Condition/Performance measurement information provides dispatchers with smart tools so objective assessments of current operating constraints can be created from past trends and existing concerns for user-based issues coming up in creation of contract procurement quote systems, and the unmet requirements of installations for efficient equipment deployment.
Integration efforts must put maximum effort into implementing and monitoring condition/performance measurement programmes in order to be worthwhile and effective in assessing supply line capacity so equipment components can be provided to meet requirements of upgrade/repair simulations.
DoD must carefully consider what equipment condition/performance results are indicating, and use the results of supply line connection techniques to both evaluate the success of past efforts and to help develop new ideas for improving future success of mobile operations for critical missions.
Specific remedial actions must not be mandated by rigid rules assessing particular condition/performance metric or measure results; instead, DoD tools should be used to flag supply line connections segments that either over-achieve or under-achieve, with specific and concrete actions determined by dispatchers on a case-by-case basis, depending on individual circumstances.
Prior to the use of contract procurement quote scheduling techniques and other automated information technologies, determining individual installation supply line connection exposure for DoD operations required considerable manual record-keeping and record compilation to derive actual condition/performance metrics requirements for establishing properties of supply line materiel.
New techniques created for DoD by dispatchers can serve as crucial sources of information on how equipment deployment is dependent on supply line capacity volumes, mobile operation route traffic signal timing information based on contract procurement quotes & number of installations requesting upgrade/repair work orders from active dispatchers in meeting goals for creating smart processes to enable success of future mobile missions.
DoD requirements of metrics and measures techniques for condition/performance evaluation must be balanced to avoid overwhelming dispatchers with massive amounts of supply line connection information to sift through to find the key drivers of upgrade/repair service quality, choosing between the vital few metrics and measures and the trivial many.
DoD must set an upper limit of condition/performance metrics and measures to establish and track requirements for equipment upgrade/repair work order generation toward creating efficient deployment modes designed for mobile operations in order to avoid the results of unfocused, misdirected activities at installations.
All too frequently, individual installations each try to optimise different subsets of equipment condition/performance metrics & measures, at the expense of process continuity, with no two installations having the same set of supply line requirement priorities in directing contract procurement quotes.
Timely reporting of condition/performance metrics can allow DoD to better understand and apply benefits resulting from actions designed to improve equipment upgrade/repair service. New tools designed by dispatchers also allow installations to quickly identify and react to consequences of supply line connection problem areas, usually leading to area deficits in equipment deployment.
Dispatchers responsible for condition/performance reporting have noted that DoD executive types live & breathe by standard reports assessing supply line connection quality to provide equipment upgrade/repair components, and that if for some reason reports are late, they never tire to inquire about it.
Once dispatchers have implemented condition/performance metrics and measurement programmes for launch in DoD supply line connection pilot projects, the next steps consist of monitoring and reporting progress determination for regularly scheduled contract procurement quotes detailing requirements for equipment component delivery to set in motion critical upgrade/repair simulations.
Clearly, most slow moving dispatch work order systems addressing equipment upgrade/repair requirements currently being used by DoD do not have a formal process in place to review and update current equipment condition/performance-based metrics and measurement programmes.
DoD appears to subscribe to the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” philosophy. This approach is not recommended as long as DoD is not capable of recognising when their condition/performance metrics and measurement programmes are outdated and due for review so well-planned equipment upgrade/repair simulations can move forward at an acceptable or even truly enhanced pace.
This Report highlights important issues affecting all modes/areas of establishing condition/performance metrics causing greatest concern to dispatchers in evaluating changing equipment upgrade/repair requirements designed to meet mission goals for future mobile operation scenarios.
Key techniques and recommendations for DoD to employ in the build, use and implementation of equipment condition/performance measurement systems include awareness of limitations and tradeoffs prevalent in standard metrics:
1. Number of reported equipment condition/performance metrics—too many will overwhelm dispatchers, while too few may not present complete picture of upgrade/repair requirements
2. Amount of detail provided—general metrics and measures are easier for dispatchers to present, but detailed assessments incorporate more factors influencing operational outcomes
3. Types of comparisons to be made— will condition/performance metrics be evaluated only internally or compared with other installations?
4. Target audience— some dispatchers will be more familiar with equipment upgrade/repair simulation factors/concepts than others; unique types of metrics exist so trade-offs are addressed
5. Equipment deployment planning models are not always used to forecast growth of installation investments in contract procurement quote systems
6. Existing dispatch centres are not centralised to promote new work order generation patterns and demands on operational outcomes
7. Outputs from supply line mode-based characteristics are not used to calculate metrics and measures for disparate equipment type mobility
8. Equipment deployment routing trip generation capacity is not considered and must be designed based on requirements of mobile surge scenarios
9. Contract procurement quote system is not accessible to multiple installations so supply line connectivity is compromised
10. Still lack of emphasis on temporal modes of equipment upgrade/repair simulation action periods for work orders