The Maritime Headquarters with Maritime Operations Center (MHQ with MOC) operational construct is perhaps one of the most significant learning events and catalysts for change facing U.S. Navy commanders today. With its prescribed actions derived from operational lessons learned, MHQ with MOC seeks to improve the ability of the Navy’s “operational-level headquarters staffs” to “assess, plan and execute.”
As the world evolves and the need to operate more efficiently and effectively in the joint arena becomes increasingly important, the MHQ with MOC concept of operations (CONOPS) enables Navy commands to become more cross-functional, streamline information flows, and leverage knowledge to speed and improve operational decisions. By following MHQ with MOC principles, warfighters will become better equipped to support commanders and be more efficient at transitioning as operations scale from normal and routine (NAR) to the full operational level of war (OLW).
As a knowledge manager working to support the MHQ with MOC implementation and sustainment processes for Adm. Robert F. Willard, Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet (COMPACFLT), the challenge has been a tremendously exciting one. COMPACFLT excels as an organization in all areas, particularly in operations; however, MHQ with MOC introduces a cultural shift that seeks to break down traditional “stovepipes,” create crosstalk, and further ‘operationalize’ the staff as a whole.
COMPACFLT will be the first command accredited as an MHQ with MOC in March 2008. An Integrated Planning Team (IPT), a core of bureau, board, center, cell and working group (B2C2WG) members and leads, and an executive steering group, under the direction of an exceptionally motivated commander, have led us to this stage of readiness. The intent of this article is to share our lessons learned, from a knowledge manager’s perspective, with the hope that as the global network of MHQs with MOCs continues to take shape, we will continue to improve the concept and refine our tasks and processes accordingly.
My direct involvement in the MHQ with MOC project began just four months prior to the commander’s Preliminary Accreditation Ready (PAR) deadline of Jan. 31, 2008. The initial taskings from the IPT for Knowledge Management were as follows:
- Follow the guidance of the commander, the ‘spirit’ of the MHQ with MOC CONOPS, and Joint Publication 3-33.
- Build a SIPRnet MOC Web Site modeled after JTF-519.
- Leverage the Collaboration-at-Sea (CAS) web content management tool and the Enterprise Knowledge Management (eKM) collaboration tool.
- Establish a working group to manage the CAS site and address KM/IM Issues.
Our entire approach to MHQ with MOC focused not on reinventing the wheel, but on using existing joint and Navy doctrine and using tools that had been proven to work for us in both the operations center and in the fleet management element. In knowledge management, following IPT guidance and the advice of our JTF-519 counterparts, our plan of action and milestones (POA&M) during the planning phase consisted of the following:
- Establish a cross-functional, cross-directorate KM Working Group (KMWG).
- Develop a MOC Web Site.
- Build the MOC Battle Rhythm, complete with inputs, outputs, associated tasks and processes.
- Assess/Develop Web Tools for:
-- a. Training
-- b. Manning
-- c. Lessons Learned
-- d. Taskers and Significant Events
-- e. Collaboration & Decision Making
- Produce a KM Plan and a Web Site Management Plan.
An item of note that will not be discussed here in detail but will be mentioned to open discussion is that COMPACFLT chose not to establish an information management board or cell (IMB or IMC). This decision was not an oversight, but a choice necessitated by our current organizational structure which we will be reevaluating as the project moves forward.
The Challenges
Some of the challenges we faced revealed themselves almost immediately, the first being manning and organization. COMPACFLT is fortunate to have a Flag officer in the position of Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO). It does not, however, have an official billet for a Knowledge Management Officer (KMO). The COMPACFLT KM team consists instead of the CKO, Rear Adm. Joseph Mulloy, and a small group of contractors, myself included, working throughout the COMPACFLT area of responsibility (AOR).
Like most obstacles we encountered, issues that arose due to manning issues in KM were overcome by way of the commander’s clear and enthusiastic support for KM initiatives and the day-to-day support of the MOC Director Rear Adm. Tom Copeman, the CKO, and the members of the IPT. Additionally, the formation of a KM Working Group allowed us to reach out to all directorates via Information Management and Training Leads (IMTLs) assigned by each directorate to represent both fleet management and MOC interests.
The KMWG permitted us to accomplish our immediate information collection and sharing goals when developing our website, and provided a vehicle for us to address all KM/IM issues in a balanced forum.
Our KM team went forward with the understanding that the KM function would need to be further defined and honed at COMPACFLT, and that standing up the MHQ with MOC, maximizing the efforts of the KMWG, and fulfilling the immediate needs of the organization; however, we could was paramount.
Time and its associated pressures proved to be another big challenge. With only a few months to support Adm. Willard’s aggressive timelines, accreditation deadlines rather than longer term change initiatives became the primary focus of effort. This was not necessarily a negative aspect of the process because it allowed us to draw the lines around and highlight those areas we knew we would need to address in more detail later.
Some of the key tasks a KM hopes to perform earlier on, such as conducting KM assessments and developing a full information exchange report matrix, could not be accomplished initially due to in part to the number of demands placed on the directorate and B2C2WG leads, and the KM, for a multitude of accreditation inputs.
Our KM goal was to assess, organize, and codify the many processes that occur at our command daily, however the more visible tasks, particularly, the construction of the website, soon became the primary objective. Now that we have met the deadline, the real detail work is beginning to take place.
As we approach accreditation, our longer term organizational learning goals have moved back into focus and we will likely begin to address how we will meet those goals as we go through the accreditation process.
As we have said many times at COMPACFLT, we are building the plane as we are flying it. Learning the concept and executing it at the same time is a challenge, but certainly not one that will not be overcome as we exercise the concept, capture lessons learned, and adjust accordingly. As a knowledge manager, my approach to capturing tacit knowledge has been more anthropological than “technical.”
Observing processes in motion, having informal conversations, participating in and observing meetings and events occurring at all levels of the staff has helped our team gain further insight into MOC processes without putting the burden of understanding KM on the staff. As Cmdr. John Hearne and Christine Carobine stated in a recent article, “Organizations don’t DO knowledge management; they attempt to improve their performance using the people and tools available to them.” In our experience, this is the best and least disruptive approach to take when attempting to implement and facilitate change of this scope and size.
Commander’s Guidance
Much of how we approached organizing ourselves under the MHQ with MOC concept centered on the six phases of the commander’s decision cycle, known as “the Willard wheel.” B2C2WGs were challenged to think about and organize their information and processes using the six fundamentals of command and control (C2):
- Maintain Alignment
- Provide Situational Awareness
- Advance the Plan
- Comply with Procedure
- Counter the Enemy
- Adjust Apportionment
This task was first explicitly visualized on our website, but has evolved into the way that information is prepared and presented, whether or not it is explicitly labeled as such. Understanding this cycle is critical to understanding the commander’s thought process and organizing information flows to align with and support the cycle represents another necessary cultural change that the staff will need to absorb.
Adm. Willard directed several critical events that helped the B2C2WG leads through the planning process and consequently helped the KM team with some of our fundamental organizational objectives. At the first MOC briefing for Adm. Willard, the IPT leads provided a status report for our respective areas. Before we began, he asked us to do two things. First, he asked “what is different” about how we were doing business prior to the MOC, and second, he asked us to be honest about the challenges we encountered in the process.
The admiral also emphasized that the MHQ with MOC was not an “exercise,” rather that it was indeed a new way of doing business, and that he expected all to perform accordingly. This guidance not only set the tone for the brief, but for the entire implementation process. Certainly, to have a commander who is as engaged and open to dialogue throughout the process will be critical to the success of any MHQ with MOC concept implementation.
A daylong warfighting processes forum was organized at the request of Adm. Willard where the B2C2WG leads presented the commander their processes in detail. Following that forum, Adm. Willard directed us to conduct a battle rhythm tabletop in order to first construct our Major Combat Operations (MCO) Battle Rhythm, then our Normal and Routine (NAR) Battle Rhythm. These events were necessary for opening the lines of communication between B2C2WGs and to building an understanding of where we needed to be as an organization, for accreditation and beyond.
Other crucial guidance from Adm.Willard included:
- Develop the website as a “one stop shop” for the warfighter.
- Be customer focused – find out what our numbered fleets need, how they need it and when.
- COMPACFLT may follow but not copy the JTF-519 model; make our website uniquely COMPACFLT MOC.
- Note the lines of demarcation between B2C2WGs, between fleet management and MOC functions, and between MOCs at other commands.
- Continue to look at how other commands are accomplishing the tasks, evaluate other tool sets, and maintain alignment.
Lessons Learned
Every person who participated in the MHQ with MOC implementation will have their own set of lessons learned. Below are some of our most critical lessons learned from a KM’s perspective:
- Understand the evolutionary & experimental nature of the MHQ with MOC concept and move out accordingly. As difficult as it is, be open to change.
- As a KM, involve yourself in the IPT from the earliest stages of planning.
- Make efforts staff wide, not just on the leadership tier, to promote awareness and understanding of the MHQ with MOC concept.
- Create opportunities for key players to discuss cross functional relationships in open forums (table tops) both during and after implementation.
- Build internal B2C2WG battle rhythms, identify inputs and outputs, and then consolidate.
- As a KM, influence the process at as many levels as possible as a participant, not just as an outside observer.
COMPACFLT MHQ with MOC
To date in KM, we have established an active KMWG, developed a KM plan as part of the MOC Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), developed a powerful “one-stop shop” website that is accessible to our commander and those who support him on all levels, and have procured tools to work within CAS 3.0 such as, portal pages, a lines of operation tool, eKM actions plug-in, and a refined manning database and battle rhythm tool adopted from the JTF-519 tool set.
As a MOC, we have constructed a Phase 0 Normal and Routine and Phase 2 Major Combat Operations (MCO) battle rhythms and identified our initial set of inputs and outputs, and we are working to further define and document the true relationships and inner workings between the bureaus, boards, centers, cells and working groups.
As we continue through the accreditation process and work to refine our organizational processes, our objectives remain to learn from our actions, improve collaboration across the staff and between commands, and to become an organization that is adaptive to change and always ready for the fight. Knowledge management and information management will continue to play critical roles throughout the transition process and, if successful, our combined efforts will further enable all Navy commanders to make the best decisions possible and increase war fighter readiness throughout the Navy.
Ms. Jamie Hatch is the knowledge manager for U.S. Pacific Fleet.