Reflecting on Chapter Seven of the Wharton text, Kleindorfer (2005) discusses the difficulties challenging leadership or an organization's decision-makers hammered by the data from the all-connected Internet, as well as the increased globalization facing many organizations through their connectivity to the net and the resulting global customer. This intricacy of a connected environment is also responsible for organizations being required to manage large amounts of data which has spawned the Decision Support Systems or DSS; as well as stifle the decision-making process with a systemic complexity of problems associated with environmental complexity and multiple stakeholders (Kleindorfer, 2005).
While Lockheed Martin is at times on the forefront of Leading the Technological Edge, we are at the same time caught in the cultural identity trap of still looking at opportunities for growth and change based on the same methodologies adopted by aging leadership of Baby boomers who became decision-makers void of the assistance of data modeling and technology assistance. Many of the same challenges that our leadership faced in earlier days’ void of the internet or technology are still influencing the decision-makers who are now in the Pilot seat driving the plane. Just as consumers are challenged to make decision based on utilization of DSS programs that still narrow our decisions down to more choices than we are capable of choosing from, our business and my leadership is also challenged with decision methodologies our organization’s utilize to deal with data rich environments, systemic complexity, and the environment complexity presented by multiple stakeholders.
Reflecting on these challenges, I believe Lockheed Martin Aeronautics has the opportunities to better process these complex data sets that would likely result in better decisions being made across our organization. While I am often void of the complexity of the decision-making processes at the executive level, I do get to experience our decision-making at the Mid-Level management tier – more so now being involved in finding solutions to complex problems our management is challenged to solve.
Like any modern organization, Lockheed Martin Aerospace has found itself straddling great loads of data information. Not only is the data generated by our Engineering and Development Teams looking for new solutions and adapting to the drive to match technology to solutions that earn us business, but we also are driving ourselves to utilized the data sets out there in order to keep our Technological Edge over our competition.
Within Lockheed’s Information Technology Group, our Aeronautics Group captures a great deal of raw data generated by our various departments, but also generated by external influences from our stakeholders and from other competition wanting to be integrated into our programs and teams. Just as the military generates large amounts of data through its intelligence operations to stay ahead of the growing threats to our way of life, Lockheed Martin is also surfing through data on a global level to stay ahead of the competition, as well as keeps it creative edge. Lockheed Martin does an excellent job of data mining this information into DSS type tools that are utilized for decisions at senior management or executive levels of our organization, especially when these decisions can be based on comparing historical trends along with emerging technologies.
We also have unique decision-making process that involve professionals integrated with military and defense agency personnel co-facilitating facets of our business, and these teams work with each other to drive our production development programs – and share information in the process. We also utilize many teams experienced at analyzing much of the data collected by our Air Force and Marine Aviation Groups that are now flying our Aircraft and producing research data and flight information which flows back to our research and development programs that utilized these data streams for process improvements to our aircraft development as we ramp up production to full-rate.
At the same time as we are managing these complex loads of data, our company as a whole is challenge in dealing with systemic complexity. Systemic complexity is “created by interactions across multiple system boundaries surrounding a particular decision context” (Kleindorfer, 2005, p. 122). At Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, our Systemic Complexity is being experienced at every level of our organization. The systemic complexity problem gets even worse when considering the decisions being made across our aircraft programs, and this is hampered because each one of our aircraft programs is its’ own silo type organization and we are trying to improve our communication across each division.
In terms of citing examples of systemic complexity afflicting the decision-making process being made at the executive levels of our organization. One prime example is when each time headquarters attempts to make an important decision, they reach out to the different basses to gather feedback on the options and gather various data. This is a very slow, complex, and cumbersome process. Another good example is the inability for various Air Force computer or financial systems to connect. This one of the directors of each aircraft program needs to make decisions that affect the other aircraft programs, and because others are being affected in the process, they have voice concerns that result in our Corporate Management stepping in to alter or take these decisions away from our leadership.
Another prime example of systemic complexity is also demonstrated when it takes our own compliance and legal teams months or years to change written regulations due the drafting process, job changeovers by compliance personnel, and the need for this compliance through regulations and corporate guidance being rolled out to various teams across our company through various work centers and across global support sites and bases – and each one requires their own feedback and approval during the process. Not only is Lockheed Martin inundated with the complexity of our own regulations and processes, but we are also governed by external regulations levied by the US Government and US military organizations that we do business with. We must adhere to many rules and regulations – and our internal regulations must find a symbiotic relationship with the external ones in order for our organization to continue to do business and support our military and government customers.
One way I think this process can be improved in in marrying our internal computer systems with our military counterparts supply chain and research and development system. By integrating our systems, we ensure that we stay connected in all phases of development of our programs – and we are keeping to the demands our military customers have for our products. One other possible solution which is working in other organizations is in flattening the organization, where complex decisions once relished at the senior leadership level are flowed down to the lower levels of the organization, and the responsibilities are shared across the organization – also allowing greater buy in to change and adaptation.
In terms of dealing with environmental complexity and multiple stakeholders. Lockheed Martin Aeronautics deals with large amounts of environmental complexity. As most of our businesses are dealing with supporting the War Machine, and protecting our countries and the NATO countries, we have a complex amount of global participation in our operations, as well as global customer bases across various programs and systems.
While my own level within the organization is still in the trenches, many of my own decisions and choices affect our business and our abilities to make profit. Each buyer on the Mission System Team, commands charge of managing millions of dollars in programs that affect not only our military customers getting the best tools to do their jobs, but also requires adherence to ensuring the integrity of the monies being bore by taxpayers through our government contracts – thus needing ethical considerations as well.
While the complexity of many business decisions can be assisted with Decision Support Systems, and through complexity of the data driving the business as well as being produce at the same time; each person within our organization has the shared responsibility to ensure their decisions are keeping with our standards and rules that are internal of our culture as well as in compliance with the external rules and regulations that make our process so complex. We must all being the stakeholder and keep each other accountable in order for our business to grow and thrive in our global marketplace.
References:
Hoch, S. J., & Kunreuther, H. C. (2005). Wharton on making decisions. (1st edition.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Lombardo, J. (2016, June 6). Decision Making Styles: Directive, Analytical, Conceptual and Behavioral. Retrieved from Study.com: http://study.com/academy/lesson/decision-making-styles-directive-analytical-conceptual-and-behavioral.html
Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2014, September 01). 9 Habits That Lead to Terrible Decisions. Harvard Business Review.
No comments:
Post a Comment