Building the Enterprise - Booz Allen Hamilton

cross-cutting mission areas. Theyalso occur with mission-supportfunctions, such as purchasing goodsand services and cutting payrollchecks. Suboptimal performance,duplication of effort, inefficiencyand wasted resources are the result.For example, agencies regularlypay too much for commodity purchasesbecause they fail to leveragethe combined buying power of thefederal enterprise. Thus, while manyagencies, such as the Department ofCommerce, have consolidated IThardware and software purchaseswithin their own ranks to save millionsof dollars, this same approachapplied across government couldsave hundreds of millions of dollars.Needless duplication and overlapalso abound in the government’shandling of security clearance backgroundinvestigations to determinesuitability for federal hiring. Multipleagencies have made separateand costly investments in electroniccase management and adjudicationsystems for background investigationsinstead of working together tocreate and use a shared system, accordingto the GAO. 3The president and the executivebranch must redouble their effortsto take a more holistic, enterpriseapproach to the multiagency missionsand functions of government.When we say that the federal governmentshould act more like an enterprise,we mean that it should betterintegrate and unify the efforts ofthe executive departments, agencies,bureaus and offices to achieve crosscuttinggoals, missions and functionsthat individual agencies cannot effectivelytackle on their own.While fully recognizing thatmany challenges require the participationof state, county and localgovernments as well as private organizationsand institutions and internationalpartners, we have chosen tolimit the boundaries of this report to3 Ibid. 79–83.“When we say that the federalgovernment should act morelike an enterprise, we meanthat it should better integrateand unify the efforts of theexecutive departments,agencies, bureaus and officesto achieve cross-cutting goals,missions and functions thatindividual agencies cannoteffectively tackle on their own.”focus specifically on the operation ofthe executive branch of the federalgovernment. However, the enterpriseapproach we advocate is justas necessary in tackling intergovernmentaland international challenges,and just as applicable.Taking the enterprise approachdoes not mean that government missionsand functions must be centralized.That approach has its ownset of bureaucratic problems. Norare we suggesting that current departmentaland agency missions beeliminated or that government bemassively reorganized. History hasshown that restructuring governmentis a politically charged, expensiveand time-consuming processthat often has unintended consequences.It typically fails to attackthe root causes of a particular issueand, most importantly, diverts attentionfrom solving problems thatnow mutate faster than any reorganizationcan match. We need an approachthat is as adaptive and flexibleas the challenges it is designedto overcome.The enterprise model describedthroughout this roadmap meets thisobjective. Unlike past managementreforms, it minimizes the need forlegislation or wholesale restructuring.However, it does require morethan interagency committees, councilsand task forces—the traditionalapproach when agencies are forcedto work together. It will require culturechange and commitment by seniorleaders, as well as investment inmanagement infrastructure.The president and the executivebranch can employ this new modelto address national public policygoals and cross-cutting federal missions,such as securing our nationand its borders, protecting our interestsabroad, ensuring food safety,sustaining economic growth and development,assuring a well-trainedand educated workforce, fosteringpublic health, facilitating internationaltrade and delivering social4 PARTNERSHIP FOR PUBLIC SERVICE | BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON