Upload
vungoc
View
263
Download
5
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
LOGISTICS MATURITY EVALUATOR
R E P O R T I R 5 0 9 R 1 · A P R I L 2 0 0 6
J A M E S H . R E A Y A . J E F F R E Y C O L A I A N N I E V E L Y N F . H A R L E S T O N
A M Y M A L E T I C J O H N G . M A R C U S
The views, opinions, and findings contained in this report are those of LMI and should not be construed as an offi-cial agency position, policy, or decision, unless so des-ignated by other official documentation.
Logistics Maturity Evaluator IR509R1/APRIL 2006
Executive Summary
To operate effectively, federal civil agencies should continuously develop new, more integrated logistics systems to acquire, maintain, and deliver needed equip-ment, materials, and infrastructures that are optimized in terms of investment and benefits. Agency managers generally recognize that existing logistics systems are not as effective or efficient as they could be; however, there is no available bench-mark to readily assess current systems without significant investment. The challenge is to reduce the costs of operations and support, increase workforce productivity, reduce costs of managing inventory, and increase the effectiveness of delivering support material and services. To achieve these objectives, the logis-tics systems of each agency should be evaluated to determine how well operations are being supported, whether meaningful improvement initiatives are planned or in place, and what the end cost will be.
LMI wishes to help government logistics managers determine the current state of their logistics processes, prioritize resource application, and identify future direc-tion. To do so, we embarked on a research effort to develop a logistics maturity evaluator (LME). By accomplishing this independent research and development task, we hope to develop LMI’s analytical capability to provide a structured high-level assessment of federal agencies’ logistics status, progress, and proficiency and help agency managers target areas for improving performance and reducing support costs.
The LME borrows heavily from the capability maturity model concept being ap-plied in many organizations to meet management’s need for an unbiased assess-ment tool. Our intention is to develop a repeatable system that gives logistics managers an objective comparison of the present status of their agencies’ business processes and technologies for delivering goods and services.
We completed the first of two phases for this research task. The set of characteris-tics and evaluation criteria we developed can be used as a standard against which managers can measure an agency’s logistics system.
iii
By applying the LME to logistics organizations, government managers will be able to
determine the current level of their logistics processes in terms of modernization and implementation of improvements and technologies;
identify additional process improvements that may be applicable to their organizations; and,
based on the collective experience of similar organizations, identify likely areas for focusing business process reengineering initiatives to maximize return on investment, with a reasonable expectation of success-ful implementation given the organization’s current level of development.
For the purpose of assessing logistics maturity in government agencies, we devel-oped five progressive maturity levels and identified the characteristics of related business practices within each level, as shown in Figure ES-1.
Figure ES-1. Logistics Maturity Pyramid
Level 1—Initial(Basic practices)
Level 2—ManagedLogistics
Level 3—Tailored Logistics
Level 4—Quantitatively Managed
Level 5—Optimized Integration
Improvementpractices
Operationalexcellence
Organizationalfocus
Logistics skillsdevelopment
Functionalintegration
Costreduction
Qualityimprovement
programAsset
visibility
Itemidentification
Assetmanagement
Distributionand transportation
Materialdisposition
Requirements determination MaintenanceMaterial acquisition
Resourcemanagement
Inventoryoptimization
Systemsmodernization
Metricsanalysis
Supplierrelationship
management
Customerrelationship
management
Balanced scorecard andbenchmarking
Supplychain
integration
Performance-based
logisticsStrategicsourcing
Enterpriseintegration
Strategicplanning and
execution
We can determine an agency’s logistics maturity by asking key logistics person-nel to complete an evaluation questionnaire. Once agency personnel complete the survey, individual scores are aggregated and summarized into an organizational score. The LME process produces graphical representation of the composite rank-ing of the target logistics organization on the level 1–5 maturity scale. Results are compiled and compared with other similar agencies or matched to a private sector counterpart. The final LME report to agency managers includes key conclusions and suggestions for next steps.
iv
Executive Summary
This report presents the results of our research in Phase I and the products in-cluded in the LME. In Phase II, we plan to test the LME capability with data ob-tained from selected government civil agency logistics managers and personnel.
v
vi vi
Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction to Logistics Maturity..............................................1-1
CHARACTERIZATION OF LOGISTICS MATURITY.............................................................. 1-1
VALUE OF ASSESSING LOGISTICS MATURITY ............................................................... 1-2
Chapter 2 Capability Maturity Models .......................................................2-1
Chapter 3 Applying CMM to Logistics .......................................................3-1
Chapter 4 Maturity Levels in Government Logistics..................................4-1
MATURITY LEVEL 1.................................................................................................... 4-2
MATURITY LEVEL 2.................................................................................................... 4-2
MATURITY LEVEL 3.................................................................................................... 4-3
MATURITY LEVEL 4.................................................................................................... 4-3
MATURITY LEVEL 5.................................................................................................... 4-4
Chapter 5 Our Approach to a Logistics Maturity Evaluator .......................5-1
Chapter 6 Maturity Model Assessment Questionnaire..............................6-1
EVALUATING THE LME ASSESSMENT RESULTS............................................................ 6-2
Preliminary Contact with Agency Personnel ...................................................... 6-3
Using the Questionnaire .................................................................................... 6-3
Scoring .............................................................................................................. 6-4
SUMMARY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ 6-4
Chapter 7 Results of IR&D Project and Future Plans ...............................7-1
RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 7-1
FUTURE PLANS ......................................................................................................... 7-1
Appendix A Logistics Maturity Evaluator Survey
Appendix B Letter of Understanding
Appendix C Initial LME Survey
vii
Figures Figure 1-1. Components of Logistics Maturity......................................................... 1-1
Figure 2-1 Capability Maturity Model ...................................................................... 2-2
Figure 2-2. Staged Versus Continuous Representation.......................................... 2-3
Figure 3-1. Applying CMMI Concepts to Logistics Organizations ........................... 3-2
Figure 5-1. Logistics Maturity Pyramid.................................................................... 5-1
Figure 6-1. Sample Composite Ranking of Logistics Maturity................................. 6-5
viii
Chapter 1 Introduction to Logistics Maturity
By developing a logistics maturity evaluator (LME), LMI hopes to augment our analytical capability to provide a structured, high-level assessment of the logistics status, progress, and proficiency of federal agencies and to help agency managers identify areas for improving performance and reducing support costs. Our inten-tion is to develop a repeatable procedure that allows logistics managers to objec-tively compare their organizations’ business processes and technologies with a targeted, optimized, and integrated logistics operation. The comparison should help managers determine where to place emphasis and resources to achieve higher levels of customer service.
CHARACTERIZATION OF LOGISTICS MATURITY There are two phases of our planned approach to the LME development task. In Phase I we developed a set of characteristics and evaluation criteria that can be used as a standard against which to measure an agency’s logistics process infra-structure.1 As a first step, we identified the basic elements that characterize logis-tics maturity. These are shown in Figure 1-1.
Figure 1-1. Components of Logistics Maturity
Thecomponentsof logistics
maturity
Visionand
strategies
Technologyenablers
Logistics
processes
Organization
and
workforce
Reso
urce
s
Perfo
rman
ce
1 Our development work was influenced by the Software Capability Maturity Model (SW-CMM)
concept developed by the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie-Mellon University. The CMM is addressed in Chapter 2.
1-1
We then identified maturity levels, incorporating basic and improved logistics processes and business practices that—at the highest level of maturity—lead to the optimized integration of an organization’s overall logistics system. To gather information regarding a logistics organization’s current status, we developed an assessment questionnaire that would quantify the level of logistics maturity. Our questionnaire incorporates the basic components of logistics maturity. Details of this research are discussed in subsequent chapters.
In Phase II of the LME project, we will exercise the LME capability in live tests with selected government agency logistics managers and personnel.
VALUE OF ASSESSING LOGISTICS MATURITY An organization’s processes define how it works. They produce the desired results and provide the mechanism to incorporate knowledge, use capabilities, leverage resources, and ultimately do things better.
There is a common misconception that improved results are a certainty if an or-ganization has really good people, access to advanced technology, and motivated, experienced managers. This notion is, at best, naive. Although people and tech-nology are essential to achieving organizational objectives, process improvement is equally critical. Private sector organizations can ultimately look at profit-and-loss statements to measure success. Government activities do not have an equally objective measure of results or progress toward organizational goals. The pursuit of initiatives is often disjointed or fragmented; yet, government managers are con-tinuously asked to assess progress, make improvements, and become more effi-cient and effective.
Unfortunately, process improvement initiatives in government activities are often ignored or even feared by the managers charged with achieving organizational goals and objectives. Such managers often focus on one aspect of improvement (such as workforce training or technology application) without seeing the integrat-ing function accomplished by the organization’s business processes. They equate the term “process” with bureaucracy, inertia, regimentation, and added up-front costs. Conversely, these managers—under pressure for results—sometimes initi-ate process change without a clear understanding of the associated process, tech-nology, and workforce in attaining long-term direction or end-state goals.
In process-oriented areas like logistics, failure to begin with an integrated “big picture” view of functional elements inevitably leads to failed efforts and wasted resources. To help government logistics managers determine the current state of their logistics processes, prioritize resource application, and identify meaningful future direction, LMI embarked on this independent research effort to develop a logistics maturity evaluator. The LME borrows heavily on the capability maturity model concept applied by many organizations around the world to meet manage-ment’s need for an assessment tool.
1-2
Introduction to Logistics Maturity
As part of the movement in government to make functional processes more effi-cient and effective, managers are often charged to analyze and adopt private-sector practices to rapidly improve and modernize key processes like logistics. Once national leaders in logistics management, government organizations have fallen behind in the last several decades in implementing innovative processes, methods, and enabling technologies. As costs escalate and agencies downsize, government organizations have lost the analytical capability and technical knowl-edge to effect large-scale improvements. Outsourcing of process improvement implementation and, more directly, modernization of automated systems is now the only option for government managers who seek significant process improve-ment. But these managers must first assess the current status and establish the or-ganization’s strategic direction before committing large-scale resources to any particular improvement path.
In the area of logistics, the private sector has already committed to substantial re-search, innovation, business process reengineering, and technology development and implementation. Many of these private-sector efforts have important application in the public sector, but government managers often are faced with too many “solu-tions,” rather than too few. These managers will find the LME useful as they attempt to apply, leverage, and prioritize scarce process implementation resources so the maximum improvement is obtained for a finite level of investment.
Using the LME, managers can select appropriate process improvement tools and initiatives that have proven successful in both private sector and government applications and that are most applicable to their specific organizational needs.
Application of the LME to logistics organizations will allow government managers to achieve the following:
With a modest analytical effort, determine the current level of their logis-tics processes in terms of process modernization and implementation of emerging improvements and technologies.
Identify additional process improvement areas that may be applicable to their organization.
Based on the collective experience of similar organizations, identify likely areas for business process reengineering initiatives to maximize return on investment, with a reasonable expectation of successful implementation given the organization’s current level of development.
1-3
1-4 1-4
Chapter 2 Capability Maturity Models
Improving the end results or attaining the prescribed goals has become an intrinsic objective of nearly every organization. When an enterprise wishes to improve re-sults, it typically focuses on three factors: people, processes and methods, and technology. Processes and methods generally provide the capability to optimize available people and technology to improve output. Manufacturing industries have long recognized that improving processes is an important way of meeting business objectives. In service-oriented industries, such as logistics, process im-provement is also accepted as a means to better results. Unfortunately, process change is difficult to define and implement because the desired objectives may be imprecise.
Government managers must move their agencies toward improved results in a structured manner, with well-defined steps and quantifiable targets. This approach permits more effective course adjustment and interim measurement of success. A meaningful plan of action and milestones is essential to an effective improvement plan; however, organizations often are not well-versed in the process of effective planning, and the home-grown action plan is often replete with false starts, non-essential milestones, and dead-end activities. One approach to avoiding these pit-falls is to learn from the mistakes of others and adopt courses of action that have been validated by previous efforts. Today, through the application of various auto-mated process analysis tools, we can document, track, and assess process improve-ment activities in ways previously considered too cumbersome and overly resource intensive. One such technique is a capability maturity model (CMM).
What is a capability maturity model? Stated simply, it is a structured way to de-termine the levels or extent of an organization’s process capabilities. Within the model, organizational progress is expressed in terms of the degree of maturity, that is, from ad hoc, immature processes to disciplined, mature processes with improved quality, efficiency, and effectiveness. The model describes an evolu-tionary improvement path that documents the organization’s progress from one maturity level to the next higher level.
Current CMMs often use the convention of five maturity levels—from least mature (level 1) to most mature (level 5). These maturity levels are defined based on the competency achieved as an organization implements specific process improve-ments. For example, an organization may achieve maturity level 1 by automating
2-1
tasks that previously were accomplished manually. Higher levels of maturity are attained as the organization integrates processes across organizational lines.1
By recognizing and using the maturity level definitions built into the model, man-agers can more easily determine the degree of process improvement being achieved. CMM usually includes an increasing scale, as shown in Figure 2-1.
Figure 2-1 Capability Maturity Model
Immature
Fullymature
Maturity level 1: Efforts typically are ad hoc and not integrated
Maturity level 5:Organizationhas achievedits process goals, and is continually improving them
1 23
4
5
The first CMM model, Software CMM (SW-CMM), was developed in the early 1990s by the software community under the stewardship of the Carnegie-Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute (SEI). The Department of Defense funded this effort and continues as a principal participant in CMM development. To-day, SEI retains oversight of CMM development efforts worldwide, acting as a cen-tral clearinghouse and model repository for CMM information, providing a standard approach for appraising proposed capability models, and conducting CMM training and seminars. SEI has also led the evolution of CMM to a broader scope by integrat-ing capability maturity models across such disciplines as systems engineering, inte-grated product development, and acquisition. This effort to apply capability models across disciplines is called capability maturity model integration (CMMI).
There are two approaches to developing and using capability maturity models: staged representation and continuous representation. Either approach can help managers assess the level of maturity currently achieved in an organization or the level targeted for the future.
Staged representation is a more holistic approach in which the CMM evaluation focuses on the level of maturity attained for the full range of processes for the organization. This approach is often used when man-agement wishes to determine the maturity level of the entire organization for a given discipline. We incorporated the staged representation approach into the LME.
1 We describe specific maturity levels that we adopted for use in the LME in Chapter 4.
2-2
Capability Maturity Models
Continuous representation measures maturity levels separately for indi-vidual processes within a discipline. In this case, management can focus on individual areas and apply priority attention to processes that may be problematic or are likely candidates for near-term improvement.
Regardless of which representation is used, the same basic evaluation criteria are applied to assess level of maturity. Figure 2-2 illustrates the two approaches to CMM representation.
Figure 2-2. Staged Versus Continuous Representation
1
2
3
4
5
Mat
urity
leve
l
Staged…for an established set of process areas across an organization
0
1
2
3
4
5
Proc
ess
area
cap
abilit
y
PA PA PA
Continuous…for individual process areas across an organization
Measures overall maturity Measures process maturity
Although the majority of CMM implementations are in the private sector, the concept has been applied to government activities. For example, the Federal Aviation Administration has instituted an extensive CMM program as a basis for business process reengineering across the agency. The Department of Defense developed an acquisition CMM for application to military weapons and equipment programs.
Our research indicates there is noteworthy similarity between target processes in the private sector and government activities. In later chapters, we focus on the po-tential for use of the CMM concept in the LME as a process evaluation and im-provement tool particularly for federal civil agencies.
2-3
2-4 2-4
Chapter 3 Applying CMM to Logistics
As described in Chapter 2, the concept and application of capability maturity models is well documented and a widely accepted analytical technique. Our re-search effort, therefore, focused on the application of the CMM method.
In this IR&D task, we addressed three specific analytical perspectives:
The application of the CMM approach to the area of logistics
The construction of a less-complex approach to CMM that would be at-tractive to federal government civil agency senior managers
An assessment method tailored to government logistics organizations.
Our research identified a number of functional areas (in both the private and pub-lic sectors) in which CMM had been applied. By using the repository of informa-tion available on the Software Engineering Institute website,1 we were able to determine that no previous CMM efforts had focused on government logistics.
Our research also indicated that a CMM approach could be a useful tool for gov-ernment managers to assess the level of development and status of their logistics organizations and processes. Use of CMM requires
a well understood set of business functions or activities,
accepted business process improvement practices that are recognized by functional managers as essential to achieving organizational objectives, and
an acceptable, viable method for accomplishing maturity level assessment.
The members of our research team have extensive expertise in the full range of functions and activities that comprise the logistics process within government and the private sector. We were able to readily document the scope of logistics func-tions that should be incorporated into a logistics maturity evaluator.
Our team also had access to a wide body of reports, research papers, web-based documentation, and other sources, which permitted us to compile a comprehensive list of logistics-oriented business process improvement practices. We were able to include in our assessment tool a range of generally accepted improvement approaches that could help assess the maturity of an organization being evaluated.
1 SEI website is http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/.
3-1
Developing an acceptable way to assess maturity was the most difficult element of our research project. Although we began with a reasonably good knowledge of gov-ernment logistics functions and generally accepted business improvement practices, it was not clear whether the CMM approach espoused by SEI and the documented CMM implementation guidelines2 were applicable for most civil agency logistics organizations. The characteristics of a classic CMM assessment appeared to be unac-ceptable for many potential civil agency logistics clients. As an example, prior CMM efforts have been time consuming, manpower intensive, and expensive. As a result, agency managers may not be anxious to embark on a full CMM assessment. There-fore, our research challenge was to construct a logistics maturity evaluation approach that incorporated the essential elements and discipline of the CMM, but required only a limited resource commitment, which is more attractive to agency managers.
Further, a rigid application of existing CMM methodology requires substantial documentation of an organization’s individual business processes with a high level of detail. Such effort may yield significant detailed information regarding the day-to-day functioning of organizational processes, but most government managers would rather obtain a more summarized assessment of their organiza-tion’s maturity status—at least initially—in order to focus on an incremental and evolutionary process improvement initiative. Figure 3-1 presents the basic re-search steps we took to develop and accomplish a logistics maturity evaluation.
Figure 3-1. Applying CMMI Concepts to Logistics Organizations
Identifylogistics and
related components
Prepareassessment
questionnaires
Describecharacteristics
of logistics maturitylevels
Identifykey
improvementpractices
Complete“test”
assessments
Documentresults
The classic CMM method requires a periodic recertification of assessment results. Our research approach attempted to apply the basic CMM concept while provid-ing a “snapshot” assessment and initial focus on a summary level of detail and assessment.
The remaining chapters of this report describe the research accomplished to com-plete the steps shown above.
2 Mary Beth, Chrissi et al., CMMI: Guidelines for Process Integration and Product Improvement,
Addison-Wesley Publications, September 2004.
3-2
Chapter 4 Maturity Levels in Government Logistics
Based upon our research, we can identify six fundamental components of logistics maturity:
Vision and strategy
Organization and workforce
Resources
Technology enablers
Logistics processes
Performance.
We took logistics maturity to mean the capability of an agency to execute logis-tics practices in a manner satisfactory to its customers. It is not necessary for an agency to be the best in the world or even the best in its class (although that is al-ways a desirable objective) to reach the summit of maturity. We are mindful that civil agencies, in particular, are routinely under tight personnel and funding con-straints. It is impractical to expect them to be the leaders in the execution of mod-ern logistics initiatives, but it is quite reasonable to expect them to adopt such initiatives and execute them well enough to meet the needs of their customers, notwithstanding their organizational constraints.
Logistics maturity within an agency begins with a clear vision and articulation of who the customers are and what they need in the way of support. Coincidental with the vision is a strategy to align available resources (people, processes, tech-nology, and dollars) to meet that need. Next, the people in the workforce must be organized and given the training and leadership necessary to fulfill their responsi-bilities. The workforce also must have sufficient resources. The cliché, “doing more with less,” is not a long-term strategy for success.
Finally, logistics maturity must consider availability and application of technol-ogy enablers, such as information systems and communication devices and net-works that are sufficiently modern to do the job; logistics policies and processes that are documented, understood, and enforced; and metrics that give workers and managers alike a true picture of the outcome of their efforts.
For the purpose of assessing logistics maturity in government agencies, we devel-oped the following descriptions of the five progressive maturity levels.
4-1
MATURITY LEVEL 1 A maturity level 1 organization typically operates on an ad hoc basis. The organi-zation rarely provides a stable environment. Processes are performed, but not in accordance with set corporate goals and objectives. Success in these organizations often depends on the competence of people in the organization, and success can-not be repeated unless the same individuals are assigned to the next project.
At the initial level of logistics maturity, an organization will, at a minimum, ac-complish seven basic practices:
Material acquisition
Requirements determination
Maintenance
Item identification
Asset management
Distribution and transportation
Material disposition.
MATURITY LEVEL 2 At maturity level 2, an organization’s logistics components are planned, docu-mented, performed, monitored, and controlled at the project and process level. To advance to level 2 of logistics capability, which we call managed logistics, an agency would be expected to perform nine tasks competently:
Logistics skills development
Asset visibility
Functional integration
Quality improvement
Cost reduction
Resource management
Inventory optimization
Systems modernization
Metrics analysis.
4-2
Maturity Levels in Government Logistics
MATURITY LEVEL 3 At maturity level 3, logistics components are tailored from the organization’s set of standard processes and related organizational assets to suit the circumstances in which they will be performed. At maturity level 3, processes are well character-ized and understood, and are described in policies, standards, procedures, tools, and methods.
By level 3, tailored logistics, an agency practices the following:
Supply chain integration
Strategic sourcing
Performance-based logistics
Supplier relationship management
Balanced scorecard and benchmarking
Customer relationship management.
MATURITY LEVEL 4 Organizations that achieve maturity level 4 are managing logistics components using statistical and other quantitative techniques. Quantitative objectives for product quality, customer service quality, and process performance are estab-lished and used as management criteria. Product quality, service quality, and process performance are understood in statistical terms and are managed through-out the life of processes.
At level 4, an agency’s organizational focus is on
enterprise integration and
strategic planning and execution.
4-3
MATURITY LEVEL 5 At maturity level 5, an organization has achieved all of the goals of the preced-ing maturity levels. Logistics components are fully integrated and continually improved based upon the organization’s understanding of the common causes of performance, cost, and customer satisfaction variations inherent in these logis-tics components. Level 5, optimized integration, is the target end state. Opera-tional excellence is achieved at this highest maturity level. Of course, a lot of management attention, resources, and time must be expended to reach level 5.
Maintaining level 5 status over time is equally difficult. Customer needs are al-ways changing, and logistics organizations must continually gauge what the requirements are and adjust their attention accordingly.
4-4
Chapter 5 Our Approach to a Logistics Maturity Evaluator
The basic functions in any logistics organization include material acquisition, requirements determination, maintenance, item identification, asset manage-ment, distribution and transportation, and material disposition. These functions form the base of the logistics maturity pyramid (level 1) shown in Figure 5-1.
Levels 2–5 are composed of improvement practices at increasing levels of diffi-culty, complexity, and potential benefit. An organization may perform some or all of the practices internally, or it may choose to serve as overseer and outsource the work to another government or private sector organization.
The core of the LME is a questionnaire that was developed to help government agency executives assess the maturity level of their logistics organization with a minimum initial investment of time and money. We can determine an agency’s logistics maturity by asking key logistics personnel to complete the questionnaire. Survey participants must be thoroughly familiar with functions and practices within their organization.
Figure 5-1. Logistics Maturity Pyramid
P A G E 2
Level 1—Initial(Basic practices)
Level 2—ManagedLogistics
Level 3—Tailored Logistics
Level 4—Quantitatively Managed
Level 5—Optimized Integration
Improvementpractices
Operationalexcellence
Organizationalfocus
Logistics skillsdevelopment
Functionalintegration
Costreduction
Qualityimprovement
programAsset
visibility
Itemidentification
Assetmanagement
Distributionand transportation
Materialdisposition
Requirements determination MaintenanceMaterial acquisition
Resourcemanagement
Inventoryoptimization
Systemsmodernization
Metricsanalysis
Supplierrelationship
management
Customerrelationship
management
Balanced scorecard andbenchmarking
Supplychain
integration
Performance-based
logisticsStrategicsourcing
Enterpriseintegration
Strategicplanning and
execution
5-1
Logistics managers strive to move their organizations up the pyramid from basic functions (level 1) to optimized integration (level 5). This upward movement means passing through each set of improvement practices identified at levels 2–4 to reach level 5.
Each practice within a level must be performed to the satisfaction of the organiza-tion and its customers before upward movement can occur. Specific answers within the assessment questionnaire are gauged to determine this degree of satisfaction. This means an organization cannot jump from level 1 directly to level 3 simply be-cause it is performing all of the level 1 functions as well as strategic sourcing at level 3. All the level 2 practices must be achieved effectively (e.g., logistics skills development, asset visibility) before moving on to level 3. However, our assess-ment approach does not require an organization to perform each practice within a level with the same degree of competency. For example, an organization may be exceedingly good at level 2 cost reduction and metrics analysis, but only satisfac-tory at quality improvement and systems modernization. Such an organization would meet the test of acceptability if each practice was being performed at least satisfactorily.
We assess an agency’s logistics maturity by administering the evaluation ques-tionnaire to key logistics personnel. Once agency personnel have completed the survey, individual scores are aggregated and summarized into an organizational score. The scoring system is constructed so that no maturity levels can be skipped. The acceptable score for one maturity level has to be attained before an organiza-tion can be rated at the next higher maturity level.
The research team developed a list of evaluation questions for the questionnaire, with five possible answers for each question. Both the questions and answer choices are weighted. The weight of each question is based upon the level of the logistics function within the logistics maturity pyramid. The levels are assigned weights of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest level of maturity—or the greatest weight. The responses are similarly weighted with the most mature practices as-signed a weight of 5.
An individual’s response to a question receives a score equal to the question weight multiplied by the weight of the chosen answer. The scores are averaged for each pyramid function and practice area, then summed across pyramid areas for a final score for each logistics component. Scores are rounded down to the nearest whole number to determine the maturity level reached for each component.
The components of logistics maturity are given equal weight, but an organization cannot get credit for a maturity level unless the minimum level score is met for all components. This means the minimum level score reached across all components is the overall maturity level for the individual component.
As an example of the scoring process, one organization could be assessed at a 2.7 capability level with another organization assessed at a 2.1 level, yet both
5-2
Our Approach to a Logistics Maturity Evaluator
organizations are considered to be at level 2. The higher numeric score does not entitle an organization to assume level 3 performance. The organization remains at level 2 until it attains a satisfactory score for all level 3 practice area requirements before moving up to that level.
Of course, organizations can institute process improvement initiatives at any time for functions within any maturity level. Under the LME assessment, however, these organizations would not be scored at the higher maturity level until all func-tions or practices at lower levels are scored as satisfactory. This means an organi-zation cannot “leapfrog” to a higher level. Such action works to the detriment of the maturity assessment concept as it attempts to improve an organization’s per-ceived score before the necessary infrastructure is in place to support widespread, permanent improvement.
Managers should understand that to attempt to advance prematurely to higher ma-turity levels jeopardizes the stability and effectiveness of existing improvements because the foundation for their successful institutionalization has not been com-pleted. Our LME scoring is conservative because attempting to implement im-provements without proper foundation may cause performance failure at the very point they are needed most—under stress.
5-3
5-4 5-4
Chapter 6 Maturity Model Assessment Questionnaire
One of the most difficult aspects of evaluating an organization’s maturity status is devising an assessment approach that comprehends a meaningful scope of the process areas and includes understandable and quantifiable evaluation criteria at the same time it is easily used by a broad range of knowledgeable participants.
Under the classic CMM method, teams of analysts often work up and down the chain of command and operation to document, in great detail, the existing proc-esses, methods, and technologies in place or planned for the organization. Al-though this approach can yield a very accurate and detailed description of the level of activity and progress in the organization, it has the disadvantage of being costly and time consuming. Further, such an analysis often becomes bogged down in the details of operations and initiatives, and may not produce sufficient “big picture” actionable information.
The details of an organization’s existing and planned improvement efforts ulti-mately must be assessed to determine the level of success and identify course cor-rections when they are needed. There also is great value—particularly for senior managers—in knowing the overall status of the organization’s processes and busi-ness process improvement initiatives. Such information is essential for evaluating potential improvement alternatives against generally recognized criteria and benchmarks, particularly as they are demonstrated in “world-class” organizations or activities. Having a formal, useful evaluation process reduces the subjective nature of the decisions and increases the probability of selecting business im-provement solutions that meet the demands of organizational stakeholders and customers.
The core of the LME is the questionnaire that was developed to permit govern-ment executives to assess the maturity level of their logistics organization with minimal initial investment in time and resources. Building on the broad range of analytical research already accomplished by LMI personnel over the past several years, our LME team identified the basic subject matter that must be incorporated into the functional scope of the evaluation tool. This scope incorporates the func-tions, practices, and improvement areas included in the logistics maturity pyramid discussed in Chapter 5.
Our research challenge was to develop a mechanism that sufficiently differenti-ated a range of capabilities that characterized the distinctive level of maturity or improvement progress for each functional topic. At the same time, our evaluation tool had to be a “stand-alone” vehicle, requiring minimal explanation or descrip-tion. To satisfy these requirements, the team developed a 173 question survey that
6-1
incorporated the 26 functional elements of our logistics maturity pyramid. The survey is multiple-choice, with five possible answers for each question. Answers range from A to E, with question “A” answers relating to the highest maturity level and “E” responses relating to the lowest level of maturity. Respondents are advised to answer questions truthfully and accurately for their organizational cir-cumstances, and not try to outwit the system.
The following is a sample survey question.1 Agency participants in the LME sur-vey choose the answer that best characterizes their organization.
Our agency’s approach to reutilization of unneeded equipment and material assets is:
A. Our agency has official rules and processes in place to ensure that material no longer required by the owning/using organization is of-fered for reuse to all other organizations within the agency.
B. Our agency has official rules and processes in place to ensure that material no longer required by the owning/using organization is of-fered to some organizations within the agency.
C. Our agency does not have official rules and processes but as a general practice the owning/using organization offers material no longer required to all other organizations within the agency.
D. Our agency does not have official rules and processes but as a general practice the owning/using organization offers material no longer required to some organizations within the agency.
E. Our agency has not issued material disposition guidance, either officially or unofficially.
EVALUATING THE LME ASSESSMENT RESULTS As described earlier, an LME assessment is equally useful in focusing management attention on specific process improvement target areas and assessing the overall maturity level across an organization’s full range of logistics processes. By summa-rizing the results of the LME questionnaire, we can document for agency managers the status of awareness, priority, and implementation of a series of widely accepted process improvement initiatives across the full spectrum of common logistics func-tions. This documentation captures the collective knowledge and experience of the logistics practitioners within the organization being assessed.
To ensure a valid evaluation of an agency’s logistics maturity level, the LME process follows a series of steps that foster full understanding of the process and a disciplined execution of the evaluation mechanism.
1 A copy of the full survey questionnaire is provided under Appendix A. The automated LME
product is on the CD enclosed with this report.
6-2
Maturity Model Assessment Questionnaire
Preliminary Contact with Agency Personnel As part of the LME process, LMI personnel make initial contact with senior agency managers to explain the concept, process, and expected benefits of our logistics maturity evaluator. An initial briefing acquaints senior managers and other appropriate agency staff with the LME approach and elicits their feedback regarding the applicability and need for such an evaluation at that agency.
The agreement between LMI and agency management is formalized in a letter of understanding (LOU) that documents the relationship and responsibilities of the participating parties.2 Agency managers are then asked to complete a preliminary survey to help determine the basic profile of the logistics organization, re-sources, and processes.3 After evaluating this profile, LMI works with the agency to identify a number of key logisticians who represent the organization’s most sig-nificant logistics activities (such as mission critical logistics providers or high dol-lar programs) to participate in the LME evaluation session. LMI personnel then meet with the potential recipients of the LME survey to make them aware of the purpose, required actions and how the LME results will be provided to the agency. Considerations such as nondisclosure, anonymity, confidentiality, and potential uses of the evaluation results are addressed.
Using the Questionnaire Agency senior managers approve the application of the LME and identify personnel who will be tasked to respond to the LME assessment questionnaire. LMI personnel oversee the completion of the LME questionnaire, which can be administered at the agency worksite or at an LMI facility, depending on the preference of agency management.
The questionnaire is automated to facilitate both the entry of responses by agency personnel and the tabulation of scores. The LME tool actually is a system of data-bases. Responses are collected from participants, and the central database or-ganizes the responses and aggregate results for different groups. The LME tool collects each participant’s answers in a Microsoft Access database. Because the form opens automatically, the inner workings of the database are transparent to participants.
2 An example of this LOU is provided as Appendix B. 3 A copy of this initial survey is at Appendix C.
6-3
Each user follows a series of simple steps to complete the survey:
Enter agency, department, and job title (for tracking purposes).
Choose the appropriate answer for each question using the radio buttons labeled A through E. The questions are numbered and organized according to the logistics maturity pyramid.
Navigate through the list of questions using the arrows at the bottom of the form.
Click the “Survey Complete” button when finished.
Click the stop sign button to exit the survey before all questions have been answered.
Click the “Print Your Responses” button to print a report showing the questions and answers selected.
Click “Exit LME” to exit the tool.
The responses are saved in a table within a separate database, and the scores are calculated.
Scoring Once all questionnaires are completed, manually entered forms (if used) are tran-scribed into the automated system for tabulation. The results are then scored and summarized, as described in Chapter 5.
All responses to the LME questionnaire are compiled in a central database, which organizes responses from multiple individuals and reports results across and within groups (for example, agencies or departments). A table containing the scores from each questionnaire is then linked to this central database. Once the individual responses are averaged, reports and graphs can be displayed.
SUMMARY ASSESSMENT After scoring is complete, the computed results are formatted into a report for presentation to agency officials. LMI compiles and analyzes survey responses to determine the status of improvement practices within the logistics components, quantify the organization’s logistics maturity, and create an organizational logis-tics maturity evaluation profile. Results are compared to those of similar agencies or matched to private sector experience. The final report to agency managers in-cludes summaries of responses by logistics practice and other groupings, key con-clusions, and suggestions for next steps.
6-4
Maturity Model Assessment Questionnaire
Consistent with the CMM concept discussed earlier, the LME process produces an overall figure that graphically represents the composite ranking of the target logistics organization on the maturity level 1–5 scale. Scores are compiled for each of the six components of logistics maturity and an overall maturity level as-signed. As Figure 6-1 illustrates, agency management can easily see their total maturity level score and the corresponding highs and lows that affect their overall ranking.
Figure 6-1. Sample Composite Ranking of Logistics Maturity
1
2
3
4
5
PerformanceLogistics process
Technology enablers
ResourcesOrganization and
workforce
Vision and
strategies
Mat
urity
leve
ls
Overall maturity
level
6-5
6-6 6-6
Chapter 7 Results of IR&D Project and Future Plans
RESULTS The LME development team completed the initial phase of the research effort and produced a working version of a logistics maturity analytical assessment tool. The LME was developed for use by senior logistics managers in government agencies who desire an initial assessment of the status of their ongoing organic or con-tracted logistics support programs and initiatives.
As described earlier, the LME builds on the concept of the CMM developed by Software Engineering Institute of Carnegie-Mellon University. The LME is a streamlined version of the CMM approach; it uses a comprehensive questionnaire to obtain information from key logistics personnel in the government activity be-ing assessed. This evaluation approach uses the inherent expertise of agency per-sonnel to document the logistics maturity of the organization.
The assessment questionnaire was compiled based on the collective logistics experi-ence and knowledge of the LMI development team. It covers the full spectrum of lo-gistics functions and best practice initiatives from both government and the private sector. Questionnaire responses are weighted based on criteria developed for the pro-ject to determine the maturity level for each logistics area and the results are arrayed for the 26 areas characteristic of logistics organizations.
Selected agency personnel may complete the questionnaire using an automated system or hard copy. Results are then summarized and documented graphically for presentation to senior agency officials.
FUTURE PLANS As we approached Phase II of our work—the application of the LME—we were encouraged in our informal conversations with several Department of Homeland Security (DHS) managers who indicated they would be interested in testing LME. The department’s logistics operations consist of a patchwork of legacy processes and systems representing the 22 different federal organizations that were brought under the new DHS organization created by Congress in November 2002.
It is not surprising that the processes and systems of the 22 DHS organizations—which were developed independently—are not integrated. Although logistics has not been consistently defined at the departmental level, it is the commonly applied label for material management processes and systems throughout DHS.
7-1
Still, DHS has no consistent way of evaluating the overall logistics process com-ponents. As is true in a number of civil agencies, logistics is defined differently in each DHS organization, and some organizations do not have a separately struc-tured logistics element, even though the agency, as a whole, has significant logis-tics responsibilities. The scope of logistics may vary from administrative support at headquarters level to major warehousing and repair activities. Therefore, it is often impossible for managers to know which areas require particular attention. Further, managers need to know which of the seemingly similar processes and systems are more advanced and capable than the others, and which should be revamped or retired and replaced.
The LME team is pursuing another opportunity to test the LME with the Federal Supply Service of the General Services Administration. This organization has numerous logistics improvement initiatives underway and appears to be a viable target for demonstrating the value of the LME as an assessment tool. The LME development team plans to continue to pursue opportunities to validate the tool in several target civil agencies.
7-2
Appendix A Logistics Maturity Evaluator Survey
We developed a comprehensive LME questionnaire to help government execu-tives assess the maturity of their logistics organization. The challenge was to de-velop a survey that sufficiently differentiated between the capabilities that characterize each level of maturity.
The resulting evaluation tool is a “stand-alone” vehicle, requiring minimal expla-nation or description. There are 173 questions that incorporate the 26 functional elements of our logistics maturity pyramid. Survey participants choose among five possible answers (A to E).
Respondents are advised to answer questions truthfully and accurately for their organizational circumstances, and not try to “outwit” the system.
A-1
DRAFT—[Click here and type report #)] —5/1/06 A-2 IR509R1_A-app_BANNER.doc DRAFT—[Click here and type report #)] —5/1/06 A-2 IR509R1_A-app_BANNER.doc
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
Age
ncy:
Dep
artm
ent:
Job
Title
:
Inst
ruct
ions
: Ple
ase
circ
le th
e le
tter t
hat c
orre
spon
ds to
the
mos
t app
ropr
iate
cho
ice
for y
our o
rgan
izat
ion.
1O
ur a
ppro
ach
to it
em id
entif
icat
ion
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Ite
m Id
entif
icat
ion
AA
- W
e us
e a
com
bina
tion
of c
omm
erci
al it
em
iden
tific
atio
n da
ta s
ourc
es a
nd th
e Fe
dera
l Lo
gist
ics
Info
rmat
ion
Sys
tem
(FLI
S) d
atab
ase
as th
e so
urce
of i
tem
iden
tific
atio
n in
form
atio
n.
BB
- W
e pr
imar
ily u
se o
ur e
nd it
em a
cqui
sitio
n or
sup
port
cont
ract
ors
to p
rovi
de it
em
iden
tific
atio
n da
ta.
CC
- W
e ha
ve o
ur o
wn
data
bas
e as
a s
ourc
e of
ite
m id
entif
icat
ion
info
rmat
ion.
DD
- W
e us
e co
mm
erci
al c
atal
ogs
to id
entif
y th
e ite
ms
we
need
.
EE
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
does
not
hav
e a
met
hod
to c
atal
og it
ems
we
use
to c
ondu
ct o
ur
mis
sion
resp
onsi
bilit
ies.
2R
espo
nsib
ility
for c
atal
ogin
g ite
ms
in o
ur lo
gist
ics
proc
esse
s re
sts
with
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Ite
m Id
entif
icat
ion
AA
- th
e D
efen
se L
ogis
tics
Info
rmat
ion
Ser
vice
w
hich
pro
vide
s ca
talo
ging
and
rela
ted
serv
ices
to
our
org
aniz
atio
n.
BB
- ou
r cen
tral c
atal
ogin
g/ite
m id
entif
icat
ion
orga
niza
tion.
CC
- ea
ch o
pera
ting
unit
whi
ch is
resp
onsi
ble
for i
dent
ifica
tion
of th
e ite
ms
it us
es.
DD
- a
com
mer
cial
item
cat
alog
ing
com
pany
or
serv
ice.
EE
- do
not
kno
w.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
3O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
is re
spon
sibl
e fo
r gov
ernm
ent-w
ide
man
agem
ent o
f cer
tain
item
s ba
sed
on:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Ite
m Id
entif
icat
ion
AA
- W
e ar
e as
sign
ed m
anag
emen
t re
spon
sibi
lity
for s
ome
item
s un
der t
he
Inte
grat
ed M
ater
ial M
anag
emen
t (IM
M)
prog
ram
.
BB
- W
e pa
rtici
pate
in th
e In
tegr
ated
Mat
eria
l M
anag
emen
t pro
gram
, but
are
not
ass
igne
d re
spon
sibi
lity
as IM
M fo
r any
item
s.
CC
- Ite
ms
incl
uded
in o
ur lo
gist
ics
syst
em h
ave
no o
ther
use
rs th
an o
ur A
genc
y.
DD
- Ite
ms
in o
ur lo
gist
ics
syst
em m
ay h
ave
othe
r use
rs, b
ut w
e pr
efer
to m
anag
e ou
r ow
n ite
ms
for o
pera
tiona
l or s
ecur
ity re
ason
s.
EE
- W
e ar
e no
t aw
are
of th
e IM
M p
rogr
am.
4Fo
r ite
ms
in o
ur lo
gist
ics
proc
ess
that
requ
ire te
chni
cal d
ata
for
re-p
rocu
rem
ent,
mai
nten
ance
or o
pera
ting
purp
oses
, our
ap
proa
ch to
man
agin
g th
at d
ata
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Ite
m Id
entif
icat
ion
AA
- W
e re
ly p
rimar
ily o
n co
ntra
ctor
s or
oth
er
gove
rnm
ent a
ctiv
ities
to m
aint
ain
auto
mat
ed
tech
nica
l dat
a fil
es fo
r whi
ch w
e ha
ve
arra
nged
acc
ess.
BB
- W
e m
aint
ain
cent
raliz
ed a
utom
ated
te
chni
cal d
ata
files
for o
ur o
wn
item
in
form
atio
n.
CC
- E
ach
oper
atin
g un
it in
our
Age
ncy
mai
ntai
ns it
s ow
n te
chni
cal d
ata
info
rmat
ion
in
wha
teve
r for
m it
requ
ires.
DD
- W
e m
aint
ain
mos
t tec
hnic
al d
ata
such
as
item
des
crip
tions
or d
raw
ings
in "h
ard-
copy
" pa
per f
iles.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o re
quire
men
t for
tech
nica
l dat
a.
A-3
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
5If
logi
stic
s m
anag
ers
or o
ther
mem
bers
of o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
have
a
need
to id
entif
y an
item
, the
app
roac
h m
ight
be:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Ite
m Id
entif
icat
ion
AA
- A
cces
sing
an
on-li
ne d
ata
base
con
tain
ing
item
iden
tific
atio
n in
form
atio
n.
BB
- E
-mai
ling,
tele
phon
ing
or o
ther
wis
e co
ntac
ting
a ca
talo
ging
or t
echn
ical
spe
cial
ist.
CC
- R
evie
win
g go
vern
men
t or c
omm
erci
al
cata
logi
ng p
aper
doc
umen
ts.
DD
- S
earc
hing
the
Inte
rnet
for i
nfor
mat
ion.
EE
- A
skin
g a
supe
rvis
or o
r co-
wor
ker f
or h
elp.
6Th
e de
gree
to w
hich
our
item
iden
tific
atio
n pr
oces
s is
inte
grat
ed
with
the
mai
nten
ance
pla
nnin
g an
d de
sign
eng
inee
ring
proc
esse
s is
bes
t des
crib
ed b
y:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Ite
m Id
entif
icat
ion
AA
- Th
is p
roce
ss is
fully
impl
emen
ted
thro
ugho
ut th
e or
gani
zatio
n an
d un
ders
tood
w
ithin
bot
h m
aint
enan
ce a
nd e
ngin
eerin
g gr
oups
.
BB
- Th
e in
tegr
atio
n oc
curs
in s
ome
but n
ot a
ll pr
oduc
t lin
es; h
owev
er, p
lans
are
ong
oing
to
exte
nd to
the
full
oper
atio
n.
CC
- Th
ere
is v
ery
limite
d in
tegr
atio
n be
twee
n m
aint
enan
ce p
lann
ing
and
desi
gn e
ngin
eerin
g pr
oces
ses.
DD
- O
ur m
aint
enan
ce p
lann
ing
and
desi
gn
engi
neer
ing
proc
esse
s ar
e no
t int
egra
ted.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
7Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow o
ur it
em id
entif
icat
ion
proc
ess
rela
tes
end-
use
parts
to m
issi
on e
ssen
tial e
quip
men
t:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Ite
m Id
entif
icat
ion
AA
- E
nd-u
se p
arts
are
link
ed to
mis
sion
es
sent
ial e
quip
men
t, th
e da
ta is
mai
ntai
ned,
an
d th
e da
ta is
read
ily a
cces
sibl
e to
all
user
s.
BB
- M
any
parts
are
link
ed to
mis
sion
ess
entia
l eq
uipm
ent,
but d
oes
excl
ude
item
s (s
uch
as
com
mon
or l
ow-c
ost)
and
may
not
alw
ays
be
acce
ssib
le.
CC
- O
nly
certa
in p
arts
are
link
ed, a
nd th
e va
lidity
of t
he in
form
atio
n is
som
etim
es
susp
ect.
DD
- Th
ere
is n
o pa
rts a
pplic
atio
n pr
ogra
m in
th
is o
rgan
izat
ion.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
8As
set m
anag
emen
t is
an e
xpre
ssed
par
t of o
ur e
nter
pris
e st
rate
gic
plan
.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Man
agem
ent
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
A-4
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
9O
vera
ll as
set m
anag
emen
t is
the
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Man
agem
ent
AA
- Th
e ch
ief o
f log
istic
s at
the
exec
utiv
e le
vel
BB
- A
full
time
asse
t man
ager
at t
he e
xecu
tive
leve
l
CC
- Th
e ch
ief f
inan
cial
offi
cer
DD
- A
full
time
staf
f mem
ber a
t the
mid
dle
man
agem
ent l
evel
EE
- Doe
s no
t app
ly to
our
org
aniz
atio
n
10Ar
e m
ost m
ajor
equ
ipm
ent a
sset
s m
anag
ed b
y a
prog
ram
offi
ce?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur m
ajor
ass
ets
are
man
aged
by
a pr
ogra
m o
ffice
that
is fu
lly s
taffe
d an
d in
tegr
ated
into
the
oper
atio
n w
ith a
utho
rity
over
the
man
agem
ent o
f the
ass
ets.
BB
- O
ur m
ajor
ass
ets
are
man
aged
by
a pr
ogra
m o
ffice
, but
the
offic
e is
with
out f
ull
staf
f or a
utho
rity.
CC
- W
e co
ordi
nate
effe
ctiv
ely
amon
g ou
r va
rious
offi
ces
and
colle
ctiv
ely
perfo
rm th
e w
ork
of a
pro
gram
offi
ce.
DD
- W
e do
not
hav
e a
prog
ram
offi
ce, n
or d
o w
e pe
rform
this
role
.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
11Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e st
ate
of o
ur a
sset
man
agem
ent
met
rics:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
deve
lope
d en
terp
rise-
wid
e m
etric
s ad
dres
sing
ass
et m
anag
emen
t an
d co
ntin
uous
ly re
view
s th
ese
met
rics
to
iden
tify
impr
ovem
ents
.
BB
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
som
e as
set
man
agem
ent m
etric
s an
d pl
ans
to e
xpan
d th
em to
ent
erpr
ise-
wid
e m
easu
res
of
man
agem
ent e
ffect
iven
ess.
CC
-Our
org
aniz
atio
n ha
s so
me
asse
t m
anag
emen
t met
rics,
but
they
do
not
repr
esen
t how
ass
ets
are
man
aged
.
DD
- W
e do
not
mea
sure
ass
et m
anag
emen
t.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
12O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s ap
proa
ch to
the
acqu
isiti
on o
f maj
or a
sset
s is
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Man
agem
ent
AA
- A
n Ag
ency
- wid
e pr
ogra
m in
clud
es
requ
irem
ents
fore
cast
, inv
estm
ent r
evie
w,
inte
grat
ed lo
gist
ics
plan
ning
, and
acq
uisi
tion
BB
- A
genc
y- w
ide
requ
irem
ents
fore
cast
, in
vest
men
t rev
iew
, and
acq
uisi
tion
CC
- A
genc
y- w
ide
requ
irem
ents
are
fore
cast
an
d ac
quire
d fo
r all
orga
niza
tions
.
DD
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
fore
cast
s re
quire
men
ts
and
acqu
ires
need
ed
EE
- W
e se
nd a
pur
chas
e re
ques
t to
the
proc
urem
ent o
ffice
A-5
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
13Ar
e fu
ndin
g re
quire
men
ts fo
r maj
or a
sset
s re
flect
ed a
s lin
e ite
ms
in th
e an
nual
bud
get?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Man
agem
ent
AA
- A
sset
requ
irem
ents
are
sys
tem
atic
ally
de
velo
ped,
det
aile
d in
the
annu
al b
udge
t, an
d av
aila
ble
for s
enio
r man
agem
ent r
evie
w.
BB
- A
sset
requ
irem
ents
are
dev
elop
ed a
nd
subm
itted
in a
n an
nual
bud
get b
ut n
ot it
emiz
ed
or v
isib
le to
sen
ior m
anag
emen
t.
CC
- O
ur b
udge
ts d
escr
ibe
our r
equi
rem
ents
bu
t do
not b
reak
out
indi
vidu
al m
ajor
ass
et
cate
gorie
s.
DD
- W
e do
not
dev
elop
fund
ing
requ
irem
ents
fo
r maj
or a
sset
s in
our
ann
ual b
udge
ts.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
14O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
uses
an
asse
t man
agem
ent s
yste
m th
at
incl
udes
the
follo
win
g fu
nctio
nalit
y or
inte
rface
s.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Man
agem
ent
AA
- A
cqui
sitio
n, c
onfig
urat
ion
man
agem
ent,
mai
nten
ance
, acc
ount
abili
ty, s
uppl
y, h
uman
re
sour
ces
and
finan
ce.
BB
- A
cqui
sitio
n, m
aint
enan
ce, a
ccou
ntab
ility,
an
d fin
ance
.
CC
- A
cqui
sitio
n, a
ccou
ntab
ility
and
fina
nce.
DD
- A
ccou
ntab
ility
and
finan
ce.
EE
- Fi
nanc
ial A
ccou
ntab
ility
onl
y
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
15O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
an e
nter
pris
e w
ide
mat
eria
l dis
tribu
tion
and
trans
porta
tion
plan
Pyr
amid
Are
a:D
istri
butio
n an
d Tr
ansp
orta
tion
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
16O
ur tr
ansp
orta
tion
syst
em p
rovi
des
in-tr
ansi
t mat
eria
l ass
et
visi
bilit
y
Pyr
amid
Are
a:D
istri
butio
n an
d Tr
ansp
orta
tion
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
A-6
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
17Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur d
istri
butio
n po
licy
rega
rdin
g pl
acem
ent o
f sup
plie
s an
d eq
uipm
ent:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:D
istri
butio
n an
d Tr
ansp
orta
tion
AA
- O
ur m
ater
ial d
istri
butio
n po
licy
spec
ifica
lly
requ
ires
keep
ing
mat
eria
l inv
ento
ries
as c
lose
to
poi
nt-o
f-use
as
poss
ible
.
BB
- In
pra
ctic
e, w
e po
sitio
n m
ater
ial i
nven
tory
cl
ose
to p
oint
-of-u
se w
hene
ver p
ossi
ble.
CC
- W
e do
not
hav
e po
licy
on th
is m
atte
r.
DD
- W
e po
sitio
n m
ater
ial i
nven
tory
whe
reve
r ou
r war
ehou
ses
are
loca
ted.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
18Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es w
here
we
rece
ive
supp
lies
and
equi
pmen
t:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:D
istri
butio
n an
d Tr
ansp
orta
tion
AA
- M
ater
ial r
ecei
pts
are
rout
inel
y re
ceiv
ed a
t po
int o
f ope
ratio
nal u
se.
BB
- H
igh
prio
rity
ship
men
ts a
re s
omet
imes
sh
ippe
d di
rect
ly to
poi
nt o
f use
.
CC
- A
ll m
ater
ial s
hipm
ents
are
rece
ived
at
cent
ral w
areh
ouse
loca
tions
.
DD
- O
ur p
rocu
rem
ent o
ffice
r(s)
dec
ides
whe
re
to s
hip
mat
eria
l com
ing
from
com
mer
cial
so
urce
s.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
19Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e w
ay w
e re
sour
ce d
istri
butio
n an
d tra
nspo
rtatio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:D
istri
butio
n an
d Tr
ansp
orta
tion
AA
- D
istri
butio
n an
d tra
nspo
rtatio
n re
quire
men
ts h
ave
an id
entif
iabl
e an
d di
rect
lin
k to
our
fina
ncia
l bud
getin
g sy
stem
, ena
blin
g us
to id
entif
y if
our b
udge
ts a
re p
rope
rly s
ized
to
mee
t our
requ
irem
ents
.
BB
- D
istri
butio
n an
d tra
nspo
rtatio
n re
quire
men
ts a
re ro
lled
up in
to a
gen
eric
ac
coun
t, w
hich
com
plic
ates
our
abi
lity
to
iden
tify
if ou
r bud
gets
are
pro
perly
siz
ed to
m
eet o
ur re
quire
men
ts.
CC
- D
istri
butio
n an
d tra
nspo
rtatio
n re
quire
men
ts a
re ro
lled
up in
to m
ore
than
one
ge
neric
acc
ount
, whi
ch c
ompl
icat
es o
ur a
bilit
y to
iden
tify
if ou
r bud
gets
are
pro
perly
siz
ed to
m
eet o
ur re
quire
men
ts.
DD
- D
istri
butio
n an
d tra
nspo
rtatio
n ar
e ex
pens
es fo
r whi
ch o
ur c
usto
mer
s re
imbu
rse
us; t
here
fore
thes
e ex
pens
es d
o no
t hav
e a
net i
mpa
ct o
n ou
r bud
gets
.
EE
- D
on't
know
.
20O
ur e
nter
pris
e le
vel m
etric
s in
clud
e tra
nspo
rtatio
n an
d di
strib
utio
n m
easu
res
Pyr
amid
Are
a:D
istri
butio
n an
d Tr
ansp
orta
tion
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
on't
know
.
A-7
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
21O
ur A
genc
y's
appr
oach
to re
ultil
izat
ion
of u
nnee
ded
equi
pmen
t an
d m
ater
ial a
sset
s is
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial D
ispo
sitio
n
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s of
ficia
l rul
es a
nd
proc
esse
s in
pla
ce to
ens
ure
that
mat
erie
l no
long
er re
quire
d by
the
owni
ng/u
sing
or
gani
zatio
n is
offe
red
for r
euse
to a
ll ot
her
orga
niza
tions
with
in th
e A
genc
y.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s of
ficia
l rul
es a
nd
proc
esse
s in
pla
ce to
ens
ure
that
mat
erie
l no
long
er re
quire
d by
the
owni
ng/u
sing
or
gani
zatio
n is
offe
red
to s
ome
orga
niza
tions
w
ithin
the
Age
ncy.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y do
es n
ot h
ave
offic
ial r
ules
an
d pr
oces
ses
but a
s a
gene
ral p
ract
ice
the
owni
ng/u
sing
org
aniz
atio
n of
fers
mat
erie
l no
long
er re
quire
d to
all
othe
r org
aniz
atio
ns w
ithin
th
e A
genc
y.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y do
es n
ot h
ave
offic
ial r
ules
an
d pr
oces
ses
but a
s a
gene
ral p
ract
ice
the
owni
ng/u
sing
org
aniz
atio
n of
fers
mat
erie
l no
long
er re
quire
d to
som
e or
gani
zatio
ns w
ithin
th
e A
genc
y.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s no
t iss
ued
mat
erie
l di
spos
ition
gui
danc
e, e
ither
offi
cial
ly o
r un
offic
ially
.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
22Fo
r pur
pose
s of
equ
ipm
ent a
nd m
ater
ial d
ispo
sitio
n, o
ur
orga
niza
tion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial D
ispo
sitio
n
AA
- ha
s a
full-
time
staf
f tra
ined
and
kn
owle
dgea
ble
abou
t how
to d
ispo
se o
f m
ater
iel i
n ac
cord
ance
with
the
Fede
ral
Pro
perty
Man
agem
ent r
ules
.
BB
- ha
s a
staf
f tra
ined
and
kno
wle
dgea
ble
abou
t how
to d
ispo
se o
f mat
erie
l in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith th
e Fe
dera
l Pro
perty
M
anag
emen
t rul
es b
ut th
ese
pers
onne
l onl
y w
ork
on d
ispo
sitio
n on
an
as-r
equi
red
basi
s.
CC
- re
lies
on c
ontra
ctor
s to
per
form
the
full
rang
e of
dis
posi
tion
actio
ns (r
eutil
izat
ion,
do
natio
n, a
nd s
urpl
us s
ales
).
DD
- re
lies
on c
ontra
ctor
s to
per
form
som
e di
spos
ition
act
ions
.
EE
- do
es n
ot h
ave
any
mat
erie
l dis
posi
tion
resp
onsi
bilit
ies.
23O
ur b
udge
t and
pro
gram
pla
n in
clud
es a
dequ
ate
pers
onne
l and
fu
ndin
g to
effe
ctiv
ely
and
effic
ient
ly d
ispo
se o
f equ
ipm
ent a
nd
mat
erie
l:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial D
ispo
sitio
n
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n.
A-8
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
24O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s te
chno
logy
pos
ture
in m
ater
iel d
ispo
sitio
n ca
n be
bes
t des
crib
ed a
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial D
ispo
sitio
n
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y ow
ns a
nd o
pera
tes
our c
urre
nt
stat
e-of
-the-
art t
echn
olog
y sy
stem
, whi
ch
enab
les
us to
effe
ctiv
ely
notif
y ot
hers
with
in
and
outs
ide
the
Age
ncy
or to
be
ours
elve
s no
tifie
d by
oth
ers,
with
in o
r out
side
, of t
he
avai
labi
lity
of e
xces
s an
d su
rplu
s m
ater
iel.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y ow
ns a
nd o
pera
tes
our c
urre
nt
stat
e-of
-the-
art t
echn
olog
y sy
stem
, whi
ch
enab
les
us to
effe
ctiv
ely
notif
y ot
hers
with
in
the
Age
ncy
or to
be
ours
elve
s no
tifie
d by
ot
hers
with
in th
e A
genc
y of
the
avai
labi
lity
of
exce
ss a
nd s
urpl
us m
ater
iel.
CC
- A
sup
port
cont
ract
or o
wns
and
ope
rate
s ou
r cur
rent
sta
te-o
f-the
-art
tech
nolo
gy s
yste
m,
whi
ch e
nabl
es u
s to
not
ify o
ther
s w
ithin
and
ou
tsid
e th
e A
genc
y or
to b
e ou
rsel
ves
notif
ied
by o
ther
s, w
ithin
or o
utsi
de, o
f the
ava
ilabi
lity
of e
xces
s an
d su
rplu
s m
ater
iel.
DD
- A
sup
port
cont
ract
or o
wns
and
ope
rate
s ou
r cur
rent
sta
te-o
f-the
-art
tech
nolo
gy s
yste
m,
whi
ch e
nabl
es u
s to
not
ify o
ther
s w
ithin
the
Age
ncy
or to
be
ours
elve
s no
tifie
d by
oth
ers
with
in th
e A
genc
y of
the
avai
labi
lity
of e
xces
s an
d su
rplu
s m
ater
iel.
EE
- Th
e au
tom
ated
sys
tem
sup
porti
ng o
ur
mat
erie
l dis
posi
tion
effo
rts is
not
cur
rent
sta
te-
of-th
e-ar
t.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
25Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s w
ritte
n pr
oced
ures
cov
erin
g th
e di
spos
al o
f unn
eede
d m
ater
iel a
s re
quire
d by
the
Fede
ral P
rope
rty M
anag
emen
t rul
es p
ublis
hed
by
the
Gen
eral
Ser
vice
s A
dmin
istra
tion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial D
ispo
sitio
n
AA
- O
ur o
ffici
al m
ater
ial d
ispo
sal p
roce
dure
s ar
e co
nsis
tent
with
Fed
eral
Pro
perty
M
anag
emen
t rul
es a
nd m
eet o
ur
orga
niza
tion'
s ne
eds.
BB
- W
e ge
nera
lly m
eet F
eder
al P
rope
rty
Man
agem
ent p
roce
dure
s.
CC
- W
e ha
ve o
ur o
wn
mat
eria
l dis
posa
l pr
oced
ures
tailo
red
to o
ur u
niqu
e re
quire
men
ts.
DD
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
has
its o
wn
mat
eria
l di
spos
al p
roce
dure
s.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
26Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es m
ater
iel d
ispo
sitio
n in
our
or
gani
zatio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial D
ispo
sitio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve m
ater
iel d
ispo
sitio
n pe
rform
ance
st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od a
nd ri
goro
usly
mon
itore
d.
BB
- W
e ha
ve m
ater
ial d
ispo
sitio
n pe
rform
ance
st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od b
ut a
re n
ot ri
goro
usly
mon
itore
d.
CC
- W
e ha
ve m
ater
iel d
ispo
sitio
n pe
rform
ance
st
anda
rds
that
are
not
cur
rent
or w
ell
unde
rsto
od.
DD
- W
e re
ly o
n co
ntra
ctor
s to
mee
t agr
eed-
to
perfo
rman
ce s
tand
ards
.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e m
eani
ngfu
l per
form
ance
st
anda
rds.
A-9
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
27O
ur A
genc
y's
visi
on fo
r mat
eria
l acq
uisi
tion
is b
est d
escr
ibed
as:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial A
cqui
sitio
n
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y's
visi
on is
that
mat
erie
l ac
quis
ition
stra
tegi
es a
nd p
roce
sses
sha
ll co
ntin
ually
see
k ou
t and
app
ly fr
esh
and
crea
tive
appr
oach
es in
sup
port
of o
ur
cust
omer
s.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s no
t arti
cula
ted
a cl
ear
visi
on/s
trate
gy s
tate
men
t but
it d
emon
stra
tes
thou
gh it
s ac
tions
that
agi
lity
and
reso
urce
fuln
ess
in m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n is
en
cour
aged
.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y w
orks
with
the
Offi
ce o
f Fe
dera
l Pro
cure
men
t Pol
icy
and
GS
A's
Fe
dera
l Pro
cure
men
t Reg
ulat
ions
sta
ff to
id
entif
y an
d m
inim
ize
or re
mov
e re
d ta
pe th
at
ham
pers
effe
ctiv
e m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y w
orks
col
labo
rativ
ely
with
su
pplie
rs to
find
inno
vativ
e w
ays
to a
cqui
re
mat
erie
l with
in th
e co
ntex
t of e
xist
ing
fede
ral
proc
urem
ent r
egul
atio
ns.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y ad
here
s st
rictly
to tr
aditi
onal
m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n pr
oces
ses
with
in th
e co
ntex
t of e
xist
ing
fede
ral p
rocu
rem
ent
regu
latio
ns.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
28W
hich
bes
t des
crib
es o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s m
ater
ial a
cqui
sitio
n pr
ogra
m:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial A
cqui
sitio
n
AA
- O
ur m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n w
orkf
orce
co
mm
unic
ates
and
wor
ks e
ffect
ivel
y w
ith o
ur
Age
ncy'
s lo
gist
ics
staf
f and
with
our
cus
tom
ers
and
supp
liers
.
BB
- O
ur m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n or
gani
zatio
n is
not
en
cum
bere
d w
ith m
anag
emen
t lay
erin
g th
at
impe
des
effe
ctiv
e su
ppor
t.
CC
- O
ur m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n w
orkf
orce
ro
utin
ely
wor
ks w
ith th
e A
genc
y's
logi
stic
s st
aff
to a
ddre
ss c
urre
nt c
ritic
al is
sues
.
DD
- O
ur m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n w
orkf
orce
is u
p-to
-da
te in
its
train
ing
and
know
ledg
e of
cur
rent
pr
ocur
emen
t pra
ctic
es a
nd e
mer
ging
tren
ds.
EE
- O
ur m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n w
orkf
orce
is
basi
cally
a s
tand
-alo
ne o
pera
tion
that
pro
vide
s as
sist
ance
whe
n as
ked
to b
ut is
not
wel
l in
tegr
ated
with
the
Age
ncy'
s lo
gist
ics
staf
f and
pr
ogra
m.
A-10
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
29Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur m
ater
ial a
cqui
sitio
n or
gani
zatio
n's
budg
et a
nd p
rogr
am p
lan
rega
rdin
g pe
rson
nel a
nd
fund
ing
to e
ffect
ivel
y su
ppor
t the
Age
ncy'
s st
aff,
cust
omer
s, a
nd
supp
liers
mat
eria
l acq
uisi
tion
need
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial A
cqui
sitio
n
AA
- O
ur a
cqui
sitio
n or
gani
zatio
n is
fully
sta
ffed
with
fund
ing
auth
ority
suf
ficie
nt to
man
age
staf
f, cu
stom
er, a
nd s
uppl
ier r
equi
rem
ents
.
BB
- O
ur a
cqui
sitio
n or
gani
zatio
n su
ppor
ts
staf
f, cu
stom
ers,
and
sup
plie
rs, b
ut la
cks
eith
er s
uffic
ient
fund
ing
or s
taff
to e
ffect
ivel
y pe
rform
all
func
tions
.
CC
- O
ur a
cqui
sitio
n or
gani
zatio
n ca
n pe
rform
so
me
of th
ese
func
tions
but
doe
s no
t hav
e th
e au
thor
ity, p
erso
nnel
, or f
undi
ng to
sup
port
all.
DD
- W
e do
not
mai
ntai
n a
mat
eria
l acq
uisi
tion
orga
niza
tion.
EE
- D
o no
t kno
w
30In
our
org
aniz
atio
n ou
r ele
ctro
nic
busi
ness
rela
tions
hips
with
co
mm
erci
al s
uppl
iers
are
cha
ract
eriz
ed b
y:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial A
cqui
sitio
n
AA
- E
stab
lishm
ent o
f e-b
usin
ess
inte
rcha
nges
be
twee
n ou
r acq
uisi
tion
proc
esse
s an
d pr
ivat
e se
ctor
sup
plie
rs u
sing
com
mer
cial
ly
reco
gniz
ed in
form
atio
n in
terc
hang
e st
anda
rds.
BB
- E
stab
lishe
d ac
quis
ition
par
tner
ship
s w
ith
sele
cted
sup
plie
rs in
clud
ing
two-
way
dat
a sh
arin
g.
CC
- A
rms-
leng
th c
ontra
ctin
g w
ith s
uppl
iers
ac
com
plis
hed
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith F
eder
al
Acq
uisi
tion
Reg
ulat
ions
.
DD
- M
ater
ial p
rocu
rem
ent u
sing
GS
A fe
dera
l su
pply
sch
edul
es a
nd g
over
nmen
t cre
dit c
ard
purc
hase
s.
EE
- M
ater
ial p
rocu
rem
ent c
ontra
cts
arra
nged
by
pos
tal m
ail,
e-m
ail a
nd b
y te
leph
one.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
31O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s po
licy
on a
dmin
istra
tive
and
prod
uctio
n le
ad
times
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial A
cqui
sitio
n
AA
- W
e ac
tivel
y at
tem
pt to
redu
ce th
ese
times
in
ord
er to
impr
ove
cust
omer
sup
port
and
redu
ce c
osts
.
BB
- W
e ge
nera
lly a
ccep
t the
lead
tim
es
prov
ided
by
the
cont
ract
ors
sellin
g m
ater
ial
and
serv
ices
to o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion.
CC
- P
roje
cted
lead
tim
es in
our
org
aniz
atio
n ar
e ba
sed
on p
ast h
isto
ry d
ata.
DD
- O
ur m
ater
ial a
cqui
sitio
n sy
stem
doe
s no
t re
quire
us
to u
se p
rior l
ead
time
info
rmat
ion.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o po
licy
on le
ad ti
mes
.
32W
hich
sta
tem
ent b
est d
escr
ibes
mat
erie
l acq
uisi
tion
perfo
rman
ce in
you
r org
aniz
atio
n.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
ater
ial A
cqui
sitio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n pe
rform
ance
st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od a
nd ri
goro
usly
mon
itore
d.
BB
- W
e ha
ve m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n pe
rform
ance
st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od b
ut a
re n
ot ri
goro
usly
mon
itore
d.
CC
- W
e ha
ve m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n pe
rform
ance
st
anda
rds
that
are
not
cur
rent
or w
ell
unde
rsto
od.
DD
- W
e re
ly o
n co
ntra
ctor
s to
man
age
mat
erie
l ac
quis
ition
per
form
ance
sta
ndar
ds.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e m
ater
iel a
cqui
sitio
n pe
rform
ance
sta
ndar
ds.
A-11
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
33Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur p
roce
ss to
agg
rega
te
requ
irem
ents
for c
omm
on s
uppl
ies
and
equi
pmen
t tha
t will
be
used
thro
ugho
ut th
e or
gani
zatio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
equi
rem
ents
Det
erm
inat
ion
AA
- A
ll ac
tiviti
es a
cros
s ou
r Age
ncy
regu
larly
co
ordi
nate
mat
eria
l and
equ
ipm
ent
requ
irem
ents
to e
nsur
e ec
onom
y of
sca
le
acqu
isiti
ons.
BB
- O
ur s
uppl
y pe
rson
nel c
ompa
re in
form
atio
n on
acq
uisi
tion
of c
omm
on it
ems
whe
neve
r po
ssib
le.
CC
- Th
ere
is n
ot s
uffic
ient
info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e to
coo
rdin
ate
purc
hase
s of
com
mon
item
s or
eq
uipm
ent.
DD
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
is re
spon
sibl
e fo
r ac
quiri
ng it
s ow
n su
pplie
s an
d eq
uipm
ent.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
34Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e lin
kage
bet
wee
n th
e te
mpo
of
oper
atio
ns a
nd th
e fu
ndin
g fo
r log
istic
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
equi
rem
ents
Det
erm
inat
ion
AA
- W
e re
late
logi
stic
s fu
ndin
g to
ope
ratio
nal
activ
ity a
s pa
rt of
our
pla
nnin
g, p
rogr
amm
ing
and
budg
etin
g.
BB
- O
ur lo
gist
ics
peop
le tr
y to
coo
rdin
ate
logi
stic
s fu
ndin
g w
ith o
pera
tiona
l man
ager
s w
hene
ver p
ossi
ble.
CC
- O
pera
tions
and
logi
stic
s fu
ndin
g ar
e di
ffere
nt c
ateg
orie
s.
DD
- O
pera
tions
and
logi
stic
s re
quire
men
ts a
re
not r
eally
dire
ctly
rela
ted.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
35Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow fo
reca
sted
mat
eria
l re
quire
men
ts a
re re
late
d to
the
requ
irem
ents
act
ually
incu
rred
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
equi
rem
ents
Det
erm
inat
ion
AA
- O
ur a
utom
ated
requ
irem
ents
pro
cess
co
mpu
ter f
utur
e m
ater
ial n
eeds
bas
ed o
n pa
st
actu
al d
eman
ds fo
r mat
eria
l.
BB
- O
ur m
ater
ial r
equi
rem
ents
man
ager
s fa
ctor
in p
ast n
eeds
whe
n de
velo
ping
futu
re
mat
eria
l req
uire
men
ts.
CC
- W
e do
not
regu
larly
trac
k pa
st m
ater
ial
usag
e.
DD
- O
ur fu
ture
mat
eria
l dem
ands
fluc
tuat
e to
th
e po
int t
hat p
ast u
sage
is m
eani
ngle
ss.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
36O
ur lo
gist
ics
mat
eria
l req
uire
men
ts a
re p
roje
cted
and
man
aged
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
equi
rem
ents
Det
erm
inat
ion
AA
- Fo
r 5 o
r mor
e ye
ars
BB
- 3
to 4
yea
rs
CC
- B
i-ann
ually
DD
- An
nual
ly
EE
- M
onth
ly o
r les
s
A-12
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
37Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
track
s th
e di
ffere
nce
betw
een
proj
ecte
d lo
gist
ics
reso
urce
requ
irem
ents
th
at g
o in
to th
e bu
dget
and
the
fund
ing
actu
ally
rece
ived
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
equi
rem
ents
Det
erm
inat
ion
AA
- W
e tra
ck a
ctua
l fun
ding
aga
inst
pro
ject
ed
need
and
adj
ust f
utur
e re
quire
men
ts
acco
rdin
gly.
BB
- O
nce
actu
al fu
ndin
g is
rece
ived
, the
pr
ojec
ted
fund
ing
need
s ar
e no
long
er re
leva
nt.
CC
- Fu
ndin
g re
ceiv
ed b
ecom
es o
ur
requ
irem
ent.
DD
- W
e do
not
com
pare
pro
ject
ed fu
ndin
g ag
ains
t act
ual f
undi
ng.
EE
- W
e do
not
trac
k pr
ior y
ears
pro
ject
ed
fund
ing.
38W
hen
dete
rmin
ing
our a
nnua
l log
istic
s re
quire
men
ts, w
e de
velo
p pr
ojec
tions
bas
ed o
n
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
equi
rem
ents
Det
erm
inat
ion
AA
- O
pera
tiona
l pro
files
, maj
or a
cqui
sitio
ns,
oper
atio
ns a
nd m
aint
enan
ce, a
nd
cont
inge
ncie
s
BB
- M
ajor
acq
uisi
tions
, ope
ratio
ns a
nd
mai
nten
ance
, and
con
tinge
ncie
s
CC
- M
ajor
acq
uisi
tions
, ope
ratio
ns a
nd
mai
nten
ance
DD
- O
ne lu
mp
sum
for l
ogis
tics
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o lo
gist
ics
requ
irem
ents
.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
39Lo
gist
ics
reso
urce
s pr
ojec
tions
are
bas
ed o
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
equi
rem
ents
Det
erm
inat
ion
AA
- Ze
ro-b
ased
requ
irem
ents
and
fore
cast
th
roug
h cr
iteria
suc
h as
ope
ratio
nal h
ours
BB
- La
st y
ear's
exp
endi
ture
s pl
us a
fore
cast
of
plan
ned
chan
ges
CC
- La
st y
ear's
exp
endi
ture
s pl
us u
nsat
isfie
d re
quire
men
ts
DD
- La
st y
ear's
bud
get p
lus
infla
tion
EE
- W
e do
not
pro
ject
mat
eria
l req
uire
men
ts.
40Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow o
ur A
genc
y re
late
s th
e st
ate
of
equi
pmen
t/mat
eria
l mai
nten
ance
cap
abili
ties
and
the
impa
ct o
f m
aint
enan
ce s
uppo
rt in
pla
nnin
g Ag
ency
ope
ratio
ns:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
aint
enan
ce
AA
- M
aint
enan
ce c
apab
ilitie
s an
d su
ppor
t is
alw
ays
a fa
ctor
in p
lann
ing
maj
or o
pera
tions
.
BB
- M
aint
enan
ce c
apab
ilitie
s an
d su
ppor
t is
som
etim
es a
fact
or in
pla
nnin
g m
ajor
op
erat
ions
.
CC
- M
aint
enan
ce c
apab
ilitie
s an
d su
ppor
t are
de
alt w
ith a
fter a
n op
erat
ion
is c
ompl
eted
.
DD
- O
ur o
pera
tions
are
crit
ical
so
we
go w
ith
wha
t we
have
.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o m
aint
enan
ce c
apab
ility.
A-13
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
41In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, m
aint
enan
ce a
ctiv
ities
are
org
aniz
ed u
nder
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
aint
enan
ce
AA
- A
sin
gle
logi
stic
s or
gani
zatio
n
BB
- Th
e sa
me
orga
niza
tion
that
man
ages
op
erat
ions
.
CC
- A
sep
arat
e P
rogr
am O
ffice
for e
ach
type
of
equi
pmen
t
DD
- N
o on
e --
mai
nten
ance
act
iviti
es a
re
inde
pend
ent
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
any
mai
nten
ance
or
gani
zatio
ns
42Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e ac
cura
cy a
nd a
vaila
bilit
y of
m
aint
enan
ce c
ost i
nfor
mat
ion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
aint
enan
ce
AA
- Th
e co
st o
f equ
ipm
ent a
nd m
ater
ial
mai
nten
ance
is k
ept u
pdat
ed a
nd a
ccur
ate
in
auto
mat
ed d
ata
base
s ac
cess
ible
to e
very
one
with
a n
eed
to k
now
.
BB
- M
aint
enan
ce c
osts
are
ava
ilabl
e in
our
m
aint
enan
ce d
ata
syst
ems.
CC
- W
e ke
ep h
ard-
copy
reco
rds
of
mai
nten
ance
cos
ts.
DD
- W
e do
not
hav
e re
cord
s of
mai
nten
ance
co
sts.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e m
aint
enan
ce c
osts
in o
ur
orga
niza
tion.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
43Th
e st
rate
gy th
at b
est c
hara
cter
izes
our
mat
eria
l/equ
ipm
ent
mai
nten
ance
phi
loso
phy
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
aint
enan
ce
AA
- O
n-lin
e se
nsor
bas
ed m
aint
enan
ce
BB
- C
ondi
tione
d ba
sed
mai
nten
ance
CC
- S
ched
uled
pre
vent
ive
mai
nten
ance
DD
- M
aint
enan
ce a
s re
quire
d
EE
- R
un to
failu
re
44Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e av
aila
bilit
y of
m
ater
ial/e
quip
men
t mai
nten
ance
act
ions
sta
tus:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
aint
enan
ce
AA
- O
ur a
utom
ated
sys
tem
s pr
ovid
e tim
ely
stat
us o
f mai
nten
ance
act
ions
to o
pera
tiona
l m
anag
ers.
BB
- W
e ha
ve p
roce
dure
s to
repo
rt m
aint
enan
ce s
tatu
s to
app
ropr
iate
man
ager
s by
pho
ne o
r e-m
ail.
CC
- O
pera
tiona
l man
ager
s ha
ve p
oint
s of
co
ntac
t to
inqu
ire a
bout
mai
nten
ance
sta
tus.
DD
- O
pera
tiona
l man
ager
s ar
e no
t res
pons
ible
fo
r equ
ipm
ent m
aint
enan
ce.
EE
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
does
not
acc
ompl
ish
mat
eria
l/equ
ipm
ent m
aint
enan
ce.
A-14
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
45Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
hand
les
defe
rred
or u
nfun
ded
mat
eria
l/equ
ipm
ent m
aint
enan
ce
requ
irem
ents
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
aint
enan
ce
AA
- D
efer
red
mai
nten
ance
requ
irem
ents
are
tra
cked
and
revi
ewed
by
seni
or m
anag
ers.
BB
- D
efer
red
mai
nten
ance
requ
irem
ents
are
in
clud
ed in
futu
re m
aint
enan
ce b
udge
ts.
CC
- S
uch
requ
irem
ents
are
sim
ply
carr
ied
over
to
the
next
yea
r.
DD
- W
e do
not
trac
k de
ferr
ed m
aint
enan
ce
requ
irem
ents
.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
46O
ur m
ater
ial m
aint
enan
ce s
yste
m(s
)
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
aint
enan
ce
AA
- Fo
reca
sts
prev
entiv
e m
aint
enan
ce, t
rack
s co
rrec
tive
mai
nten
ance
act
ions
, and
inte
rface
s di
rect
ly w
ith th
e te
chni
cal d
ata,
sup
ply,
fin
ance
, and
hum
an re
sour
ces
syst
ems.
BB
- Fo
reca
sts
prev
entiv
e m
aint
enan
ce, t
rack
s co
rrec
tive
mai
nten
ance
act
ions
, rel
ates
repa
ir pa
rts to
mai
nten
ance
act
ions
and
trac
ks th
e w
ork
acco
mpl
ishe
d by
indi
vidu
al t
echn
icia
ns
CC
- Tr
acks
pre
vent
ive
and
corr
ectiv
e m
aint
enan
ce a
ctio
ns, a
nd re
late
s re
pair
parts
to
mai
nten
ance
act
ions
DD
- R
ecor
ds p
reve
ntiv
e an
d co
rrec
tive
mai
nten
ance
act
ions
EE
- O
ur s
yste
m d
oes
not t
rack
mai
nten
ance
ac
tivity
.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
47Fu
ndin
g re
sour
ces
for l
ogis
tics
activ
ities
are
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- B
udge
ted
and
plan
ned
for,
and
man
aged
se
para
tely
from
oth
er a
ctiv
ities
BB
- B
udge
ted
and
plan
ned
for,
but f
undi
ng is
su
bjec
t to
real
loca
tion
to n
on-lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
CC
- Im
bedd
ed (i
nclu
ded,
but
not
spe
cific
ally
id
entif
ied)
in p
rogr
am o
ffice
bud
gets
DD
- Im
bedd
ed in
uni
t-lev
el o
pera
ting
budg
ets
EE
- N
ot s
epar
atel
y id
entif
ied
48Fo
r our
org
aniz
atio
n, lo
gist
ics
reso
urce
s ar
e m
anag
ed u
nder
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- U
nder
app
licab
le lo
gist
ics
offic
es in
the
orga
niza
tion
BB
- W
ithin
ope
ratio
ns o
ffice
s
CC
- B
y th
e ap
plic
able
equ
ipm
ent p
rogr
am
offic
es
DD
- N
o on
e --
logi
stic
s ac
tiviti
es a
re re
sour
ced
inde
pend
ently
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
any
logi
stic
s re
sour
ced
activ
ities
A-15
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
49Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e ro
le q
uant
itativ
e fo
reca
stin
g m
etho
ds p
lay
in d
evel
opin
g lo
gist
ics
budg
et re
quire
men
ts:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur a
utom
ated
fore
cast
ing
syst
ems
use
stan
dard
fore
cast
ing
mod
els
to p
roje
ct fu
ture
bu
dget
requ
irem
ents
.
BB
- O
ur m
ater
ial m
anag
ers
have
info
rmat
ion
tabl
es th
at a
re b
ased
on
fore
cast
ing
mod
els
to
quan
tify
proj
ecte
d m
ater
ial b
udge
t re
quire
men
ts.
CC
- O
ur m
ater
ial r
egul
atio
ns o
r pro
cedu
res
man
uals
des
crib
e ou
r app
roac
h fo
r mat
eria
l bu
dget
requ
irem
ents
fore
cast
s.
DD
- Fu
ture
mat
eria
l bud
get r
equi
rem
ents
are
de
velo
ped
usin
g pr
ior y
ear's
figu
res
plus
in
flatio
n.
EE
- D
o no
t kno
w.
50Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e st
affin
g of
logi
stic
s ac
tiviti
es in
ou
r age
ncy:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- Lo
gist
ics
staf
fing
requ
irem
ents
are
one
of
the
high
est p
riorit
ies
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion.
BB
- Lo
gist
ics
staf
fing
requ
irem
ents
are
abo
ut
equa
l with
oth
er im
porta
nt a
reas
.
CC
- Lo
gist
ics
staf
f are
con
side
red
less
of a
pr
iorit
y th
an o
ther
sta
ff re
quire
men
ts, s
uch
as
oper
atio
ns.
DD
- Lo
gist
ics
staf
fing
is n
ot s
epar
atel
y id
entif
ied
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o st
aff m
embe
rs th
at a
re
spec
ifica
lly lo
gist
ics
pers
onne
l.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
51O
ur L
ogis
tics
IT S
yste
m a
nd F
inan
ce IT
Sys
tem
(s)
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- A
re in
tegr
ated
in th
e sa
me
syst
em(s
) with
co
mm
on d
ata
base
s an
d in
tegr
ated
ap
plic
atio
ns.
BB
- A
re in
sep
arat
e, b
ut h
ighl
y in
tegr
ated
sy
stem
s.
CC
- A
re in
sep
arat
e, s
omew
hat c
onne
cted
sy
stem
s.
DD
- A
re in
sep
arat
e, u
nint
egra
ted
syst
ems.
EE
- Lo
gist
ics
and
finan
ce h
ave
no s
yste
ms
rela
tions
hip.
52Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur lo
gist
ics
budg
ets:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- D
etai
ls o
f our
logi
stic
s or
ient
ed b
udge
ts
are
read
ily id
entif
iabl
e an
d ac
cess
ible
in
auto
mat
ed s
yste
ms.
BB
- Lo
gist
ics
budg
et in
form
atio
n ca
n be
ob
tain
ed b
y m
anua
l rev
iew
of o
ur b
udge
t do
cum
ents
.
CC
- Lo
gist
ics
budg
et d
ata
cann
ot b
e se
para
ted
from
oth
er b
udge
t cat
egor
ies.
DD
- Th
ere
are
no lo
gist
ics
elem
ents
in o
ur
annu
al b
udge
ts.
EE
- D
o no
t kno
w.
A-16
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
53In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
are
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- C
entra
lly m
anag
ed a
nd c
oord
inat
ed b
y a
dedi
cate
d H
eadq
uarte
rs e
lem
ent
BB
- R
egio
nally
man
aged
and
coo
rdin
ated
CC
- M
anag
ed a
nd c
oord
inat
ed b
y th
e ap
plic
able
pro
gram
offi
ce
DD
-The
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
the
oper
atin
g un
it
EE
- Lo
gist
ics
is n
ot m
anag
ed s
epar
atel
y fro
m
othe
r fun
ctio
ns.
54In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, lo
ng-te
rm s
usta
inm
ent o
f a n
ew s
yste
m o
r ne
w p
iece
of e
quip
men
t is
a m
ajor
con
side
ratio
n in
the
acqu
isiti
on p
roce
ss:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
55Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur m
anag
emen
t stra
tegy
for
logi
stic
s re
sour
ce m
anag
emen
t:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur a
nnua
l stra
tegi
c pl
an h
as a
sec
tion
on
logi
stic
s st
rate
gy a
nd w
e m
anag
e to
thes
e go
als
and
obje
ctiv
es.
BB
- W
e ha
ve a
doc
umen
ted
logi
stic
s re
sour
ce
plan
sep
arat
e fro
m o
ur s
trate
gic
plan
ning
do
cum
ents
.
CC
- W
e pe
riodi
cally
set
logi
stic
s ob
ject
ives
and
try
to re
sour
ce th
eir i
mpl
emen
tatio
n.
DD
- W
e ap
ply
logi
stic
s re
sour
ces
as n
eeds
oc
cur.
EE
- Lo
gist
ics
reso
urce
pla
nnin
g is
not
a
spec
ific
part
of o
ur m
anag
emen
t stra
tegy
.
56Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow th
e lo
ng-te
rm to
tal c
ost o
f ow
ners
hip
is re
cord
ed a
nd c
onsi
dere
d in
life
-cyc
le d
ecis
ions
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:R
esou
rce
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur p
olic
y an
d pr
actic
es m
anda
te fu
ll co
nsid
erat
ion
of to
tal c
ost o
f ow
ners
hip
for
maj
or e
quip
men
ts a
nd re
late
d su
ppor
t.
BB
- W
e try
to c
onsi
der l
ife c
ycle
sup
port
cost
s w
hene
ver p
ossi
ble.
CC
- W
e ba
sica
lly m
anag
e co
sts
year
-to-y
ear.
DD
- Li
fe c
ycle
cos
ts a
re ju
st p
art o
f doi
ng
busi
ness
.
EE
- A
side
from
our
bud
get e
xpen
ditu
res,
we
don'
t tra
ck s
uppo
rt co
sts.
A-17
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
57Ba
sed
on o
ur s
trate
gic
plan
, our
org
aniz
atio
n ha
s al
read
y or
in
tend
s to
impl
emen
t a m
ater
ial s
tock
age
requ
irem
ents
pro
cess
th
at re
late
s in
vent
ory
inve
stm
ent t
o cu
stom
er d
riven
per
form
ance
ob
ject
ives
.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve a
lread
y im
plem
ente
d su
ch a
ca
pabi
lity.
BB
- W
e pl
an to
dev
elop
this
cap
abili
ty in
the
futu
re.
CC
- O
ur c
urre
nt re
quire
men
ts m
etho
dolo
gy
base
d on
cus
tom
er d
eman
ds is
ade
quat
e fo
r A
genc
y ne
eds
DD
. Our
inve
ntor
y re
quire
men
ts d
o no
t nee
d su
ch a
sop
hist
icat
ed a
ppro
ach.
EE
- D
on't
Know
.
58I w
ould
cha
ract
eriz
e ou
r pro
cess
for c
ompu
ting
mat
eria
l in
vent
ory
requ
irem
ents
as
follo
ws:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- The
pro
cess
is h
ighl
y ac
cura
te in
pr
ojec
ting
our f
utur
e m
ater
ial n
eeds
.
BB
- Th
e pr
oces
s is
ade
quat
e, b
ut d
oes
not
cons
iste
ntly
fore
cast
futu
re m
ater
ial
requ
irem
ents
acc
urat
ely.
CC
- O
ur m
ater
ial r
equi
rem
ents
com
puta
tion
met
hods
are
sub
stan
tially
out
date
d.
DD
- O
ur m
ater
ial r
equi
rem
ents
are
so
vola
tile
it is
nea
rly im
poss
ible
to o
btai
n co
rrec
t for
ecas
ts
of fu
ture
nee
ds
EE
- W
e ac
quire
mat
eria
l inv
ento
ry a
s ne
eded
, so
requ
irem
ents
fore
cast
s ar
e ge
nera
lly
unne
cess
ary.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
59O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s ap
proa
ch to
qua
ntify
ing
mat
eria
l inv
ento
ry
requ
irem
ents
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- S
uch
requ
irem
ents
are
dev
elop
ed u
sing
a
mod
el th
at c
ompu
tes
the
full
rang
e of
mat
eria
l re
quire
men
ts a
cros
s ou
r Age
ncy
rega
rdle
ss o
f or
gani
zatio
nal l
evel
s.
BB
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
with
in o
ur A
genc
y us
es
a st
anda
rd a
ppro
ach
or m
odel
that
com
pute
s m
ater
ial r
equi
rem
ents
bas
ed o
n th
at
orga
niza
tion'
s un
ique
nee
ds.
CC
- A
genc
y po
licy
perm
its e
ach
maj
or
orga
niza
tion
to d
evel
op it
s ow
n ap
proa
ch to
m
ater
ial r
equi
rem
ents
com
puta
tion.
DD
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
deve
lops
futu
re y
ear
mat
eria
l req
uire
men
ts b
ased
on
prio
r yea
r's
need
s.
EE
- N
ot s
ure
who
dev
elop
s ou
r inv
ento
ry
requ
irem
ents
.
60Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e m
etho
ds u
sed
by o
ur
orga
niza
tion
to c
ompu
te m
ater
ial r
equi
rem
ents
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- M
ost m
ater
ial r
equi
rem
ents
are
bas
ed o
n ac
hiev
ing
a co
mbi
natio
n of
end
item
or
orga
niza
tiona
l rea
dine
ss o
r per
form
ance
-ba
sed
inve
ntor
y ob
ject
ives
.
BB
- W
e us
e a
com
bina
tion
of in
vent
ory
stoc
kage
com
puta
tions
incl
udin
g pe
rform
ance
-ba
sed
obje
ctiv
es, p
ast d
eman
ds a
nd
spec
ial/u
npla
nned
requ
irem
ents
cal
cula
tions
.
CC
- M
ost o
f our
inve
ntor
y re
quire
men
ts
com
puta
tions
are
bas
ed o
n pa
st re
cord
ed
mat
eria
l dem
ands
DD
- W
e de
velo
p in
vent
ory
requ
irem
ents
usi
ng
fact
ors
base
d on
prio
r yea
rs' m
ater
ial n
eeds
.
EE
- W
e pr
ojec
t inv
ento
ry n
eeds
bas
ed o
n to
tal
avai
labl
e fu
ndin
g.
A-18
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
61W
e ph
ysic
ally
pos
ition
mat
eria
l inv
ento
ries
base
d on
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- A
com
puta
tiona
l mod
el th
at s
elec
ts
loca
tions
that
sup
port
best
ser
vice
to th
e m
ost
cust
omer
s.
BB
- A
mix
of w
hole
sale
(cen
tral)
and
reta
il (u
sing
org
aniz
atio
n) lo
catio
ns.
CC
- Lo
catio
n of
our
cen
tral w
areh
ouse
faci
litie
s.
DD
- O
ther
org
aniz
atio
ns o
r con
tract
ors
hold
our
m
ater
ial i
nven
tory
.
EE
- W
here
ver w
e ha
ve s
uffic
ient
sto
rage
sp
ace.
62O
ur a
ppro
ach
to b
udge
ting
for a
cqui
sitio
n of
mat
eria
l inv
ento
ries
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve o
r pla
n to
impl
emen
t a p
roce
ss to
de
velo
p m
ater
ial i
nven
tory
bud
get
requ
irem
ents
bas
ed o
n co
ntrib
utio
n to
or
gani
zatio
nal p
erfo
rman
ce ta
rget
s.
BB
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion'
s in
vent
ory
budg
et
requ
irem
ents
are
bas
ed o
n pa
st m
ater
ial s
ales
or
dem
ands
plu
s kn
own
chan
ge fa
ctor
s.
CC
- In
vent
ory
mat
eria
l bud
gets
are
bas
ed o
n la
st y
ear's
requ
irem
ent p
lus
infla
tion.
DD
- M
ater
ial i
nven
tory
bud
gets
are
a
perc
enta
ge o
f the
val
ue o
f our
end
item
eq
uipm
ent.
EE
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
has
its o
wn
way
of
deve
lopi
ng m
ater
ial b
udge
ts.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
63I w
ould
cha
ract
eriz
e ou
r inv
ento
ry s
uppo
rt pe
rform
ance
as
follo
ws:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- C
usto
mer
requ
irem
ents
for i
nven
tory
are
ne
arly
alw
ays
met
on
time,
in th
e pr
oper
qu
antit
ies
and
at th
e rig
ht c
ost.
BB
- C
usto
mer
inve
ntor
y re
quire
men
ts a
re
gene
rally
sat
isfie
d, b
ut w
e se
em to
hav
e su
bsta
ntia
l lev
els
of b
acko
rder
ed m
ater
ial
and/
or la
te d
eliv
erie
s.
CC
- C
usto
mer
con
fiden
ce in
our
logi
stic
s pr
oces
s co
uld
be s
igni
fican
tly im
prov
ed.
DD
- W
e do
n't m
easu
re c
usto
mer
sat
isfa
ctio
n w
ith in
vent
ory
supp
ort.
EE
- In
vent
ory
supp
ort i
s no
t our
org
aniz
atio
n's
resp
onsi
bilit
y.
64In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, in
vent
ory
(i.e.
repa
ir pa
rts, o
pera
tiona
l su
pplie
s) d
istri
butio
n is
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:In
vent
ory
Opt
imiz
atio
n
AA
- C
entra
lly m
anag
ed a
nd c
oord
inat
ed
BB
- R
egio
nally
man
aged
and
coo
rdin
ated
CC
- M
anag
ed a
nd c
oord
inat
ed b
y th
e ap
plic
able
pro
gram
offi
ce
DD
- Le
ft to
the
oper
atin
g un
it
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
inve
ntor
y
A-19
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
65Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur s
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n pr
ogra
m:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
yste
ms
Mod
erni
zatio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve a
form
al s
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n pr
ogra
m th
at c
over
s m
ost k
ey A
genc
y fu
nctio
ns.
BB
- E
ach
oper
atin
g un
it is
resp
onsi
ble
for i
ts
own
syst
ems
mod
erni
zatio
n.
CC
- W
e ha
ve h
ired
a co
ntra
ctor
to h
elp
us w
ith
syst
ems
mod
erni
zatio
n.
DD
- Th
ere
are
no re
sour
ces
avai
labl
e fo
r m
oder
nizi
ng o
ur s
yste
ms.
EE
- O
ur s
yste
ms
don'
t nee
d fu
rther
m
oder
niza
tion.
66Th
e fo
llow
ing
desc
ribes
our
age
ncy
post
ure
on s
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
yste
ms
Mod
erni
zatio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve a
sys
tem
s m
oder
niza
tion
initi
ativ
e th
at w
ill p
rovi
de n
eede
d fu
nctio
nal
impr
ovem
ents
ove
r sev
eral
yea
rs.
BB
- W
e ha
ve a
long
-term
sys
tem
s m
oder
niza
tion
prog
ram
that
is in
crem
enta
lly
fund
ed o
ver s
ever
al y
ears
.
CC
- S
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n ta
kes
plac
e co
ntin
uous
ly a
s w
e id
entif
y ne
eded
im
prov
emen
ts.
DD
- S
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n is
nee
ded
cont
inuo
usly
to u
pgra
de c
ompu
ters
and
co
mm
unic
atio
ns.
EE
- S
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n ju
st ta
kes
a lo
ng
time.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
67I b
elie
ve o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
impl
emen
ted
an a
ccep
tabl
e le
vel
of te
chno
logy
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
yste
ms
Mod
erni
zatio
n
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
68Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e aw
aren
ess
and
train
ing
aspe
ct
of o
ur s
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n pr
ogra
m:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
yste
ms
Mod
erni
zatio
n
AA
- O
ur s
yste
ms
mod
erni
zatio
n ef
forts
alw
ays
incl
ude
impr
ovem
ent o
f sta
ff co
mpe
tenc
y th
roug
h co
ncur
rent
form
al tr
aini
ng.
BB
- W
e no
rmal
ly re
ceiv
e su
ffici
ent o
n-th
e-jo
b tra
inin
g as
sys
tem
s ar
e m
oder
nize
d.
CC
- O
ur tr
aini
ng p
rogr
ams
are
usua
lly s
epar
ate
from
sys
tem
s m
oder
niza
tion
effo
rts.
DD
- O
ur s
taff
lear
ns b
y do
ing.
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
a fo
rmal
trai
ning
pro
gram
re
late
d to
logi
stic
s m
oder
niza
tion.
A-20
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
69O
ur A
genc
y's
logi
stic
s sy
stem
s m
oder
niza
tion
prog
ram
can
be
char
acte
rized
as:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
yste
ms
Mod
erni
zatio
n
AA
- H
ighl
y su
ppor
tive
of th
e A
genc
y m
issi
on
and
perfo
rman
ce o
bjec
tives
.
BB
- Fo
cusi
ng o
n fa
cilit
atin
g bu
sine
ss p
roce
ss
impr
ovem
ent.
CC
- G
ener
ally
kee
ping
up
with
sta
te-o
f-the
-art
tech
nolo
gy.
DD
- G
ener
ally
inef
fect
ive
in s
uppo
rting
fu
nctio
nal p
roce
ss im
prov
emen
t.
EE
- A
was
te o
f tim
e an
d m
oney
.
70Pe
rform
ance
and
Cos
t Mea
sure
men
ts in
our
Age
ncy:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
etric
s A
naly
sis
AA
- A
re ro
lled
up to
cap
ture
Age
ncy
leve
l pe
rform
ance
BB
- C
onsi
der a
genc
y-le
vel p
erfo
rman
ce, b
ut
not i
n an
inte
grat
ed fa
shio
n
CC
- In
tegr
ate
a nu
mbe
r of l
ow le
vel m
easu
res
to in
dica
te p
erfo
rman
ce a
t int
erm
edia
te
orga
niza
tiona
l lev
els
DD
- A
re g
ener
ally
lim
ited
to tr
acki
ng in
divi
dual
lo
w-le
vel a
ctiv
ities
EE
- Fo
rmal
mea
sure
men
ts a
re n
ot p
art o
f our
A
gnec
y's
man
agem
ent.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
71O
ur m
easu
res
are
wid
ely
know
n, u
nder
stoo
d an
d ac
cept
ed a
t all
leve
ls o
f the
org
aniz
atio
n.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
etric
s A
naly
sis
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
72Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur lo
gist
ics
syst
em p
erfo
rman
ce
mea
sure
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
etric
s A
naly
sis
AA
- O
ur p
erfo
rman
ce m
easu
res
are
alm
ost a
ll qu
antif
iabl
e, a
re tr
acke
d on
a re
gual
r bas
is,
and
used
by
appr
opria
te m
anag
ers.
BB
- M
ost p
erfo
rman
ce m
easu
res
are
quan
tifie
d w
ith p
erio
dic
man
agem
ent r
epor
ts.
CC
- W
e co
llect
dat
a re
gard
ing
our p
erfo
rman
ce
mea
sure
s if
it is
ava
ilabl
e.
DD
- O
ur p
erfo
rman
ce m
easu
res
tend
to b
e su
bjec
tive,
i.e.
, not
qua
ntifi
able
.
EE
- W
e ge
nera
lly d
on’t
mea
sure
per
form
ance
.
A-21
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
73Th
e m
easu
res
we
use
gene
rally
con
side
r per
form
ance
or c
ost
effe
ctiv
enes
s ra
ther
than
just
thro
ughp
ut v
olum
e or
wor
kloa
d.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
etric
s A
naly
sis
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
o no
t kno
w
74Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n lo
gist
ics
perfo
rman
ce m
easu
res
and
fund
ing
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
etric
s A
naly
sis
AA
- P
erfo
rman
ce m
easu
res
are
a ke
y el
emen
t of
our
stra
tegi
c an
d re
sour
cing
pla
nnin
g sy
stem
.
BB
- W
e in
clud
e st
atus
of p
erfo
rman
ce
mea
sure
s in
our
pro
gram
and
bud
get
subm
issi
ons.
CC
- W
e se
em to
rece
ive
addi
tiona
l res
ourc
es if
ou
r per
form
ance
impr
oves
.
DD
- W
e se
em to
rece
ive
addi
tiona
l res
ourc
es if
ou
r per
form
ance
get
s w
orse
.
EE
- P
erfo
rman
ce a
nd fu
ndin
g ar
e no
t rea
lly
rela
ted
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
75Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n lo
gist
ics
perfo
rman
ce m
easu
res
and
our a
genc
y's
goal
s an
d ob
ject
ives
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:M
etric
s A
naly
sis
AA
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
goal
s an
d ob
ject
ive
each
ha
ve c
lose
ly re
late
d, q
uant
itativ
e pe
rform
ance
m
easu
res
as re
quire
d by
the
Gov
ernm
ent
Per
form
ance
and
Res
ults
Act
(GP
RA
).
BB
- W
e ha
ve g
oals
and
obj
ectiv
es w
ith re
late
d pe
rform
ance
mea
sure
s.
CC
- W
e tra
ck o
ur p
erfo
rman
ce a
gain
st
quan
tifia
ble
targ
et o
bjec
tives
.
DD
- O
rgan
izat
iona
l goa
ls a
nd o
ject
ives
hav
e no
t bee
n re
late
d to
spe
cific
mea
sure
s.
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
form
al, d
ocum
ente
d go
als
and
obje
ctiv
es.
76O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
an o
ffici
al w
ritte
n pl
an th
at m
anda
tes
clas
sroo
m, d
ista
nce
lear
ning
, and
/or o
n-th
e-jo
b tra
inin
g on
Ag
ency
logi
stic
s po
licie
s an
d pr
oces
ses.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Lo
gist
ics
Ski
lls D
evel
opm
ent
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
o no
t kno
w
A-22
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
77Fo
r our
org
aniz
atio
n, lo
gist
ics
skill
s de
velo
pmen
t gen
eral
ly re
lies
on:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Lo
gist
ics
Ski
lls D
evel
opm
ent
AA
- M
anag
emen
t-req
uire
d, c
ross
cut
ting
train
ing
(cla
ssro
om/d
ista
nce
lear
ning
/OJT
, ei
ther
sin
gly
or c
ombi
ned)
to q
ualif
y a
pers
on
in tw
o or
mor
e lo
gist
ics
area
s ac
ross
the
supp
ly c
hain
.
BB
- E
mpl
oyer
-req
uire
d cl
assr
oom
and
/or
dist
ance
lear
ning
trai
ning
focu
sed
prim
arily
on
a sp
ecifi
c lo
gist
ics
func
tion
(suc
h as
ac
quis
ition
, ass
et m
anag
emen
t, m
aint
enan
ce,
trans
porta
tion)
.
CC
- E
mpl
oyer
-req
uire
d on
-the-
job
train
ing
focu
sed
prim
arily
on
a sp
ecifi
c lo
gist
ics
func
tion.
DD
- E
mpl
oyee
-initi
ated
opt
iona
l tra
inin
g re
late
d to
impr
ovin
g on
e's
spec
ific
or g
ener
al lo
gist
ics
skills
.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e an
act
ive
logi
stic
s sk
ills
deve
lopm
ent p
rogr
am.
78O
ur b
udge
t and
pro
gram
pla
n in
clud
es a
dequ
ate
fund
ing
to
deve
lop
and
mai
ntai
n th
e lo
gist
ics
skill
s of
our
em
ploy
ees:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Lo
gist
ics
Ski
lls D
evel
opm
ent
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
79Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e te
chno
logy
-rel
ated
logi
stic
ski
ll de
velo
pmen
t in
our o
rgan
izat
ion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Lo
gist
ics
Ski
lls D
evel
opm
ent
AA
- W
e ha
ve im
plem
ente
d to
day'
s el
ectro
nic
com
mer
ce a
nd s
uppl
y ch
ain
busi
ness
en
viro
nmen
t (us
ing
tool
s su
ch a
s G
SA's
Ad
vant
age
prog
ram
or c
omm
erci
al e
lect
roni
c or
derin
g ap
plic
atio
ns).
BB
- W
e un
ders
tand
and
are
usi
ng te
chno
logy
in
serti
on s
trate
gies
to re
engi
neer
our
bus
ines
s pr
oces
ses.
CC
- W
e ar
e tra
inin
g ou
r wor
kfor
ce to
con
side
r en
terp
rise
reso
urce
pla
nnin
g (E
RP
) con
cept
s an
d so
lutio
ns.
DD
- W
e ha
ve o
r are
pla
nnin
g to
hire
con
tract
or
expe
rts to
dev
elop
our
tech
nolo
gy s
kills
..
EE
- W
e pl
an li
ttle
or n
o te
chno
logy
-rel
ated
lo
gist
ics
skill
s de
velo
pmen
t.
80O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
belie
ves
it is
crit
ical
to h
ave
a be
tter t
rain
ed,
mul
ti-sk
illed
, and
em
pow
ered
wor
kfor
ce to
take
full
adva
ntag
e of
im
porta
nt p
roce
sses
suc
h as
usi
ng b
est c
omm
erci
al a
nd
gove
rnm
ent p
ract
ices
, app
lyin
g bu
sine
ss c
ase
anal
ysis
(BC
A)
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Lo
gist
ics
Ski
lls D
evel
opm
ent
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
o no
t kno
w
A-23
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
81Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es lo
gist
ics
skill
s de
velo
pmen
t in
our
orga
niza
tion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Lo
gist
ics
Ski
lls D
evel
opm
ent
AA
- W
e ar
e ac
tivel
y re
engi
neer
ing
or
trans
form
ing
how
we
deve
lop
or m
aint
ain
the
logi
stic
s sk
ills
of o
ur w
orkf
orce
so
that
we
can
effe
ctiv
ely
oper
ate
in th
e m
oder
n bu
sine
ss
envi
ronm
ent.
BB
- W
e ar
e m
ovin
g aw
ay fr
om a
func
tiona
l or
tech
nica
l spe
cial
ist l
ogis
tics
wor
kfor
ce to
one
th
at is
pre
pond
eran
tly c
ompo
sed
of m
ulti-
skill
ed g
ener
alis
ts.
CC
- W
e ha
ve b
een
or a
re b
eing
trai
ned
in n
ew
dire
ctio
ns a
nd p
rogr
ams
such
as
perfo
rman
ce-
base
d w
ork
agre
emen
ts (w
ith g
over
nmen
t pa
rtner
s) o
r con
tract
s (w
ith c
omm
erci
al fi
rms)
.
DD
- W
e ha
ve b
een
or a
re b
eing
trai
ned
in
spec
ific
area
s su
ch a
s to
tal l
ife c
ycle
ow
ners
hip
cost
s of
pro
ject
s or
pro
gram
s.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
ot m
ade
chan
ges
to th
e tra
ditio
nal w
ays
we
deve
lop
our l
ogis
tics
wor
kfor
ce.
82In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, lo
gist
ics
pers
onne
l:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Lo
gist
ics
Ski
lls D
evel
opm
ent
AA
- A
re c
aree
r log
istic
s pr
ofes
sion
als
BB
- A
re s
peci
alis
ts in
oth
er fi
elds
, but
hav
e si
gnifi
cant
exp
erie
nce
and
train
ing
to p
rovi
de
them
the
expe
rtise
nec
essa
ry
CC
- A
re in
the
logi
stic
s fie
ld a
s a
prer
equi
site
to
ente
ring
a m
ore
desi
rabl
e fie
ld.
DD
- A
re te
mpo
raril
y in
the
logi
stic
s fie
ld u
ntil
som
e ot
her o
ppor
tuni
ty c
omes
alo
ng.
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
logi
stic
s pe
rson
nel
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
83Fo
r our
org
aniz
atio
n, a
sset
vis
ibilit
y m
eans
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- A
n in
tegr
ated
app
roac
h th
at u
ses
know
ledg
e of
ass
et lo
catio
n an
d m
ovem
ent t
o im
prov
e su
ppor
t to
our c
usto
mer
s.
BB
- A
n ap
proa
ch to
usi
ng te
chno
logy
, fin
anci
al
reco
rds,
and
bus
ines
s pr
oces
ses
to a
llow
tim
ely
insi
ght i
nto
the
loca
tion,
iden
tity,
and
m
ovem
ent o
f inv
ento
ry a
nd e
quip
men
t.
CC
- A
met
hodo
logy
to c
ombi
ne te
chno
logy
and
bu
sine
ss p
roce
sses
to tr
ack
asse
t loc
atio
n an
d m
ovem
ent
DD
- Te
chno
logy
that
is in
pla
ce to
mon
itor t
he
loca
tion
of a
sset
s.
EE
- W
e do
not
use
that
term
in o
ur
orga
niza
tion.
84Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur a
genc
y's
post
ure
on a
sset
vi
sibi
lity:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- O
ur s
trate
gic
plan
incu
ldes
spe
cific
goa
ls,
obje
ctiv
es, a
nd m
ilest
ones
for i
mpl
emen
ting
full
mat
eria
l ass
et v
isib
ility
.
BB
- O
ur s
trate
gic
plan
men
tions
the
need
for
mat
eria
l ass
et v
isib
ility
.
CC
- W
e ha
ve a
n on
goin
g in
itativ
e to
ach
ieve
gr
eate
r mat
eria
l ass
et v
isib
ility
.
DD
- N
o ad
ditio
nal p
lann
ing
is n
eede
d in
the
area
of a
sset
vis
ibilit
y.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
ot id
entif
ied
an a
sset
bis
ibili
ty
requ
irem
ent.
A-24
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
85As
set v
isib
ility
is in
clud
ed in
our
org
aniz
atio
n's
logi
stic
s tra
inin
g in
th
e fo
llow
ing
man
ner:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- M
ost p
rinci
pal m
anag
ers
and
key
empl
oyee
s ha
ve re
ceiv
ed s
ome
form
aliz
ed
asse
t vis
ibilit
y tra
inin
g.
BB
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
initi
ated
or p
lans
to
prov
ide
form
aliz
ed a
sset
vis
ibili
ty tr
aini
ng to
ex
ecut
ives
and
em
ploy
ees.
CC
- M
anag
ers
and
empl
oyee
s ne
ed to
fa
mili
ariz
e th
emse
lves
with
ass
et v
isib
ility
co
ncep
ts, p
ract
ices
, and
tech
nolo
gy.
DD
- E
mpl
oyee
s re
ceiv
e ba
sic
train
ing
on th
e te
chno
logy
use
d fo
r ass
et v
isib
ility
.
EE
- A
sset
vis
ibili
ty tr
aini
ng is
not
requ
ired
in o
ur
orga
niza
tion.
86Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow o
ur a
genc
y us
es a
sset
vis
ibilit
y in
det
erm
inin
g ov
eral
l mat
eria
l bud
get r
equi
rem
ents
for
acqu
isiti
on a
nd m
anag
emen
t:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- W
e ha
ve fu
ll vi
sibi
lity
of m
ater
ial a
sset
s in
ou
r req
uire
men
ts a
nd b
udge
ting
proc
ess
and
use
this
info
rmat
ion
to c
ompu
te fu
ndin
g re
quire
men
ts.
BB
- O
ur b
udge
ting
proc
ess
take
s av
aila
ble
asse
ts in
to a
ccou
nt in
det
erm
inin
g fu
ture
re
quire
men
ts.
CC
- W
e ha
ve a
sset
vis
ibili
ty b
ut d
o no
t ne
cess
arily
use
this
info
rmat
ion
in o
ur
budg
etin
g pr
oces
s.
DD
- W
e do
not
hav
e as
set v
isib
ility
info
rmat
ion
avai
labl
e in
our
aut
omat
ed s
yste
ms.
EE
- E
ach
indi
vidu
al o
rgan
izat
iona
l com
pone
nt
is re
spon
sibl
e fo
r its
ow
n us
se o
f ass
et
info
rmat
ion.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
87Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es h
ow IT
Tec
hnol
ogy
solu
tions
that
en
able
ass
et v
isib
ility
, suc
h as
RFI
D a
nd b
ar c
odes
, are
im
plem
ente
d as
par
t of o
ur o
vera
ll pr
oces
s im
prov
emen
t stra
tegy
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- W
e ha
ve m
ajor
initi
ativ
es u
nder
way
to u
se
tech
nolo
gy e
nabl
ers
to im
prov
e ou
r vis
ibilit
y of
m
ater
ial a
sset
s.
BB
- W
e pl
an to
use
ass
et v
isib
ility
tech
nolo
gies
in
the
futu
re.
CC
- W
e ar
e no
t cer
tain
we
need
new
te
chno
logi
es in
this
are
a.
DD
- O
ur a
sset
vis
ibili
ty re
quire
men
ts d
on't
real
ly re
quire
sig
nific
ant n
ew te
chon
olog
y in
vest
men
ts.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o as
set v
isib
ility
requ
irem
ent.
88O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s as
set v
isib
ility
tech
nolo
gy c
onsi
sts
of:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- R
eal-t
ime,
act
ive
iden
tific
atio
n an
d tra
ckin
g of
all
of o
ur e
quip
men
t and
sup
plie
s.
BB
- R
eal-t
ime,
act
ive
iden
tific
atio
n of
mos
t (bu
t no
t all)
of o
ur e
quip
men
t and
sup
plie
s.
CC
- R
ecor
ding
loca
tions
of s
ome
of o
ur
equi
pmen
t and
sup
plie
s, w
ith e
noug
h le
ad-
time
to a
ffect
inve
ntor
y de
cisi
ons.
DD
- R
ecor
ding
loca
tions
of s
ome
of o
ur
equi
pmen
t and
sup
plie
s, w
ith to
o lit
tle le
ad-
time
to a
ffect
inve
ntor
y de
cisi
ons.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e an
y as
set v
isib
ility
tech
nolo
gy.
A-25
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
89In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, a
sset
vis
ibilit
y is
use
d in
the
follo
win
g ar
eas:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- In
vent
ory
man
agem
ent,
supp
ly c
hain
m
anag
emen
t, as
set m
anag
emen
t, de
man
d fo
reca
stin
g, b
udge
t pla
nnin
g, a
nd a
cqui
sitio
n de
cisi
ons.
BB
- In
vent
ory
man
agem
ent a
nd s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent.
CC
- In
vent
ory
and
finan
cial
man
agem
ent.
DD
- D
istri
butio
n fu
nctio
ns o
nly.
EE
- W
e do
not
use
it in
our
org
aniz
atio
n.
90Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s pl
ans
to d
evel
op
ente
rpris
e-w
ide
met
rics
to a
sses
s m
ater
ial a
sset
vis
ibili
ty, b
oth
inte
rnal
ly a
nd fr
om o
ur c
usto
mer
's p
oint
of v
iew
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:A
sset
Vis
ibili
ty
AA
- W
e ha
ve c
apab
ilitie
s in
pla
ce to
mea
sure
th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
and
accu
racy
of o
ur a
sset
bi
sibi
lity
prog
ram
.
BB
- A
sset
vis
ibili
ty m
eaus
res
are
part
of o
ur
futu
re p
roce
ss im
prov
emen
t req
uire
men
ts.
CC
- W
e ha
ve n
ot y
et id
entif
ied
a ne
ed to
m
easu
re a
sset
vis
ibili
ty e
ffect
iven
ess.
DD
- O
ur a
sset
vis
ibili
ty p
rogr
am d
oes
not n
eed
addi
tiona
l mea
nsur
es o
f effe
ctiv
enes
s.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e a
mat
eria
l ass
et v
isib
ility
pr
ogra
m.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
91Fu
nctio
nal i
nteg
ratio
n is
a s
tate
d go
al o
f our
logi
stic
s st
rate
gic
plan
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
92O
ur lo
gist
ics
proc
esse
s an
d sy
stem
s ar
e:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- S
trong
ly in
tegr
ated
with
ope
ratio
ns, t
he
cust
omer
and
our
sup
ply
chai
n pa
rtner
s
BB
- S
trong
ly in
tegr
ated
with
ope
ratio
ns a
nd o
ur
cust
omer
s
CC
- In
tegr
ated
with
oth
er lo
gist
ics
and
finan
ce
proc
esse
s an
d sy
stem
s
DD
- In
tegr
ated
with
oth
er lo
gist
ics
proc
esse
s an
d sy
stem
s
EE
- O
ur lo
gist
ics
proc
esse
s an
d sy
stem
s ar
e no
t int
egra
ted
A-26
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
93Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es o
ur a
genc
y's
logi
stic
s da
ta
stan
dard
izat
ion
and
inte
grat
ion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- D
ata
is s
tand
ardi
zed,
cap
ture
d on
e tim
e an
d di
strib
uted
to re
late
d us
ers
and
syst
ems.
BB
- D
ata
is n
ot s
tand
ardi
zed,
cap
ture
d on
e tim
e an
d di
strib
uted
to re
late
d us
ers
and
syst
ems.
CC
- D
ata
is in
tegr
ated
thro
ugh
man
ual
inte
rven
tion
betw
een
syst
ems.
DD
- D
ata
is s
tore
d on
indi
vidu
al "c
uff s
yste
ms"
.
EE
- O
ur d
ata
is n
ot in
tegr
ated
.
94O
ur lo
gist
ics
man
agem
ent a
nd s
taff
are
awar
e of
the
role
s an
d re
spon
sibi
litie
s of
oth
er o
rgan
izat
ions
' log
istic
s ac
tiviti
es.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- A
ll pe
rson
nel a
re c
ross
-trai
ned
in s
ever
al
func
tions
.
BB
- M
anag
ers
and
supe
rvis
ors
are
train
ed in
se
vera
l are
as
of o
rgan
izat
iona
l res
pons
ibilit
y.
CC
- O
nly
uppe
r lev
el m
anag
ers
need
to b
e aw
are
of o
ther
org
aniz
atio
n's
resp
onsi
bilit
ies.
DD
- O
nly
man
ager
s an
d su
perv
isor
s ar
e tra
ined
in a
reas
out
side
our
org
aniz
atio
n
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
95Th
e fo
llow
ing
best
des
crib
es th
e re
latio
nshi
p be
twee
n lo
gist
ics
and
oper
atio
ns in
our
age
ncy:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- Lo
gist
ics
is a
n eq
ual p
artn
er w
ith
oper
atio
ns in
ach
ievi
ng o
ur to
tal o
rgan
izat
iona
l m
issi
on.
BB
- M
anag
emen
t rec
ogni
zes
that
ope
ratio
ns
cann
ot s
ucce
ed w
ithou
t effe
ctiv
e lo
gist
ics
supp
ort.
CC
- Lo
gist
ics
is o
ne a
spec
t of s
ucce
ssfu
l op
erat
ions
.
DD
- O
pera
tiona
l nee
ds m
ust c
ome
befo
re
logi
stic
s su
ppor
t nee
ds.
EE
- Lo
gist
ics
is n
ot p
art o
f our
org
aniz
atio
n's
mis
sion
.
96In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, e
nter
pris
e fu
nctio
nal i
nteg
ratio
n is
mea
sure
d by
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- M
anag
emen
t ass
essm
ent o
f ent
erpr
ise
perfo
rman
ce m
etric
s th
at re
late
to o
vera
ll pr
oces
s pe
rform
ance
, tot
al c
ost a
nd c
usto
mer
sa
tisfa
ctio
n.
BB
- S
peci
fic m
etric
s ap
plic
able
to e
ach
logi
stic
s m
anag
er th
at c
olle
ctiv
ely
cont
ribut
e to
ov
eral
l org
aniz
atio
nal i
nteg
ratio
n.
CC
- A
nnua
l ass
essm
ents
by
our m
anag
ers
who
det
erm
ine
how
muc
h in
tegr
ated
effo
rt is
ne
eded
.
DD
- R
ando
m fe
edba
ck fr
om o
ur p
rimar
y cu
stom
ers.
EE
- Fu
nctio
nal i
nteg
ratio
n is
not
qua
ntita
tivel
y m
easu
red.
A-27
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
97In
our
org
aniz
atio
n, fu
nctio
nal i
nteg
ratio
n ob
ject
ives
are
su
ppor
ted
by:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- P
roce
dure
s w
here
mor
e in
tegr
ated
fu
nctio
nal a
reas
are
per
mitt
ed to
reta
in
impr
ovem
ent s
avin
gs re
late
d to
ach
ievi
ng
over
all o
rgan
izat
iona
l obj
ectiv
es.
BB
- In
crea
sing
allo
catio
n of
reso
urce
s to
fu
nctio
nal e
lem
ents
that
con
tribu
te s
igni
fican
tly
to a
fully
inte
grat
ed p
roce
ss.
CC
- G
ivin
g so
me
addi
tiona
l res
ourc
es to
or
gani
zatio
nal a
ctiv
ities
that
are
dee
med
im
porta
nt to
gre
ater
inte
grat
ion.
DD
- Fu
nctio
nal i
nteg
ratio
n is
not
con
side
red
whe
n al
loca
ting
reso
urce
s.
EE
- Fu
nctio
nal i
nteg
ratio
n ha
s no
rela
tions
hip
to re
sour
ces.
98M
ost m
ajor
dec
isio
ns c
once
rnin
g lo
gist
ics
are
disc
usse
d at
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Fu
nctio
nal I
nteg
ratio
n
AA
- C
ross
-func
tiona
l tea
m m
eetin
gs th
at
incl
ude
oper
ator
s (c
usto
mer
s), l
ogis
ticia
ns a
nd
othe
r sup
porti
ng e
lem
ents
suc
h as
the
CFO
, C
IO, a
nd h
uman
reso
urce
s.
BB
- C
ross
-func
tiona
l tea
m m
eetin
gs th
at
incl
ude
oper
ator
s (c
usto
mer
s) a
nd lo
gist
icia
ns.
CC
- C
ross
-func
tiona
l tea
m m
eetin
gs th
at
incl
ude
only
logi
stic
ians
.
DD
- Th
e in
divi
dual
pro
cess
leve
l.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
99O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s fo
rmal
qua
lity
impr
ovem
ent p
rogr
am c
an b
e ch
arac
teriz
ed a
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
t Pro
gram
AA
- Hig
hly
effe
ctiv
e
BB
- S
omew
hat e
ffect
ive.
CC
- M
inim
ally
effe
ctiv
e
DD
- N
ot E
ffect
ive.
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
a qu
ality
pro
gram
.
100
Posi
tive
resu
lts o
f our
logi
stic
s qu
ality
impr
ovem
ent p
rogr
am is
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
t Pro
gram
AA
- A
prio
rity
of a
ll ou
r age
ncy
exec
utiv
es
BB
- A
prio
rity
of o
nly
our l
ogis
tics
man
ager
s an
d ex
ecut
ives
CC
- A
prio
rity
of o
ur d
irect
orat
e an
d di
visi
on
man
ager
s
DD
- A
prio
rity
of th
e pr
oces
s ow
ners
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e a
logi
sitc
s qu
ality
im
prov
emen
t pro
gram
.
A-28
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
101
Our
qua
lity
impr
ovem
ent p
rogr
am is
wid
ely
know
n, u
nder
stoo
d an
d ac
cept
ed a
t all
leve
ls o
f the
org
aniz
atio
n.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
t Pro
gram
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
102
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
e of
our
qua
lity
impr
ovem
ent
syst
em tr
aini
ng p
rogr
am:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
t Pro
gram
AA
- A
ll pe
rson
nel a
re tr
aine
d
BB
- M
anag
ers
and
supe
rvis
ors
are
train
ed
CC
- O
nly
uppe
r lev
el m
anag
ers
DD
- O
nly
non
man
ager
s an
d su
perv
isor
s ar
e tra
ined
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
103
Our
qua
lity
impr
ovem
ent s
yste
m c
an b
e fo
und:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
t Pro
gram
AA
- In
tegr
ated
thro
ugho
ut a
ll le
vels
and
pr
oces
ses
in o
ur lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
.
BB
- N
ot in
tegr
ated
, but
sep
arat
ely
exec
ture
d at
al
l lev
els
and
proc
esse
s in
our
logi
stic
s ac
tiviti
es.
CC
- In
our
mos
t im
porta
nt lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
.
DD
- In
onl
y a
few
logi
sitc
s ac
tiviti
es.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e a
qual
ity im
prov
emen
t sy
stem
for l
ogis
tics.
104
In o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion,
reso
urce
s ar
e pr
ovid
ed to
pro
mot
e gr
eate
r pr
oduc
t/ser
vice
qua
lity
by:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
t Pro
gram
AA
- P
rogr
amm
ing
and
budg
etin
g re
sour
ces
dire
ctly
for q
ualit
y im
prov
emen
t act
ions
and
in
itiat
ives
.
BB
- E
nsur
ing
that
all
logi
stic
s or
gani
zatio
ns
iden
tify
qual
ity im
prov
emen
t req
uire
men
ts a
s pa
rt of
thei
r goa
ls a
nd o
bjec
tives
.
CC
- W
orki
ng c
lose
ly w
ith th
e qu
ality
con
trol
offic
e.
DD
- B
uild
ing
qual
ity in
to o
ur p
rodu
cts/
serv
ices
.
EE
- Our
org
aniz
atio
n is
not
resp
onsi
ble
for
fund
ing
prod
uct/s
ervi
ce q
ualit
y.
A-29
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
105
Qua
lity
impr
ovem
ent i
n lo
gist
ics
is p
art o
f our
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
t Pro
gram
AA
- C
orpo
rate
per
form
ance
mea
sure
men
t pr
ogra
m
BB
- O
vera
ll lo
gist
ics
perfo
rman
ce
mea
sure
men
t pro
gram
CC
- In
divi
dual
dire
ctor
ate
or d
ivis
ion
perfo
rman
ce m
easu
rem
ent p
rogr
am
DD
- P
roce
ss le
vel r
evie
ws
EE
- Q
ualit
y Im
prov
emen
ts a
re n
ot m
easu
red
106
Our
org
aniz
atio
n ha
s a
proc
ess
to s
tand
ardi
ze s
uppl
ies,
eq
uipm
ent a
nd p
roce
sses
to re
duce
cos
ts.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
107
To c
ontro
l log
istic
s co
sts,
we
use
outp
uts
from
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- B
oth
our l
ogis
itcs
and
finan
ce s
yste
ms
BB
- O
nly
our f
inan
ce s
yste
ms
CC
- O
ur lo
cal s
tand
alon
e co
st s
yste
m
DD
- E
stim
ates
mad
e fro
m p
oint
obs
erva
tions
EE
- W
e do
not
man
age
by c
ost
108
We
use
Act
ivity
Bas
ed C
ostin
g to
man
age:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- A
ll lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
as
an in
tegr
ated
cos
t
BB
- A
ll lo
gist
ics
as in
depe
nden
t cos
ts
CC
- O
nly
sele
cted
logi
stic
s ac
tiviti
es
DD
- O
nly
certa
in lo
gist
ics
proc
esse
s
EE
- W
e do
not
use
Act
ivity
Bas
ed C
ostin
g
A-30
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
109
Rep
ortin
g an
d as
sess
ing
cost
s is
an
impo
rtant
par
t of o
ur
perfo
rman
ce m
easu
res.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
110
Our
dec
isio
ns in
rega
rd to
org
aniz
ing
and
staf
fing
logi
stic
s ac
tiviti
es a
re b
ased
prim
arily
on
best
val
ue u
se o
f res
ourc
es.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
111
In o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion,
our
phi
loso
phy
abou
t out
sour
cing
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- O
utso
urce
whe
n th
ere
is a
cos
t adv
anta
ge,
no o
pera
tiona
l ris
k, a
nd th
e fu
nctio
n is
not
a
core
com
pete
ncy
BB
- O
nly
whe
n th
ere
is a
cos
t adv
anta
ge a
nd a
no
n-co
re c
ompe
tenc
y
CC
- A
lway
s w
hen
ther
e is
a c
ost a
dvan
tage
re
gard
less
of r
isk
and
core
com
pete
ncie
s
DB
- Lo
gist
ics
core
com
pete
ncie
s w
ill no
t be
outs
ourc
ed re
gard
less
of c
ost a
dvan
tage
EE
- A
ll lo
gist
ics
is o
utso
urce
d as
a m
atte
r of
cour
se.
112
The
inte
grat
ion
and
stre
amlin
ing
of o
ur b
usin
ess
proc
esse
s to
re
duce
the
over
all c
ost o
f log
istic
s su
ppor
t for
suc
h el
emen
ts a
s m
aint
enan
ce, s
uppl
y, d
istri
butio
n, a
nd tr
ansp
orta
tion
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- P
art o
f our
cor
pora
te s
trate
gic
plan
BB
- P
art o
f our
logi
stic
s bu
sine
ss p
lan
CC
- U
p to
the
vario
us lo
gist
ics
dire
ctor
ates
and
di
visi
ons
DD
- U
p to
the
indi
viua
l pro
cess
ow
ners
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
A-31
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
113
Cos
t inf
orm
atio
n fo
r log
istic
s pr
oces
s ar
e:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
ost R
educ
tion
AA
- Ava
ilabl
e fro
m a
n in
tegr
ated
bus
ines
s sy
stem
s an
d ar
e av
aila
ble
to a
ll le
vels
of
man
agem
ent.
BB
- Av
aila
ble
from
sev
eral
bus
ines
s sy
stem
s an
d ar
e av
aila
ble
to a
ll le
vels
of m
anag
emen
t.
CC
- Av
aila
ble
from
our
bus
ines
s sy
stem
s bu
t re
quire
spe
cial
repo
rts.
DD
- N
ot p
art o
f our
bus
ines
s sy
stem
s an
d ar
e m
aint
aine
d of
f-lin
e.
EE
- N
ot m
aint
aine
d at
all.
114
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s ap
proa
ch to
Su
pplie
r Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
ier R
elat
ions
hip
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s a
clea
r vis
ion
of w
ho it
s su
pplie
rs a
re a
nd a
stra
tegy
for d
evel
opin
g bu
sine
ss re
latio
nshi
ps w
ith th
em to
opt
imiz
e su
pply
cha
in p
erfo
rman
ce.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y is
fam
iliar w
ith th
e pr
inci
ples
of
SR
M a
nd h
as p
lans
to a
dopt
it.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y is
sat
isfie
d w
ith th
e su
ppor
t cu
rren
tly p
rovi
ded
by s
uppl
iers
and
ther
efor
e do
es n
ot n
eed
to a
dopt
SR
M.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y w
ould
like
to a
dopt
SR
M b
ut is
un
able
to d
o so
bec
ause
of p
rocu
rem
ent
regu
latio
ns, f
undi
ng, o
r per
sonn
el c
onst
rain
ts.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y do
es n
ot c
onsi
der S
RM
to b
e ap
plic
able
to it
s op
erat
ions
.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
115
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
e of
Sup
plie
r Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t (S
RM
) in
our o
rgan
izat
ion:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
ier R
elat
ions
hip
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur s
taff
is tr
aine
d an
d kn
owle
dgea
ble,
an
d en
gage
d in
app
lyin
g S
RM
.
BB
- O
ur s
taff
is tr
aine
d an
d kn
owle
dgea
ble
abou
t how
to a
pply
SR
M b
ut o
nly
has
the
time
to w
ork
on S
RM
on
a lim
ited
basi
s.
CC
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
exte
nsiv
ely
on
cont
ract
ors
to a
pply
SR
M.
DD
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
occa
sion
ally
on
cont
ract
ors
to a
pply
SR
M.
EE
- O
ur a
genc
y do
es n
ot e
ngag
e in
SR
M.
116
Our
bud
get a
nd p
rogr
am p
lan
incl
udes
ade
quat
e pe
rson
nel a
nd
fund
ing
to e
ffect
ivel
y an
d ef
ficie
ntly
app
ly S
RM
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
ier R
elat
ions
hip
Man
agem
ent
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n.
A-32
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
117
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es th
e st
atus
of y
our o
rgan
izat
ion'
s SR
M te
chno
logy
or s
oftw
are?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
ier R
elat
ions
hip
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
SR
M te
chno
logy
, so
ftwar
e an
d te
chni
ques
to m
ost o
f our
op
erat
ions
.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
SR
M te
chno
logy
and
te
chni
ques
to a
sel
ect f
ew o
pera
tions
.
CC
- A
sup
port
cont
ract
or u
nder
stan
ds a
nd
appl
ies
curr
ent s
tate
-of-t
he-a
rt S
RM
te
chno
logy
, sof
twar
e or
tech
niqu
es to
mos
t of
our o
pera
tions
.
DD
- A
sup
port
cont
ract
or u
nder
stan
ds a
nd
appl
ies
curr
ent s
tate
-of-t
he-a
rt S
RM
te
chno
logy
, sof
twar
e o
r tec
hniq
ues
to s
ome
of
our o
pera
tions
.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o si
gnifi
cant
tech
nolo
gy s
yste
m
supp
ortin
g ou
r SR
M e
fforts
.
118
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es th
e st
atus
of y
our o
rgan
izat
ion'
s SR
M p
roce
sses
?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
ier R
elat
ions
hip
Man
agem
ent
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and
our s
uppl
iers
' wor
k pr
oces
ses
are
stab
le a
nd w
ell u
nder
stoo
d by
ou
r SR
M p
ract
ition
ers
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and/
or o
ur s
uppl
iers
' wor
k pr
oces
ses
are
unde
rgoi
ng c
hang
es th
at m
ake
it di
fficu
lt to
app
ly S
RM
at t
his
time.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y ca
n ap
ply
SR
M to
som
e bu
t no
t all
wor
k pr
oces
ses.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and/
or o
ur s
uppl
iers
' wor
k pr
oces
ses
are
not w
ell u
nder
stoo
d, m
akin
g it
diffi
cult
to d
ecid
e w
here
and
how
to a
pply
S
RM
.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y an
d/or
our
cus
tom
ers
do n
ot
expe
ct to
use
SR
M in
our
dea
lings
with
eac
h ot
her.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
119
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es S
RM
per
form
ance
in y
our
orga
niza
tion.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
ier R
elat
ions
hip
Man
agem
ent
AA
- W
e ha
ve S
RM
per
form
ance
out
com
e st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od a
nd ri
goro
usly
mon
itore
d.
BB
- W
e ha
ve S
RM
per
form
ance
out
com
e st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od b
ut a
re n
ot a
lway
s rig
orou
sly
mon
itore
d.
CC
- W
e ha
ve S
RM
per
form
ance
out
com
e st
anda
rds
that
are
not
cur
rent
or w
ell
unde
rsto
od.
DD
- W
e re
ly o
n co
ntra
ctor
s to
man
age
SR
M
perfo
rman
ce o
utco
me
stan
dard
s.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e S
RM
per
form
ance
ou
tcom
e st
anda
rds.
120
A ba
lanc
ed s
core
card
is a
sig
nific
ant p
art o
f our
stra
tegi
c pl
an.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
A-33
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
121
Our
bal
ance
d sc
ore
card
incl
udes
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- P
erfo
rman
ce, C
ost,
Kno
wle
dge
Dev
elop
men
t and
Cus
tom
er s
atis
fact
ion
mea
sure
s
BB
- P
rimar
ily p
erfo
rman
ce a
nd c
ost m
etric
s
CC
- P
rimar
ily c
ost a
nd b
udge
t inf
orm
atio
n
DD
- A
num
ber o
f wel
l-doc
umen
ted
met
rics.
EE
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
does
not
use
a b
alan
ced
scor
ecar
d ap
proa
ch.
122
Our
org
aniz
atio
n ha
s an
act
ive
benc
hmar
king
pro
gram
with
oth
er
gove
rnm
ent a
genc
ies
or p
rivat
e bu
sine
sses
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- Fo
r mor
e th
an 5
yea
rs
BB
- Fo
r 3 to
5 y
ears
CC
- Fo
r 1 to
2 y
ears
DD
- D
one
occa
sion
ally
EE
- O
ur O
rgan
izat
ion
does
not
use
be
nchm
arki
ng.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
123
The
info
rmat
ion
sour
ce th
at w
e us
e to
sup
port
our b
alan
ced
scor
e ca
rd is
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- A
dire
ct fe
ed fr
om th
e da
ta s
ystm
es th
at
we
use
for o
ur d
ay-to
-day
bus
ines
s pr
oces
ses.
BB
- Fr
om s
peci
al re
ports
from
our
bus
ines
s sy
stem
s th
at w
e ru
n pe
riodi
cally
.
CC
- C
aptu
red
off-l
ine
from
obj
ectiv
e ob
serv
atio
ns a
nd re
ports
from
our
bus
ines
s sy
stem
s.
DD
- A
col
lect
ion
of n
otio
nal d
ata.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
124
Our
exe
cutiv
es a
re k
ept f
amilia
r with
our
bal
ance
d sc
orec
ard:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- With
qua
rterly
or s
emi-a
nnua
l sch
edul
ed
brie
fings
and
dis
cuss
ions
.
BB
- W
ith a
nnua
l sch
edul
ed b
riefin
gs a
nd
disc
ussi
ons.
CC
- A
d ho
c re
ques
ts.
DD
- W
ith ra
re re
view
s of
our
bal
ance
d sc
ore
card
.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
A-34
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
125
Res
ourc
e al
loca
tion
deci
sion
s ar
e us
ually
mad
e ba
sed
on th
e ou
tcom
es o
f our
bal
ance
d sc
orec
ard
ass
essm
ents
.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
126
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
use
of b
ench
mar
king
as
a ba
sis
for d
ecis
ion
mak
ing
in o
ur a
genc
y:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- W
e us
e ob
serv
atio
ns fr
om o
ur
benc
hinm
arki
ng p
artn
ers
BB
- W
e us
e ob
erva
tions
from
like
or
gani
zatio
ns, b
ut n
ot fo
rmal
ben
chm
arki
ng
partn
ers
CC
- W
e us
e w
idel
y ac
cept
ed n
atio
nal t
rend
s
DD
- W
e us
e no
tiona
l dat
a
EE
- W
e do
not
use
ben
chm
arki
ng.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
127
We
have
impl
emen
ted
a ba
lanc
ed s
core
card
mea
sure
men
t sy
stem
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
that
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:B
alan
ced
Scor
ecar
d/B
ench
mar
king
AA
- P
rovi
des
a ra
nge
of p
erfo
rman
ce m
etric
s th
at m
anag
emen
t use
s to
mea
sure
ove
rall
orga
niza
tiona
l effe
ctiv
enes
s.
BB
- Id
entif
ies
seve
ral p
erfo
rman
ce m
easu
res
that
we
use
in m
easu
ring
prog
ress
tow
ard
our
own
goal
s an
d ob
ject
ives
.
CC
- A
re g
ood
mea
sure
s, b
ut a
re n
ot g
ener
ally
us
ed to
sup
port
man
agem
ent d
ecis
ions
.
DD
- In
clud
es s
ome
mea
sure
s th
at a
re n
ot
dire
ctly
rela
ted
to o
ur p
roce
ss e
ffect
iven
ess.
EE
- In
clud
es s
ome
mea
sure
s th
at m
ay b
e co
nflic
ting
in p
urpo
se.
128
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s m
anag
emen
t ap
proa
ch to
cus
tom
er re
latio
nshi
p m
anag
emen
t?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
usto
mer
Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s do
ne C
RM
rese
arch
and
ha
s a
clea
r vis
ion
of w
ho it
s cu
stom
ers
are
and
a st
rate
gy fo
r mee
ting
the
cust
omer
s ne
eds.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y is
fam
iliar w
ith th
e pr
inci
ples
of
CR
M a
nd h
as p
lans
to a
dopt
it.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y, th
roug
h ex
perie
nce,
kno
ws
who
its
cust
omer
s ar
e an
d is
alre
ady
prov
idin
g ou
tsta
ndin
g se
rvic
e th
eref
ore
it do
es n
ot n
eed
to a
dopt
CR
M.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y w
ould
like
to a
dopt
CR
M b
ut is
un
able
to d
o so
bec
ause
of f
undi
ng o
r pe
rson
nel c
onst
rain
ts.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y do
es n
ot c
onsi
der C
RM
to b
e ap
plic
able
to it
s op
erat
ions
.
A-35
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
129
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
e of
Cus
tom
er R
elat
ions
hip
Man
agem
ent (
CR
M) i
n ou
r org
aniz
atio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
usto
mer
Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t
AA
- O
ur s
taff
is tr
aine
d an
d kn
owle
dgea
ble,
an
d en
gage
d in
app
lyin
g C
RM
.
BB
- O
ur s
taff
is tr
aine
d an
d kn
owle
dgea
ble
abou
t how
to a
pply
CR
M b
ut o
nly
has
the
time
to w
ork
on C
RM
on
a lim
ited
basi
s.
CC
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
exte
nsiv
ely
on
cont
ract
ors
to a
pply
CR
M.
DD
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
occa
sion
ally
on
cont
ract
ors
to a
pply
CR
M.
EE
- O
ur a
gnec
y do
es n
ot e
ngag
e in
CR
M.
130
Our
bud
get a
nd p
rogr
am p
lan
incl
udes
ade
quat
e pe
rson
nel a
nd
fund
ing
to e
ffect
ivel
y an
d ef
ficie
ntly
app
ly C
RM
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
usto
mer
Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
131
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es th
e st
atus
of y
our o
rgan
izat
ion'
s ap
plic
atio
n of
CR
M te
chno
logy
?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
usto
mer
Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
CR
M te
chno
logy
and
te
chni
ques
to m
ost o
f our
ope
ratio
ns.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
CR
M te
chno
logy
and
te
chni
ques
to a
few
of o
ur o
pera
tions
.
CC
- A
sup
port
cont
ract
or u
nder
stan
ds a
nd
appl
ies
curr
ent s
tate
-of-t
he-a
rt C
RM
te
chno
logy
and
tech
niqu
es to
mos
t of o
ur
oper
atio
ns.
DD
- Th
e te
chno
logy
sys
tem
sup
porti
ng o
ur
CR
M e
fforts
is n
ot c
urre
nt s
tate
-of-t
he-a
rt.
EE
- W
e ge
nera
lly d
on't
rela
te C
RM
to
tech
nolo
gy a
pplic
atio
ns
132
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es th
e st
atus
of y
our o
rgan
izat
ion'
s C
RM
pro
cess
es?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
usto
mer
Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and
our c
usto
mer
s' w
ork
proc
esse
s ar
e st
able
and
wel
l und
erst
ood
by
our C
RM
pra
ctiti
oner
s
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and/
or o
ur c
usto
mer
s' w
ork
proc
esse
s ar
e un
derg
oing
cha
nges
that
mak
e it
diffi
cult
to a
pply
CR
M a
t thi
s tim
e.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y ca
n ap
ply
CR
M to
som
e bu
t no
t all
wor
k pr
oces
ses.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and/
or o
ur c
usto
mer
s' w
ork
proc
esse
s ar
e no
t wel
l und
erst
ood,
mak
ing
it di
fficu
lt to
dec
ide
whe
re a
nd h
ow to
app
ly
CR
M.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y an
d/or
our
cus
tom
ers
do n
ot
desi
re to
use
CR
M in
itiat
ives
in o
ur d
ealin
g w
ith e
ach
othe
r.
A-36
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
133
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es C
RM
per
form
ance
in y
our
orga
niza
tion.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:C
usto
mer
Rel
atio
nshi
p M
anag
emen
t
AA
- W
e ha
ve C
RM
per
form
ance
out
com
e st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od a
nd ri
goro
usly
mon
itore
d.
BB
- W
e ha
ve C
RM
per
form
ance
out
com
e st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
gen
eral
ly w
ell
unde
rsto
od b
ut a
re n
ot u
sual
ly ri
goro
usly
m
onito
red.
CC
- W
e ha
ve C
RM
per
form
ance
out
com
e st
anda
rds
that
are
not
cur
rent
or w
ell
unde
rsto
od.
DD
- W
e re
ly o
n co
ntra
ctor
s to
man
age
perfo
rman
ce o
utco
me
stan
dard
s.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e C
RM
per
form
ance
ou
tcom
e st
anda
rds.
134
For o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion,
sup
ply
chai
n m
anag
emen
t mea
ns:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- A
n in
tegr
ated
pro
cess
that
beg
ins
with
pl
anni
ng th
e ac
quis
ition
of c
usto
mer
-driv
en
requ
irem
ents
for m
ater
ial a
nd s
ervi
ces
and
ends
with
the
deliv
ery
of m
ater
ial t
o th
e op
erat
iona
l cus
tom
er.
BB
- A
met
hodo
logy
for a
cqui
ring
mat
eria
l and
su
pply
ing
that
mat
eria
l to
our c
usto
mer
s.
CC
- In
tegr
atio
n of
the
dist
ribut
ion
and
trans
porta
tion
func
tions
to s
atis
fy c
usto
mer
or
ders
DD
- A
new
app
roac
h to
impr
ovin
g m
ater
ial
man
agem
ent.
EE
- W
e do
not
use
that
term
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
135
The
impl
emen
tatio
n of
sup
ply
chai
n m
anag
emen
t is
part
of o
ur
stra
tegi
c pl
an.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
136
Our
org
aniz
atio
n's
appr
oach
to s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent
impl
emen
tatio
n is
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- A
ssig
n an
inte
grat
ed te
am re
pres
entin
g al
l af
fect
ed s
ub-o
rgan
izat
ions
to a
ccom
plis
h im
plem
enta
tion.
BB
- A
ssig
n su
pply
cha
in m
anag
emen
t im
plem
enta
tion
to a
lead
org
aniz
atio
n to
ac
com
plis
h im
plem
enta
tion.
CC
- S
elec
t an
expe
rt co
ntra
ctor
to s
uppo
rt ou
r im
plem
enta
tion
effo
rt.
DD
- G
ive
each
logi
stic
s or
gani
zatio
n au
thor
ity
to im
plem
ent s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent t
o m
eet i
ts o
wn
requ
irem
ents
.
EE
- Th
e su
pply
cha
in m
anag
emen
t con
cept
do
es n
ot a
pply
to o
ur lo
gist
ics
proc
ess.
A-37
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
137
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent
train
ing
in y
our o
rgan
izat
ion.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- M
ost p
rinci
pal m
anag
ers
and
key
empl
oyee
s ha
ve re
ceiv
ed s
ome
form
aliz
ed
supp
ly c
hain
man
agem
ent t
rain
ing.
BB
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
initi
ated
or p
lans
to
prov
ide
supp
ly c
hain
man
agem
ent t
rain
ing
to
exec
utiv
es a
nd e
mpl
oyee
s.
CC
- M
anag
ers
and
empl
oyee
s ne
ed to
fa
milia
rize
them
selv
es w
ith s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent c
once
pts
and
prac
tices
.
DD
- E
ach
orga
niza
tiona
l ele
men
t is
resp
onsi
ble
for e
nsur
ing
empl
oyee
s ar
e tra
ined
in s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent.
EE
- S
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent t
rain
ing
is n
ot
requ
ired
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion.
138
Our
org
aniz
atio
n's
appr
oach
to s
uppl
y ch
ain
met
rics
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- W
e ha
ve d
evel
oped
org
aniz
atio
n-w
ide
supp
ly c
hain
met
rics
focu
sing
on
perfo
rman
ce,
cost
and
cus
tom
er s
atis
fact
ion.
BB
- W
e pl
an to
impl
emen
t sup
ply
chai
n m
etric
s to
mea
sure
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
our
ove
rall
supp
ly c
hain
.
CC
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
resp
onsi
ble
for a
lo
gist
ics
proc
ess
is c
harg
ed w
ith a
chie
ving
its
assi
gned
met
rics
targ
ets.
DD
- O
ur c
urre
nt lo
gist
ics
met
rics
satis
fy o
ur
man
ager
s' a
nd s
take
hold
ers'
nee
ds.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
ot e
stab
lishe
d fo
rmal
met
rics
for
our s
uppl
y ch
ain
proc
esse
s.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
139
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
our
org
aniz
atio
n's
budg
etin
g ap
proa
ch to
impl
emen
ting
supp
ly c
hain
man
agem
ent:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- O
ur c
utte
nt a
nd p
roje
cted
bud
get p
lan
fully
fu
nds
a co
mpr
ehen
sive
sup
ply
chai
n m
anag
emtn
impl
emen
tatio
n pr
ogra
m.
BB
- O
ur c
urre
nt a
nd p
roje
cted
bud
get p
lan
fund
s so
me
impo
rtant
asp
ects
of s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent.
CC
- W
e ha
ve s
om p
ropo
sed
supp
ly c
hain
m
anag
emen
t ini
tativ
es, b
ut th
ey a
re n
ot fu
lly
fund
ed.
DD
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
has
not r
ecog
nize
d a
need
to fu
nd s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent
activ
ity.
EE
- S
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent d
oes
not a
pply
to
our
org
aniz
atio
n.
140
Our
org
aniz
atio
n's
appr
oach
to im
plem
entin
g or
impr
ovin
g ou
r su
pply
cha
in m
anag
emen
t pro
cess
is b
est d
escr
ibed
as:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- U
sing
a c
ompr
ehen
sive
pro
cess
mod
elin
g an
d as
sess
men
t app
roac
h to
iden
tify
our
proc
esse
s, c
urre
nt/b
est p
ract
ices
and
rela
ted
met
rics.
BB
- P
ursu
ing
a se
ries
of p
roce
ss im
prov
emen
t in
itiat
ives
.
CC
- Ta
skin
g an
inte
grat
ion
cont
ract
or to
pr
opos
e ne
eded
pro
cess
impr
ovem
ents
.
DD
- U
pgra
ding
our
aut
omat
ed s
yste
ms
with
so
ftwar
e th
at in
corp
orat
es b
ette
r bus
ines
s pr
actic
es.
EE
- E
ach
orga
niza
tiona
l ele
men
t is
wor
king
to
impr
ove
its o
wn
busi
ness
pro
cess
es.
A-38
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
141
Impl
emen
ting
supp
ly c
hain
man
agem
ent i
n ou
r org
aniz
atio
n is
a
mat
ter o
f:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- D
eter
min
ing
basi
c pe
rform
ance
and
pr
oces
s re
quire
men
ts a
nd m
atch
ing
them
to
gove
rnm
ent o
r priv
ate
sect
or p
roce
dura
l and
te
cnol
ogic
al s
olut
ions
.
BB
- D
eter
min
ing
basi
c pe
rform
ance
and
pr
oces
s re
quire
men
ts a
nd e
ngin
eerin
g ou
r ow
n so
lutio
ns.
CC
- D
eter
min
ing
proc
ess
requ
irem
ents
onl
y.
DD
- A
cqui
ring
supp
ly c
hain
man
agem
ent
softw
are.
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n
142
Our
org
aniz
atio
n pr
imar
ily u
ses
the
follo
win
g ap
proa
ch to
im
plem
enta
tion
of te
chno
logy
sol
utio
ns in
are
as s
uch
as s
uppl
y ch
ain
man
agem
ent:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
uppl
y C
hain
Inte
grat
ion
AA
- Te
chno
logy
app
licat
ions
are
not
im
plem
ente
d un
til a
cre
dibl
e bu
sine
ss c
ase
is
docu
men
ted
and
appr
oved
.
BB
- W
e ha
ve in
pla
ce a
tech
nolo
gy s
trate
gy to
gu
ide
inve
stm
ents
bas
ed o
n su
pply
cha
in
proc
ess
impr
ovem
ent o
bjec
tives
.
CC
- G
ener
ally
, we
adop
t tec
hnol
ogie
s th
at
have
bee
n ac
cept
ed in
oth
er g
over
nmen
t or
gani
zatio
ns.
DD
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
uses
con
tract
ors
to
advi
se u
s on
ass
essm
ent a
nd s
elec
tion
of
appl
icab
le te
chno
logi
es.
EE
- W
e try
to im
plem
ent n
ew te
chno
logi
es a
s th
ey b
ecom
e av
aila
ble.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
143
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s ap
proa
ch to
st
rate
gic
sour
cing
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Sour
cing
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s a
clea
r vis
ion
of it
s sp
endi
ng p
atte
rns
with
eac
h m
ajor
sup
plie
r an
d a
stra
tegy
for u
sing
the
info
rmat
ion
to
forg
e w
in/w
in b
usin
ess
rela
tions
hips
with
the
supp
liers
.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y is
fam
iliar w
ith th
e pr
inci
ples
of
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng a
nd h
as p
lans
to a
dopt
it.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y is
sat
isfie
d w
ith th
e su
ppor
t cu
rren
tly p
rovi
ded
by s
uppl
iers
and
ther
efor
e do
es n
ot n
eed
to a
dopt
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y w
ould
like
to a
dopt
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng b
ut is
una
ble
to d
o so
bec
ause
of
proc
urem
ent r
egul
atio
ns, f
undi
ng, o
r pe
rson
nel c
onst
rain
ts.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y do
es n
ot c
onsi
der s
trate
gic
sour
cing
to b
e ap
plic
able
to it
s op
erat
ions
.
144
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
e of
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng in
our
or
gani
zatio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Sour
cing
AA
- O
ur s
taff
is tr
aine
d, k
now
ledg
eabl
e, a
nd
enga
ged
in a
pply
ing
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng.
BB
- O
ur s
taff
is tr
aine
d an
d kn
owle
dgea
ble
abou
t how
to a
pply
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng b
ut o
nly
has
the
time
to w
ork
on s
trate
gic
sour
cing
on
a lim
ited
basi
s.
CC
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
on c
ontra
ctor
s w
ho a
re
excl
usiv
ely
man
agin
g ou
r stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng
effo
rts.
DD
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
on c
ontra
ctor
s w
ho
occa
sion
ally
app
ly s
trate
gic
sour
cing
ap
proa
ches
to m
ater
ial a
cqui
sitio
n.
EE
- O
ur a
genc
y is
usi
ng p
erso
nnel
who
do
not
have
or u
se a
ny tr
aini
ng o
n st
rate
gic
sour
cing
.
A-39
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
145
Our
bud
get a
nd p
rogr
am p
lan
incl
udes
ade
quat
e pe
rson
nel a
nd
fund
ing
to e
ffect
ivel
y an
d ef
ficie
ntly
app
ly s
trate
gic
sour
cing
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Sour
cing
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n.
146
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
us o
f our
org
aniz
atio
n's
use
of te
chno
logy
to im
plem
ent s
trate
gic
sour
cing
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Sour
cing
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng
tech
nolo
gy a
nd te
chni
ques
to m
ost o
f our
op
erat
ions
.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng
tech
nolo
gy a
nd te
chni
ques
to a
few
of o
ur
oper
atio
ns.
CC
- A
sup
port
cont
ract
or u
nder
stan
ds a
nd
appl
ies
curr
ent s
tate
-of-t
he-a
rt st
rate
gic
sour
cing
tech
nolo
gy a
nd te
chni
ques
to m
ost o
f ou
r ope
ratio
ns.
DD
- Th
e te
chno
logy
sys
tem
sup
porti
ng o
ur
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng e
fforts
is n
ot c
urre
nt s
tate
-of
-the-
art.
EE
- W
e do
not
use
any
sig
nific
ant t
echn
olog
y to
sup
port
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
147
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
us o
f our
org
aniz
atio
n's
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng p
roce
sses
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Sour
cing
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and
our s
uppl
iers
' wor
k pr
oces
ses
are
stab
le a
nd w
ell u
nder
stoo
d by
ou
r stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng p
ract
ition
ers
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y ca
n ap
ply
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng to
so
me
but n
ot a
ll ac
quis
ition
wor
k pr
oces
ses.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and/
or o
ur s
uppl
iers
' wor
k pr
oces
ses
are
unde
rgoi
ng c
hang
es th
at m
ake
it di
fficu
lt to
app
ly s
trate
gic
sour
cing
at t
his
time.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y's
and/
or o
ur s
uppl
iers
' wor
k pr
oces
ses
are
not w
ell u
nder
stoo
d, m
akin
g it
diffi
cult
to d
ecid
e w
here
and
how
to a
pply
st
rate
gic
sour
cing
.
EE
- N
eith
er w
e no
r our
cus
tom
ers
know
w
heth
er s
trate
gic
sour
cing
is a
pplic
able
to o
ur
activ
ity.
148
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
stra
tegi
c so
urci
ng p
erfo
rman
ce in
ou
r org
aniz
atio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Sour
cing
AA
- W
e ha
ve s
trate
gic
sour
cing
per
form
ance
ou
tcom
e st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
ge
nera
lly w
ell u
nder
stoo
d an
d rig
orou
sly
mon
itore
d.
BB
- W
e ha
ve s
trate
gic
sour
cing
per
form
ance
ou
tcom
e st
anda
rds
that
are
cur
rent
and
ge
nera
lly w
ell u
nder
stoo
d bu
t are
not
usu
ally
rig
orou
sly
mon
itore
d.
CC
- W
e ha
ve s
trate
gic
sour
cing
per
form
ance
ou
tcom
e st
anda
rds
that
are
not
cur
rent
or w
ell
unde
rsto
od.
DD
- W
e re
ly p
rimar
ily o
n co
ntra
ctor
s to
m
anag
e st
rate
gic
sour
cing
per
form
ance
ou
tcom
e st
anda
rds.
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e st
rate
gic
sour
cing
pe
rform
ance
out
com
e st
anda
rds.
A-40
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
149
I bel
ieve
Per
form
ance
Bas
ed L
ogis
tics
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:P
erfo
rman
ce B
ased
Log
istic
s
AA
- A
man
agem
ent s
trate
gy th
at u
ses
docu
men
ted
mea
sure
s, a
gree
men
ts a
nd
inte
grat
ion
man
ager
s to
ach
ieve
opt
imum
le
vels
of c
usto
mer
sat
isfa
ctio
n.
BB
- A
n ap
proa
ch to
impr
ove
life-
cycl
e su
ppor
t of
end
item
s an
d eq
uipm
ent.
CC
- A
way
to e
limin
ate
non-
valu
e ac
tivity
in th
e lo
gist
ics
proc
ess.
DD
- A
noth
er w
ay to
acc
ompl
ish
outs
ourc
ing.
EE
- I d
on't
real
ly k
now
.
150
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion'
s ap
proa
ch to
pe
rform
ance
bas
ed lo
gist
ics:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:P
erfo
rman
ce B
ased
Log
istic
s
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s ad
opte
d a
visi
on a
nd
stra
tegy
for u
sing
PB
L ag
reem
ents
or
cont
ract
s co
verin
g bo
th s
ervi
ces
and
prod
ucts
pr
ovid
ed to
the
Age
ncy.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s ad
opte
d a
visi
on a
nd
stra
tegy
for u
sing
PB
L ag
reem
ents
or
cont
ract
s co
verin
g pr
oduc
ts p
rovi
ded
to th
e A
genc
y.
CC
- O
ur A
genc
y ha
s ad
opte
d a
visi
on a
nd
stra
tegy
for u
sing
PB
L ag
reem
ents
or
cont
ract
s co
verin
g se
rvic
es p
rovi
ded
to th
e A
genc
y.
DD
- O
ur A
genc
y is
con
side
ring
usin
g P
BL
agre
emen
ts o
r con
tract
s co
verin
g ei
ther
or
both
ser
vice
s an
d pr
oduc
ts p
rovi
ded
to th
e A
genc
y.
EE
- O
ur A
genc
y do
es n
ot p
lan
to u
se P
BL
agre
emen
ts o
r con
tract
s in
the
near
futu
re.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
151
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
e of
per
form
ance
bas
ed
logi
stic
s in
our
org
aniz
atio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:P
erfo
rman
ce B
ased
Log
istic
s
AA
- O
ur s
taff
is a
full-
time
staf
f tra
ined
, kn
owle
dgea
ble,
and
eng
aged
in a
pply
ing
PB
L.
BB
- O
ur s
taff
is tr
aine
d an
d kn
owle
dgea
ble
abou
t how
to a
pply
PB
L bu
t onl
y w
orks
on
PB
L on
per
iodi
c ba
sis.
CC
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
exte
nsiv
ely
on
cont
ract
ors
to a
pply
PB
L.
DD
- O
ur a
genc
y re
lies
perio
dica
lly o
n co
ntra
ctor
s to
app
ly P
BL.
EE
- O
ur a
genc
y do
es n
ot e
ngag
e in
PB
L.
152
Our
bud
get a
nd p
rogr
am p
lan
incl
udes
ade
quat
e pe
rson
nel a
nd
fund
ing
to e
ffect
ivel
y an
d ef
ficie
ntly
app
ly P
BL:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:P
erfo
rman
ce B
ased
Log
istic
s
AA
- S
trong
ly A
gree
BB
- P
artia
lly A
gree
CC
- P
artia
lly D
isag
ree
DD
- S
trong
ly D
isag
ree
EE
- D
oes
Not
App
ly to
Our
Org
aniz
atio
n.
A-41
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
153
The
follo
win
g be
st d
escr
ibes
the
stat
us o
f our
org
aniz
atio
n's
use
of P
BL-r
elat
ed te
chno
logy
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:P
erfo
rman
ce B
ased
Log
istic
s
AA
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
PB
L te
chno
logy
, so
ftwar
e an
d te
chni
ques
to m
ost o
f our
op
erat
ions
.
BB
- O
ur A
genc
y un
ders
tand
s an
d ap
plie
s cu
rren
t sta
te-o
f-the
-art
PB
L te
chno
logy
, so
ftwar
e a
nd te
chni
ques
to s
ome
of o
ur
oper
atio
ns.
CC
- A
sup
port
cont
ract
or u
nder
stan
ds a
nd
appl
ies
curr
ent s
tate
-of-t
he-a
rt P
BL
tech
nolo
gy, s
oftw
are
and
tech
niqu
es to
mos
t of
our
ope
ratio
ns.
DD
- Th
e te
chno
logy
sys
tem
sup
porti
ng o
ur
PB
L ef
forts
is n
ot c
urre
nt s
tate
-of-t
he-a
rt.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o pl
ans
to a
dopt
new
tech
nolo
gy
spec
ifica
lly fo
r sup
port
of P
BL
impl
emen
tatio
n
154
Whi
ch s
tate
men
t bes
t des
crib
es P
BL p
erfo
rman
ce in
you
r or
gani
zatio
n.
Pyr
amid
Are
a:P
erfo
rman
ce B
ased
Log
istic
s
AA
- W
e ha
ve d
ocum
ente
d P
BL
perfo
rman
ce
met
rics
that
focu
s on
cus
tom
er-o
rient
ed
perfo
rman
ce o
bjec
tives
and
on
redu
cing
lo
gist
ics
cost
s.
BB
- W
e ha
ve P
BL
perfo
rman
ce m
etric
s th
at
are
curr
ent a
nd g
ener
ally
wel
l und
erst
ood
and
rigor
ousl
y m
onito
red
CC
- W
e ha
ve P
BL
perfo
rman
ce m
etric
s th
at
are
not c
urre
nt o
r wel
l und
erst
ood.
DD
- W
e re
ly o
n co
ntra
ctor
s to
mee
t agr
eed-
to
PB
L pe
rform
ance
obj
ectiv
es..
EE
- W
e do
not
hav
e P
BL
perfo
rman
ce m
etric
s.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
155
In o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion,
the
desi
red
appr
oach
for a
cces
sing
and
ex
chan
ging
logi
stic
s in
form
atio
n is
bes
t des
crib
ed a
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:E
nter
pris
e In
tegr
atio
n
AA
- W
e pl
an to
use
com
mon
info
rmat
ion
repo
sito
ries
or d
ata
base
s to
pro
vide
requ
ired
info
rmat
ion
to a
ll au
thor
ized
use
rs.
BB
- O
ur in
tent
is to
ado
pt c
omm
erci
al
info
rmat
ion
data
exc
hang
e st
anda
rds
to
proc
ess
info
rmat
ion
trans
actio
ns a
mon
g di
ffere
nt a
utom
ated
sys
tem
s.
CC
- W
e w
ill co
ntin
ue to
use
gov
ernm
ent
stan
dard
tran
sact
ion
form
ats
such
as
FED
STR
IP to
exc
hang
e in
form
atio
n am
ong
diffe
rent
sys
tem
s an
d or
gani
zatio
ns.
DD
- O
ur n
orm
al m
etho
d to
exc
hang
e in
form
atio
n is
to p
repa
re p
rinte
d re
ports
and
di
ssem
inat
e th
ese
to u
sing
org
aniz
atio
ns.
EE
- W
e us
e m
essa
ges,
e-m
ail a
nd te
leph
ones
to
exc
hang
e lo
gist
ics
and
rela
ted
info
rmat
ion.
156
I wou
ld c
hara
cter
ize
our p
roce
ss fo
r pro
vidi
ng lo
gist
ics
info
rmat
ion
to m
anag
ers
and
empl
oyee
s as
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:E
nter
pris
e In
tegr
atio
n
AA
- Th
e ab
ility
of A
genc
y pe
rson
nel t
o ob
tain
re
quire
d lo
gist
ics
info
rmat
ion
is s
atis
fact
ory.
BB
- In
form
atio
n av
aila
bilit
y in
our
org
aniz
atio
n is
gen
eral
ly ti
mel
y an
d ac
cura
te.
CC
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
mai
ntai
ns th
e lo
gist
ics
info
rmat
ion
need
ed fo
r its
ow
n op
erat
ions
.
DD
- M
anag
ers
and
empl
oyee
s ca
n re
ques
t re
quire
d lo
gist
ics
and
rela
ted
info
rmat
ion
on
an a
s-ne
eded
bas
is.
EE
- Th
e ab
ility
of A
genc
y pe
rson
nel t
o ob
tain
re
quire
d lo
gist
ics
info
rmat
ion
is u
nsat
isfa
ctor
y.
A-42
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
157
Our
org
aniz
atio
n's
curr
ent s
tatu
s to
war
d de
velo
ping
an
inte
grat
ed lo
gist
ics
ente
rpris
e ar
chite
ctur
e is
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:E
nter
pris
e In
tegr
atio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve d
ocum
ente
d a
fully
dev
elop
ed
logi
stic
s en
terp
rise
arch
itect
ure
and
use
it as
a
busi
ness
pro
cess
reen
gine
erin
g to
ol.
BB
- W
e ar
e cu
rren
tly d
evel
opin
g an
inte
grat
ed
logi
stic
s en
terp
rise
arch
itect
ure.
CC
- E
ach
orga
niza
tion
with
in o
ur A
genc
y is
re
spon
sibl
e fo
r dev
elop
ing
its o
wn
ente
rpris
e an
d te
chni
cal a
rchi
tect
ure
prod
ucts
.
DD
- W
e ha
ve n
ot a
ddre
ssed
the
issu
e of
a
logi
stic
s en
terp
rise
arch
itect
ure.
EE
- A
logi
stic
s en
terp
rise
arch
itect
ure
is n
ot
requ
ired
for o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion.
158
Our
app
roac
h to
tech
nica
l mod
erni
zatio
n an
d in
tegr
atio
n of
our
au
tom
ated
logi
stic
s pr
oces
ses
is b
est d
escr
ibed
as:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:E
nter
pris
e In
tegr
atio
n
AA
- W
e ar
e pu
rsui
ng d
evel
opm
ent o
f an
inte
grat
ed d
ata
envi
ronm
ent u
sing
com
mer
cial
en
terp
rise
reso
urce
s pl
anni
ng (E
RP
) sof
twar
e as
nee
ded.
BB
- W
e ar
e co
ncen
tratin
g on
impr
ovin
g ou
r lo
gist
ics
busi
ness
pro
cess
es, m
inim
izin
g de
velo
pmen
t of t
otal
ly n
ew a
utom
ated
sy
stem
s.
CC
- W
e ar
e de
velo
ping
our
ow
n m
oder
n au
tom
ated
sys
tem
s ca
pabi
litie
s or
upg
radi
ng
exis
ting
gove
rnm
ent o
wne
d so
ftwar
e an
d/or
ha
rdw
are.
DD
- O
ur a
utom
ated
dat
a sy
stem
s ar
e su
ffici
ently
mod
ern
to s
uppo
rt ou
r Age
ncy'
s ne
eds.
EE
- W
e h
ave
not a
ddre
ssed
pro
cess
or
syst
ems
mod
erni
zatio
n in
our
org
aniz
atio
n.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
159
Our
org
aniz
atio
n m
easu
res
prog
ress
tow
ard
impr
ovin
g lo
gist
ics
base
d on
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:E
nter
pris
e In
tegr
atio
n
AA
- O
ur m
ost s
igni
fican
t log
istic
s bu
sine
ss
goal
s ba
sed
on c
usto
mer
app
rove
d m
etric
s en
com
pass
ing
over
all p
roce
ss p
erfo
rman
ce,
cost
, and
cus
tom
er s
atis
fact
ion
BB
- O
ur b
usin
ess
goal
s an
d cu
stom
er
satis
fact
ion
CC
- O
ur b
usin
ess
goal
s an
d pr
oces
s pe
rform
ance
DD
- O
ur o
vera
ll pr
oces
s pe
rform
ance
and
cos
t
EE
- C
ost
160
With
in o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion,
fund
ing
of a
fully
inte
grat
ed lo
gist
ics
proc
ess
and
info
rmat
ion
exch
ange
env
ironm
ent i
s be
st
desc
ribed
as:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:E
nter
pris
e In
tegr
atio
n
AA
- W
e ha
ve fu
nded
bus
ines
s pr
oces
ses
and
tech
nica
l ena
bler
s to
ach
ieve
this
env
ironm
ent
in th
e fo
rese
eabl
e fu
ture
.
BB
- S
ever
al k
ey p
roce
ss im
prov
emen
t ca
pabi
litie
s su
ch a
s fu
ll as
set v
isib
ility
and
in
tegr
ated
dat
a ba
ses
have
bee
n fu
nded
.
CC
- Te
chni
cal e
nabl
ers
such
as
bar c
odes
, ra
dio
frequ
ency
tags
or e
lect
roni
c da
ta
inte
rcha
nge
capa
bilit
ies
have
bee
n fu
nded
.
DD
- E
nter
pris
e in
tegr
atio
n re
quire
men
ts in
our
or
gani
zatio
n ha
ve b
een
reco
gniz
ed, b
ut h
ave
not y
et b
een
sign
ifica
ntly
fund
ed.
EE
- C
ross
-func
tiona
l or o
rgan
izat
iona
l in
tegr
atio
n of
logi
stic
s fu
nctio
ns h
as n
ot b
een
addr
esse
d in
our
org
aniz
atio
n.
A-43
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
161
I wou
ld c
hara
cter
ize
logi
stic
s st
rate
gic
plan
ning
in o
ur
orga
niza
tion
as:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Plan
ning
& E
xecu
tion
AA
- W
e ha
ve a
goo
d lo
gist
ics
stra
tegi
c pl
an
and
are
exec
utin
g it
reas
onab
ly c
onsi
sten
tly
and
on s
ched
ule.
BB
- W
e ha
ve a
goo
d lo
gist
ics
stra
tegi
c pl
an,
but w
e ha
ve n
ot b
een
able
to e
xecu
te it
ef
fect
ivel
y.
CC
- O
ur p
lan
has
not b
een
wel
l-pub
liciz
ed in
ou
r org
aniz
atio
n.
DD
- W
e ha
ve a
pla
n, b
ut a
ssig
nmen
ts h
ave
not
been
mad
e or
follo
wed
up
to a
ccom
plis
h ex
ecut
ion.
EE
- W
e ha
ve n
o pl
an.
162
I wou
ld c
hara
cter
ize
our A
genc
y m
anag
emen
t's s
uppo
rt of
our
lo
gist
ics
stra
tegi
c pl
an a
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Plan
ning
& E
xecu
tion
AA
- M
anag
emen
t is
fully
com
mitt
ed to
our
st
rate
gic
plan
's c
onte
nt a
nd p
artic
ipat
es in
its
exec
utio
n.
BB
- M
anag
emen
t sup
ports
our
stra
tegi
c pl
an
obje
ctiv
es, b
ut th
ey a
re to
o in
volv
ed in
day
-to-
day
issu
es to
focu
s on
a lo
ng ra
nge
pers
pect
ive.
CC
- O
ur L
ogis
tics
Stra
tegi
c P
lan
has
not b
een
upda
ted
in re
cent
yea
rs.
DD
- M
anag
emen
t offi
cial
s do
not
app
ear t
o be
in
tere
sted
in s
trate
gic
plan
ning
.
EE
- S
trate
gic
plan
ning
just
won
't w
ork
in o
ur
orga
niza
tion.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
163
Res
pons
ibili
ty fo
r stra
tegi
c pl
anni
ng in
our
org
aniz
atio
n:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Plan
ning
& E
xecu
tion
AA
- Is
led
by s
enio
r man
agem
ent w
ith fu
ll pa
rtici
patio
n of
key
man
ager
s an
d em
ploy
ees.
BB
- Is
acc
ompl
ishe
d by
an
Inte
grat
ed P
rodu
ct
Team
of k
ey e
mpl
oyee
s.
CC
- Is
the
resp
onsi
bilit
y of
our
stra
tegi
c pl
anni
ng o
rgan
izat
ion.
DD
- Is
eve
ryon
e's
resp
onsi
bilit
y.
EE
- N
ot s
ure
who
is re
spon
sibl
e.
164
Our
Log
istic
s S
trate
gic
Pla
n is
stru
ctur
ed in
acc
orda
nce
with
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Plan
ning
& E
xecu
tion
AA
- Th
e G
over
nmen
t Per
form
ance
and
Res
ults
A
ct (G
PR
A) m
odel
.
BB
- M
odel
s of
stra
tegi
c pl
ans
from
oth
er
gove
rnm
ent o
ffice
CC
- G
ener
ally
acc
epte
d co
mm
erci
al s
tand
ards
.
DD
- W
e de
velo
ped
our p
lan
tailo
red
to o
ur
need
s.
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
a P
lan.
A-44
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
165
I bel
ieve
the
prob
abili
ty th
at o
ur L
ogis
tics
Stra
tegi
c P
lan
will
be
larg
ely
exec
uted
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Plan
ning
& E
xecu
tion
AA
- 10
0%
BB
- M
ost m
ilest
ones
will
be
achi
eved
in th
e tim
e sp
ecifi
ed in
the
plan
.
CC
- M
ost m
ilest
ones
will
be
achi
eved
, but
it w
ill ta
ke lo
nger
than
pla
nned
.
DD
- A
few
mile
ston
es w
ill b
e ac
hiev
ed.
EE
- A
s w
ritte
n, o
ur p
lan
is n
ot e
xecu
tabl
e in
our
or
gani
zatio
n.
166
Adeq
uate
reso
urci
ng is
key
to a
suc
cess
fully
exe
cute
d st
rate
gic
plan
. O
ur p
lan
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:S
trate
gic
Plan
ning
& E
xecu
tion
AA
- Ful
ly re
sour
ced
in te
rms
of p
erso
nnel
and
fu
ndin
g.
BB
- S
ome
elem
ents
of o
ur p
lan
are
adeq
uate
ly
reso
urce
d an
d so
me
are
not.
CC
- A
t the
righ
t tim
e, re
sour
ces
will
be
mad
e av
aila
ble
for t
he m
eani
ngfu
l par
ts o
f our
pla
n.
DD
- O
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
does
not
gen
eral
ly li
nk
plan
s to
reso
urce
s.
EE
- Th
ere
are
no s
igni
fican
t res
ourc
es
avai
labl
e to
exe
cute
our
Log
istic
s S
trate
gic
Pla
n.
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
167
The
rela
tions
hip
betw
een
our o
pera
tions
and
logi
stic
s:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:O
rgan
izat
iona
l Foc
us
AA
- Lo
gist
ics
is a
pee
r with
ope
ratio
ns
BB
- Lo
gist
ics
is s
ubor
dina
te to
ope
ratio
ns
CC
- Lo
gist
ics
is s
ubor
dina
te to
har
dwar
e pr
ogra
m o
ffice
s
DD
- Lo
gist
ics
is a
3rd
tier
sup
port
elem
ent
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
an o
ffice
ass
igne
d w
ith th
e m
issi
on o
f log
istic
s
168
The
Chi
ef o
f Log
istic
s fo
r our
Age
ncy
is
Pyr
amid
Are
a:O
rgan
izat
iona
l Foc
us
AA
- Fu
ll tim
e ex
ecut
ive
leve
l pos
ition
BB
- Fu
ll tim
e up
per m
anag
emen
t 13-
15
CC
- Fu
ll tim
e m
iddl
e m
anag
emen
t 9-1
2
DD
- P
art t
ime
man
ager
EE
- W
e do
n't h
ave
a ch
ief o
f log
istic
s
A-45
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
169
How
are
logi
stic
s ac
tiviti
es o
rgan
ized
und
er th
e ch
ief o
f log
istic
s
Pyr
amid
Are
a:O
rgan
izat
iona
l Foc
us
AA
- A
ll lo
gist
ics
orga
niza
tions
repo
rt to
the
chie
f of l
ogis
tics
BB
- A
ll op
erat
iona
l log
istic
s su
ppor
t act
iviti
es
repo
rt to
the
chie
f of l
ogis
tics
CC
- O
nly
som
e of
the
oper
atio
nal s
uppo
rt lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
repo
rt to
the
chie
f of l
ogis
tics
DD
- O
nly
non-
oper
atio
nal s
uppo
rt lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
repo
rt to
the
chie
f of l
ogis
tics
EE
- D
oes
not a
pply
to o
ur o
rgan
izat
ion
170
Gen
eral
ly, t
he m
inim
um e
xper
ienc
e fo
r the
man
agem
ent s
taff
of
our l
ogis
tics
depa
rtmen
ts is
Pyr
amid
Are
a:O
rgan
izat
iona
l Foc
us
AA
- C
aree
r log
istic
s pr
ofes
sion
als
BB
- 10
or m
ore
year
s ex
perie
nce
in lo
gist
ics
CC
- 5-
10 y
ears
exp
erie
nce
in lo
gist
ics
DD
- 1-
5 y
ears
exp
erie
nce
in lo
gist
ics
EE
- N
o lo
gist
ics
expe
rienc
e
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
171
The
appr
oxim
ate
annu
al s
taff
turn
over
in o
ur lo
gist
ics
activ
ities
is:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:O
rgan
izat
iona
l Foc
us
AA
- le
ss th
an 5
%
BB
- 5-
10 %
CC
-11-
15%
DD
- gr
eate
r tha
n 15
%
EE
- I d
on't
know
172
Doe
s yo
ur lo
gist
ics
staf
fing
mee
t the
nee
ds o
f you
r mis
sion
?
Pyr
amid
Are
a:O
rgan
izat
iona
l Foc
us
AA
- Y
es
BB
- N
o, w
e co
uld
use
10%
mor
e st
aff
CC
- N
o, w
e co
uld
use
25%
mor
e st
aff
DD
- N
o, w
e co
uld
use
50%
mor
e st
aff
EE
- I d
on't
know
A-46
Logi
stic
s M
atur
ity E
valu
ator
173
Our
hum
an re
sour
ce s
uppo
rt sy
stem
is in
tegr
ated
with
our
op
erat
iona
l log
istic
s sy
stem
s by
:
Pyr
amid
Are
a:O
rgan
izat
iona
l Foc
us
AA
- R
eal t
ime
dire
ct in
terfa
ce
BB
- P
erio
dic
upda
tes
thro
ugh
a di
rect
inte
rface
CC
- W
hen
requ
este
d, b
ut n
ot a
dire
ct in
terfa
ce
DD
- M
anua
lly
EE
- W
e do
n't u
se h
uman
reso
urce
dat
a in
our
op
erat
iona
l log
istic
s sy
stem
A-47
Appendix B Letter of Understanding
The attached letter of understanding (LOU) between LMI and an agency’s management formalizes the relationship and responsibilities of the participating parties.
B-1
DRAFT—[Click here and type report #)] —4/27/06B-2 IR509R1_B-app_BANNER.doc DRAFT—[Click here and type report #)] —4/27/06B-2 IR509R1_B-app_BANNER.doc
2 0 0 0 C O R P O R A T E R I D G E . M c L E A N . V A 2 2 1 0 2 - 7 8 0 5 . T 7 0 3 . 9 1 7 . 9 8 0 0 . F 7 0 3 . 9 1 7 . 7 5 9 7 . W W W . L M I . O R G
[Click here and type date]
[Click here and type recipient’s address]
Dear [Click here and type recipient’s name]:
The purpose of this letter of understanding is to describe how LMI will conduct the Logistics Maturity Evaluation (LME) of selected Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies. Below, we outline the evaluation approach and our expectations for the participants. Participation is voluntary and at no cost to DHS or the participating agencies. This effort is funded wholly by LMI’s independent research and development funds.
Nondisclosure
The information gathered from the Logistics Maturity Assessment Questionnaire is intended solely for the purpose of aiding in the design of the Logistics Maturity Evaluation. Survey responses will be kept confidential, will only be shared with LMI personnel with a need to know, and will not be shared with any non-LMI party. LMI will not disclose the source of the survey responses.
LME Approach
Background An objective maturity evaluation of organizational logistics can offer distinct advantages to managers trying to achieve higher service levels from their logistics processes. The appraisal can inform operational decision-making, focus management emphasis, and align organizational resources. LMI developed the LME to provide executives with an enterprise view of how their logistics operations compare to a set of generally accepted improvement practices. The LME is based on research of current maturity evaluation methods and logistics best practices. The LME is a structured, high-level diagnostic tool which is used to assess a Government organization’s logistics capability and identify target areas for performance improvement and reduced support costs. LME can particularly benefit government organizations with equipment-dependent, readiness-oriented, logistics-reliant operations.
The LME considers a mix of organizational components that serve as a logistics framework:
• Vision and strategies
• Organization and workforce
• Resources
• Technology enablers
• Logistics processes
• Performance
Individual logistics components can be assessed against a maturity scale to identify stages of development and improvement practices needed.
Methodology 1. LMI will present a briefing describing the LME assessment process.
2. LMI will administer a preliminary survey to gather key organizational characteristics, including:
key missions and activities
mission critical equipment
logistics organization structure(s)
agency budget
logistics activity funding
3. Based on evaluation of this profile, LMI will work with the agency to identify five logisticians, representing the organization’s five most significant logistics activities (e.g. mission critical logistics providers or high dollar programs), to attend a one-day session to complete the LME survey.
Scoring and Analysis LMI will compile and analyze survey responses to determine the status of improvement practices within the logistics components, quantify the organization‘s logistics maturity, and create an organizational Logistics Maturity Evaluation. Results will be compared with those from similar agencies to derive key conclusions and suggest next steps.
LMI Responsibilities
LMI will
• administer the LME to the agencies in this agreement at no cost.
• provide the evaluators, materials and information systems necessary to conduct this evaluation.
• provide a complete debriefing of the results of the evaluation to the participating agency.
2000 CORPORATE RIDGE . McLEAN . VA 22102-7805 . T 703.917.9800 . F 703.917.7597 . www.lmi.org
Agency’s Name
Agency will
• provide the pre-survey information to the LME evaluators.
• provide at least five management representatives from the most significant logistics activities to take part in the evaluation.
If you have any questions about the LME during the evaluation or want to discuss the results, please contact Jeff Colaianni at (703) 917 7548, [email protected].
We appreciate the opportunity to help DHS and its agencies to optimize their logistics programs.
Sincerely,
Jeffery P. Bennett Operating Vice President
2000 CORPORATE RIDGE . McLEAN . VA 22102-7805 . T 703.917.9800 . F 703.917.7597 . www.lmi.org
Appendix C Initial LME Survey
Agency:
Interviewee:
Office:
Position:
Grade:
1. What is the annual budget in your agency?
2. Is there a specific budget for logistics? What is the annual budget for logistics?
3. Who at the executive level is in charge of logistics?
4. What general types and number of equipment do you support?
0–100 items
100–500 items
500–1,000 items
>1,000 items
Vehicles Boats Aircraft Major inspection equipment Sensors Radio equipment (C4) Maintenance significant weapons IT equipment Other
C-1
5. Do you have an agency-wide logistics office?
• Who does this office report to?
• What mission critical equipments does it support?
• How many staff does it have?
• What is the approximate annual budget?
• Are they following major logistics functions outsourced? (Y/N)
o Supply
o Maintenance
o Distribution and transportation
6. Is logistics performed in other offices?
Office Outsourced
(Y/N) Equipment supported
Number of staff
Approximate annual budget Supply (Y/N)
Maintenance (Y/N)
Distribution and transportation
(Y/N)
If you have any questions contact Jeff Colaianni at (703) 917-7548 or [email protected].
C-2
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved
OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
1. REPORT DATE (MM-YYYY) 04-2006
2. REPORT TYPE Final
3. DATES COVERED (From - To)
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Logistics Maturity Evaluator
5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
5b. GRANT NUMBER
5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) Reay, James H; Author
5d. PROJECT NUMBER
Colaianni, A. Jeffrey ; Author Harleston, Evelyn F; Author
5e. TASK NUMBER
Maletic, Amy ; Author Marcus, John G; Author
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
LMI 2000 Corporate Ridge McLean, VA 22102-7805
LMI-IR509R1
9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) LMI 2000 Corporate Ridge McLean, VA 22102 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT A Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
14. ABSTRACT LMI wishes to help government logistics managers determine the current state of their logistics processes, prioritize resource application, and identify future direction. To do so, we embarked on a research effort to develop a logistics maturity evaluator (LME). By accomplishing this independent research and development task, we hope to develop LMI’s analytical capability to provide a structured high-level assessment of federal agencies’ logistics status, progress, and proficiency and help agency managers target areas for improving performance and reducing support costs. The LME borrows heavily from the capability maturity model concept being applied in many organizations to meet management’s need for an unbiased assessment tool. Our intention is to develop a repeatable system that gives logistics managers an objective comparison of the present status of their agencies’ business processes and technologies for delivering goods and services. By applying the LME to logistics organizations, government managers will be able to determine the current level of their logistics processes in terms of modernization and implementation of improvements and technologies; identify additional process improvements that may be applicable to their organizations; and, identify likely areas for focusing business process reengineering initiatives to maximize return on investment, with a reasonable expectation of successful implementation given the organization’s current level of development. 15. SUBJECT TERMS logistics maturity evaluator; LME; capability maturity model; CMM; organizational maturity level; integrated logistics
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:
17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
18. NUMBER OF PAGES
19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON Nancy E. Handy
a. REPORT UNCLASSIFIED
b. ABSTRACT UNCLASSIFIED
c. THIS PAGE UNCLASSIFIED
UnclassifiedUnlimited
90
19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code) 703-917-7249
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18