Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorJayakanth Srinivasan.en_US
dc.contributor.authorZiegler, Dustin Pen_US
dc.contributor.otherSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-05-15T21:15:36Z
dc.date.available2012-05-15T21:15:36Z
dc.date.copyright2012en_US
dc.date.issued2012en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/70826
dc.descriptionThesis (S.M. in Engineering and Management)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Engineering Systems Division, 2012.en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (p. 149-155).en_US
dc.description.abstractIn 2010, the United States Department of Defense (DoD) spent more than $35 billion on information systems development and sustainment, with nearly $7 billion to defense business systems investments alone. It is not surprising given the scale of expenditure and complexity of the enterprise that its track record on business systems investments has not been great. Indeed, the DoD's investment management practices have been the target of many studies identifying critical concerns with how the taxpayers' dollars are spent. The get-well plan, according to these same studies, is to apply "industry best practices" to achieve the same results. Yet this view fails to adequately account for the underlying issues that give rise to these symptoms. Mistrust and confusion in governance decision structures, strategic goal misalignment, externally driven metrics that incentivize the wrong behavior, and a culture of guarding rather than sharing information were among the dominant challenges identified through stakeholder interviews. Cross-cutting issues included language barriers between the Services and Corporate DoD that impede knowledge integration and complicate performance measurement. These systemic foundational problems are deeply rooted in the nature of this public administration network and in the cultures of its strongly independent member institutions. Resolving these dysfunctional characteristics requires more than a transformation "playbook" of best practice initiatives. This research sets the trajectory for meaningful progress in defense business systems investment planning and management by outlining the fundamental changes that must occur, anchored by a more robust and transparent governance framework.en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Dustin P. Ziegler.en_US
dc.format.extent167 p.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsM.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectEngineering Systems Division.en_US
dc.subjectSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.titleFoundations of a defense digital platform : business systems governance in the Department of Defenseen_US
dc.title.alternativeBusiness systems governance in the Department of Defenseen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeS.M.in Engineering and Managementen_US
dc.contributor.departmentSystem Design and Management Program.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Engineering Systems Division
dc.identifier.oclc793200133en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record