Defense ARJ - Defense Acquisition University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Defense Acquisition Review Journal 172 endnotes 1. The ontological and epistemological position that does not assume reality is an objective experience. In this article, the author assumes reality is socially constructed (Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Searle, 1995). 2. In philosophical terms, the author refers to the “tools of epistemology and ontology” that Weick describes sensemakers using as “they create that which they interpret” (1995, p. 38). 3. Rutgers (1999) states, “In the course of the nineteenth century the idea of rationality became almost exclusively connected with science and technology, and emerged as the methodological determinant for objectivity and expertise. In fact, science became regarded as the paradigm of rationality. The scientific method of positivism constitutes the strongest expression of the belief in scientific rationality. The founding positivist, Comte (1798–1857), believed that empirical scientific research can not only improve the world by making better humans, but would enable them to control the ravages of nature. Positivism is premised on the idea that rational, scientific thought can solve all human problems and that there is a steady progress of science and society. As a research method, positivism goes hand in glove with empiricism—the belief that certain knowledge can only be arrived at by means of observation (ironically, contrary to rationalism). Positivists believed that it was a means to arrive at objective knowledge. Thus, not only is metaphysical argument debased as ‘subjective,’ but all value issues ought also to be regarded as unscientific and thereby out of the sphere of rationality” (pp. 22–23). 4. What seemingly makes technical rationality a legitimate paradigm in the minds of PPBE sensemakers is what sociologist Max Weber calls Zweckrational or a process of linear reasoning believed to establish clear means-ends linkages. “If you do X, then Y will happen as a result” This perceived and believed to be irrefutable legitimacy stems from five sub-beliefs: that an established legal code can claim obedience from members; that law is a system of abstract rules that are applied to particular cases (and that application looks after the interest of the organization within the limits of law); that the person who exercises this authority should obey in an impersonal manner; that only in the capacity of being a member is there reason to obey the law; and that this obedience is not attributed to a specific person, but the position that they occupy. In short, technical rationality is what Weber conveys as the dominant philosophy of the archetypal bureaucrat (Heydebrand, 1999). 5. These reflect a synthesis of political reasoning from the works of Machiavelli (1961/1532); Allison (1969); Kingdon (1995); Stone (1997); and Zahariadis (1998).
PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? 6. The DoD refers to this process of control as “strategic communications” in the lingo of Defense public affairs specialists (e.g., see Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, 2004). 7. The action research concept was developed by social psychologist Kurt Lewin and his colleagues in the late 1940s. His concepts spawned many to investigate phenomenological aspects of learning, to include heavily influencing David Kolb’s culminating work on experiential learning. Lewin’s learning model involved human shared experience-reflection-abstraction-testing cycles that produce new and often profound meaning (Kolb, 1984, p. 21). 1 7 3
Page 2 and 3:
Vacant Office of Small Business Pro
Page 4 and 5:
133 151 disruption of testing regim
Page 7 and 8:
Defense ARJ executiVe eDitor Defens
Page 9 and 10:
July 2008 Joint attack Munition sys
Page 11 and 12:
Does orGaniZational leVel influence
Page 13 and 14:
creatiVe Potential anD PracticeD cr
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
lessons froM tHe DeVeloPMent of arM
Page 33 and 34:
tAble 1. suMMary Case inforMation S
Page 35 and 36:
lessons froM tHe DeVeloPMent of arM
Page 37 and 38: lessons froM tHe DeVeloPMent of arM
Page 41 and 42: tAble 9. Continuity of tradoC staff
Page 49 and 50: HoW to Make incentiVe systeM of anD
Page 51 and 52: tAble 2. suMMary of Consensus views
Page 63 and 64: conclusions HoW to Make incentiVe s
Page 65 and 66: endnotes HoW to Make incentiVe syst
Page 67 and 68: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? PPBe: a
Page 69 and 70: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? 1995).
Page 71 and 72: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? cation;
Page 73 and 74: Our policy to counter international
Page 75 and 76: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? reminis
Page 77 and 78: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? process
Page 79 and 80: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? COE. As
Page 81 and 82: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? with th
Page 83 and 84: RefeRences PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pi
Page 85 and 86: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? Martin,
Page 87: PPBe: a reD or a Blue Pill? Wachows
Page 91 and 92: systeM of systeMs DeVeloPMent syste
Page 93 and 94: tHe Defense acQuisition fraMeWork:
Page 95 and 96: systeM of systeMs DeVeloPMent tHe D
Page 97 and 98: systeM of systeMs DeVeloPMent searc
Page 99 and 100: systeM of systeMs DeVeloPMent “em
Page 101 and 102: systeM of systeMs DeVeloPMent for l
Page 103 and 104: systeM of systeMs DeVeloPMent DAPA
Page 105 and 106: � � systeM of systeMs DeVeloPMe
Page 107 and 108: RefeRences systeM of systeMs DeVelo
Page 109 and 110: endnotes systeM of systeMs DeVeloPM
Page 111 and 112: a GliMPse into DoD WeaPon systeMs P
Page 113 and 114: � � � � � � � systeM
Page 115 and 116: systeM DoD WeaPon of systeMs DeVelo
Page 123: systeM DoD WeaPon of systeMs DeVelo
Page 126 and 127: Defense Acquisition Review Journal
Page 128 and 129: Defense Acquisition Review Journal
Page 130 and 131: defense Acqu s t on un vers ty web
Page 132: Defense Acquisition Review Journal
show all

Defense ARJ - Defense Acquisition University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?