DTIC ADA255265: An Analysis of Performance Measurements Systems in the Air Force Logistics Command's Aircraft Repair Depots

612 Pages·24.6 MB·English

by  Defense Technical Information Center

AD-A255 265
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE IIIEIHI|IlhI-
O.airc
0__ ew'." _ 0.fd_fý .0 !'_ ' _C oi1#dI_C" 'A ~fo_r ma-c __.%e t _ I'o t~_e raqp. _I o_ur M'fe _so ofti
.011ect(cid:127)t :m; :I oO,(cid:127) M,(cid:127)l ud-ng $uggleStmOAS*rtr .D"JI<o '-ýý I oqrT!.(cid:127) I- ,airlington 14eadqlialre, tf'fuerwno(
01,qr m,lr~aj. 5..tt. 1;,ý? Aol~g(On /A 22212-,1302 It'd to Ml!p .'fil,, )' Mhi.49eefee t (cid:127)Ind Budgle'.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave ilank) 2. REPORT DATE I 3.
119922 DISSERTATION
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE An Analysis ol. Fertormance 5. FUNDING NUMBERS
Measurements Systems In The Air Force Logistics
Command's Aircraft Repair Depots
6. AUTHOR(S)
Marsha J. Kwolek, Captain
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADORESS(ES). 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER
AFIT Student Attending: University of Georgia AiFITCI/cIA-92-015
9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADORESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/ MONITORING
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER
AFIT/CI (cid:127)(cid:127)(cid:127)|,m
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433-6593
[11. 4S
SUPPL.EMENTARY NOTES
12a. OISTRIBUTIO" / AVAILABrLITY STATEMENT .12b. DISTRIBUTION COOD&
Approved for Public Release IAW 190-1
Distributed Unlimited
ERNEST A. HAYGOOD, Captain, USAF
Executive Officer
13. ASSTRACT (4sirmnum ZOO words)I
t2 28 0 aI 9!!21-12131928
14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMSER OF PAGES
592
IL WEI coot
17. SECRITY CLASSAC.ATION 1S. SECURITY CLASWICAT108 119. SECURITY CLASSIFICATS O120. UNKTATIO " STRACT
Of 7SPORT OF THIS PAGr Of ABSTRACT
14SN 7S.O.O'1-2EO-550 Staadard FWM, t Rov 2-49)
15D
MARSHA J. KWOLEK
An Analysis of Performance Measurement Systems in the
Air Force Logistics Command's Aircraft Repair Depots
(Under the direction of JAMES F. COX, III)
This dissertation explores the goals and objectives,
competitive edges, performance criteria, and system
constraints of a selected group of depot maintenance
organizations in the Air Force Logistics Command's (AFLC's)
aircraft repair depots. Through interviews of managees at
the directorate, division, branch, and first-line super-
vision levels, the selacted ocganizations were asked to
identify the competitive edges on wnich they compete. The
organizations were then studied at the directorate,
division and branch levels to determine how performance on
the critical competitive edges is measured and to identify
the constraints that prevent the depots from achieving their
objectives. The results of this research were: (1) The
development of guidelines concerning AFLC goals and depot
objectives, competitive edges, performance criteria, and
system constraints; and (2) A prescriptive depot main-
tenance performance model showing the desired relationships
among proposed depot objectives, critical competitive edges
identified by AFLC managers (quality, cost, and delivery),
proposed performance criteria, and current system
constraints. Due to the exploratory nature nf this
research, a case study methodology was employed.
INDEX WORDS: Aircraft Maintenance, Competitive Edges,
Depot Maintenance, Performance Measurement
Systems, System Constraints, Theory of
Constraints
Accesion For
NTiS CA&I
DTjC TA3 ri
U: iJ;IZ..L;; e(cid:127) .
By o......b......,i................
i~
A-~AILv-i. . . .
.
'..
DTIC 'i'" I-N.PECTED 5
AN ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS IN THE
AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND'S AIRCRAFT REPAIR DEPOTS
by
MARSHA J. KWOLEK
B.A., University of Iowa, 1973
M.B.A., Golden Gate University, 1982
A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment
of the
Requirements for the Degroe
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
ATHENS, GEORGIA
1992
(C) 1992
MARSHA J. KWOLEK
All Rights Reserved
AN ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS IN THE
AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND'S AIRCRAFT REPAIR DEPOTS
by
MARSHA J. KWOLEK
Approved:
C jo~r Prof eso r ~ tSA ~
1
Chairman, Reading Committee
Approved:
Graduate Dean
Date
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am grateful to many individuals that helped in this
research. The members of my dissertation committee - Dr.
John H. Blackstone, Jr., Dr. K. Roscoe Davis, Dr. Asterios
G. Kefalas, and Dr. Robert Gatewood - offered technical
counsel and support throughout the research process.
Without a doubt, though, the committee chairman, Dr. James
F. Cox, III, should receive much of the credit for any
successes that may have been achieved. Via the Jonah
Conference held at Wright Patterson AFB in December, 1990,
he opened doors to all the depot maintenance organizations
examined in this study. Throughout the research he provided
direction, focus, and constant encouragement. In spite of
his busy schedule, he consistently provided quick turnarourJ
of draft chapters. Dr. Cox truly personifies the ideal
professor. From him I have learned as much about teaching
as about production/operations management subject matter.
His influence will remain with me through the rest of my
career.
Several other individuals made important contributions
to this research. Lt Colonel Richard Moore, an assistant
professor at the Air Force Institute of Technology, provided
iv
v
invaluable assistance with the construction of the effect-
cause-effect (ECE) diagrams. Ms. Jonna Hamrick typed all
the ECE diagrams, tables, and many of the figures, and
Ms. Wanda Arnold formatted the final document.
I would also like to thank the many managers and
supervisors at the Warner Robins, Ogden, and Sacramento Air
Logistics Centers (ALCs) who gave freely of their time to
explain their operations. While everyone at these three
ALCs was very helpful, three managers in key positions were
especially generous with their time. Mr. George Falldine,
the deputy director of the Avionics Directorate at Warner
Robins ALC, expounded on the workings of the Department of
Defense (DOD) budgeting process at length. Colonel Robert
Pape, the Landing Gear Division chief at Ogden ALC's
Commodities Directorate, acted as the project officer for
the Ogden ALC site visit and discussed his division in
detail. Colonel Donald Story, the Production Division chief
for Sacramento ALC's Aircraft Management Directorate,
"explicated on DOD personnel policies and their impact on his
oparation.
Finally, credit must also be given to the Air Force
Institute of Technology for sponsoring my doctoral program.
I owe the Air Force a great deal for affording me this
educational opportunity.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
LIST OF TABLES. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . xii
LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . .xiii
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM STATEMENT . . . . . I
Dissertation Summary . . . . . . . . . 1
Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . 3
AFLC Goals and Depot objectives . . . . 3
Competitive Edges. . . . . . . . . 5
Performance Criteria . . . . . . . . 7
System Constraints. . . . . . . . . 8
Research Questions. . . . . . . . . 10
Importance of Research . . . . . . . 11
Research Justification . . . . . . II
Importance to Practitioners. . . .. . 12
Importance to Researchers . . . . . . 13
Limitations of the Study. . . . . . . 15
Organization of the Dissertation . . . . . 16
II. REVIFW AND CRITIQUE OF RELEVANT LITERATURE . . 17
Performance Measurement Literature . . .. 17
Productivity Measurement of a Business Unit . 20
Performance Measurement of Functional Areas . 23
Performance Measurement Linkages . . . . . 25
Performance Measurement and Competitive Edges. 34
Performance Measurement and System Constraints 37
III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . 42
Research Questions. . . . . . . .. . 42
Research Methods . . . . . . . . .. 44
Sample Selection . . . . . . . . . . 46
Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . 49
Data Processing and Analysis . . . . . . 51
Observation and Processing . . . . . . 51
Data Analysis . . . . . . . .. 51
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . 51
AFLC Goals and Depot Objectives . . . 53
Competitive Edges. . . . . . . . 54
vi
vii
Performance Criteria . . . . . . . 56
System Constraints. . . . . . . . 57
IV. CASE STUDIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
C-130 Depot Maintenance . . . . . . . . 59
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . 59
Air Force Logistics System . . . . . 59
AFLC Organization . . . . . . . . 60
AFLC Goals . . . . . . . . . . 62
Warner Robins ALC (WR-ALC) . . . . . 62
C-130 Directorate Overview . . . . . . 65
Organization and Workload . . . . . 65
Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . 70
Supporting Directorates . . . . . . 72
Technology and Industrial Support Directorate
Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Organization and Workload . . . . . 73
TI Goals . . . . . .. . . . . 77
C-130 Production Division Overview . . . 77
Organization and Workload ..... 77
PDM Flow. .. . . . . . . . 78
Mission . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Competitive Edges . . . . . . . . 81
Directorate and Division Rankings. . . 81
Branch and First-line Supervisor Rankings 85
Performance Criteria .. . . . . . 87
DOD and AFLC Performance Criteria. . . 87
WR-ALC and Directorate Performance
Criteria. . . . . . . . . . . 93
Division and Branch Performance Criteria 99
System Constraints. . . . . . . . . 100
Overview. . . . . . . . . . 100
Physical Constraints . . . ... 103
Behavioral Constraints . . . . . . 105
Managerial Constraints . . . . . . 107
Logistical Constraints . . . . . 113
C-141 Depot Maintenance .l.. .. 118
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . 118
C-141 Directorate Overview . . . . .. 120
Organization and Workload . . . . . 120
Goals and Objectives . . . . ... 122
Supporting Directorates . . . . .. 125
Overview of TI's Manufacturing Division. . 126
Avionics Directorate and Production Division
Overview. . .. . . . . . 129
C-141 Production Division Overview . . . 1-1
Organization and Workload .... 131
Flow for PDM and Center Wing Box .
Replacement. . . . . . . . . 133
Competitive Edges . . . .... 138
Directorate and Division Rankings. . . 138