The recent DSARC review of the Navy’s reprogramming request of $23 million for the turbine-electric drive submarine is a typical example… Why then did it require a DSARC meeting of some 15 top level Defense Department people… Surly there must be a simpler and less time-consuming way to handle such matters without virtually every senior official in the Navy and OSD having personally to approve each action.
That was Admiral Hyman Rickover in “Weapon Systems Acquisition Process” Hearings Before the Committee on Armed Services United States Senate, Ninety-Second Congress, First Session, December 3-9, 1971.
The DSARC is the Packard-era version of today’s Defense Acquisition Board. He later answers his question as to why so many top level officials get involved in various reviews:
You must appreciate that when a man is in a position of authority without having the requisite technical ability, he can do one of three things: (a) approve, (b) disapprove, or (c) ask for more information. If he approves too often, he and his superiors will feel he is not doing his job, and he will be concerned that his subordinates will view him as a “rubber stamp.” If he disapproves offhand, he is concerned that he will be considered arbitrary. Therefore, the safe course and the one that gives him a reputation for “objectivity” and “thoughtfulness” is to ask for more information.
In fact he is so busy attending meetings and being briefed, so busy being fed with information he has no time to digest, that he has no time to think. Therefore, he necessarily has to accept the views of his own staff — also nearly as unfamiliar with the facts as he is. If he is undecided he can easily disapprove the action on the basis that “insufficient justification” has been provided and that many questions have been unanswered.
It would be far better to heed the advice of those recognized as truly competent in the area under consideration. As Aristotle has said: “What the superior man thinks is good, that is what is really good.”
Of course, it’s a little self-serving to say “trust us experts because you don’t really understand what’s going on.” And I’m a bit surprised that the last quote was from Aristotle rather than Plato.
But there’s definitely some truth to the matter. Complex operations cannot be easily aggregated into simple metrics for top-level decision makers who have no dedicated experience in the matter. Leaders at that level have to focus on strategic issues, not a $23 million contract (which is probably closer to $90 million in today’s dollars).
I could modify the statement to say, “What a network of well-informed people with overlapping neighborhoods of expertise think is good, that is what is really good.” But you can’t have everyone weigh in on every decision. Practically, trust individuals like Rickover to go do minimally viable products and experiments, but let his peers decide whether they are worth scaling, and always have competitors when possible to keep managers honest.
Leave a Reply