DRMI is an educational institution sponsored and supervised by the Secretary of Defense and located at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. Since 1965, DRMI has conducted professional educational programs in analytical decision making and resources management for military officers of all services and senior civilian officials of the United States and 131 other countries. These programs are presented on a regularly scheduled basis in Monterey and by specific arrangement at other locations in the United States and overseas. Since its inception DRMI has had more than 21,000 participants, including nearly 9,000 internationals.
In late 1990, the United States Congress mandated that International Military Education and Training (IMET) funds be used for more than traditional, operationally oriented military training. Specifically, the Congress identified new objectives for the program which became known as the ``Expanded IMET Initiative.'' The Initiative earmarked funds to be used specifically for training and education that would:
A key part of the legislation is a provision which allows training and education of international governmental civilian personnel of ministries other than defense. The training and education applies to senior and mid-level military officers, as well as civilians who are resource managers and/or who are in positions of leadership and influence.
The initial focus of the Initiative was on the countries of South America and Africa, especially the newly emerging democracies. This was later expanded to include the former countries of the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union. Since the implementation of the Initiative in 1991, DRMI has conducted a total of 36 courses in 25 different countries. During the last 12 months, DRMI has conducted courses in Ethiopia, Colombia, Hungary, Poland, Thailand, Jordan, El Salvador, Honduras and Venezuela. in 1996, new courses are planned for Cambodia, Malaysia, and Melanesia, along with follow-up courses in the Philippines, Colombia, Ethiopia, Romania, Honduras, and Argentina.
The principal focus of all DRMI programs is developing an understanding and appreciation of the concepts, techniques, and decision-making skills related to defense resources management. The goal of these programs is to enhance the effective allocation and use of resources in modern defense organizations. One of the most significant strengths of DRMI's educational programs is derived from the varied representationþby military service, defense agency, experience base, nation and cultureþof the participants who come together in a climate of open inquiry to examine both common and unique management situations and problems.
In view of the interdisciplinary nature of DRMI programs, a team-teaching approach is used. The primary emphasis is on analytical decision making. Each DRMI course encourages participants to develop an understanding of concepts, principles, methods and techniques drawn from management theory, economics, and quantitative reasoning. An essential goal of the courses is to retain the manager's perspective. This perspective requires the assessment of differing levels of management and the various roles of that management within a large complex organization.
Within each of these levels and roles specific management, economic, and quantitative tools may be used in improving the decision process. Ultimately, the study of decision theory and management is not for the idiosyncratic improvement of an individual manager (though that is sought) but the establishment and maintenance of a rational process for decision making.
DRMI uses an integrated series of case studies and practical exercises to make participants practice the theoretical ideas presented in lectures. Within a fictitious management structure, participants first consider the objectives, and also the limitations of action, of policy makers. At this top-level of management, participants formulate strategic long-term plans that are subject to a wide-variety of subjective and non-quantifiable concerns.
This planning stage addresses the basic tradeoffs among long-term visions and objectives. In addition to illustrating general group decision search strategies, negotiations and resolution techniques, work at this level provides a primary motivation for developing and maintaining analytical skills and methodologies within the organization. That is, in trying to address the amorphous and highly subjective tradeoffs at a strategic level, it is imperative that those elements which are identifiable, quantifiable, and analytical have been evaluated.
This top-down concern is not the only motivation; there is the additional value that having substantive quantitative analysis of alternatives, outputs, outcomes, and relationships can help to create the most important feature of analysis, the creation of new and better alternative courses of action. Furthermore, the institutionalization of quantitative decision methodologies also works to effect bottom-up improvements in the overall decision process. The most critical phase, long-range planning, attempts to answer the question of ``Why are we doing this at all?''
At a second tier, participants address the systems analysis concerns. In this stage, alternative methods are evaluated and ranked and costed. It is also important at this stage to consider the spillovers and other unintended consequences which may result from alternative courses of action. Aside from the single-minded measures of effectiveness and cost-evaluation, this level must consider disparate measures and incongruous comparisons. This is mostly highlighted by cost-effectiveness analysis and is addressed by methodologies such as the analytical hierarchy process. Although there are problems with over-quantification of decisions at this point, the additional information added by the quantitative analysis far outweighs the possible biases that are certainly introduced by measurement and combination methodologies. As a feeder to policy analysis, this level can hope at its best to identify relevant system features and costs that can be used to determine system preference, and, at the very least, to offer new and improved alternatives. As the collector of lower level analysis, this stage seeks to resolve inconsistent considerations and immeasurable concerns in evaluating cost and effectiveness tradeoffs.
At the lowest level, the brunt of quantitative decision analysis occurs. This is where the linear programs, queuing models, cost models, performance evaluations and measurements are actually carried out. The rigor of designing data collection, data management, and computation is difficult. For most managers without technical backgrounds the consideration of these issues, even in a very shallow way, subjects them to the possibility of being overwhelmed as they consider the number and incredible variety of analytical tools that can be used. While some mathematical consideration is warranted, it is important not to overwhelm managers with details to the point that they can no longer see past the technical description to its use in the organization. DRMI is trying to make its participants better consumersþif not producersþof analytical information.
DRMI has had a variety of experiences in its educational efforts abroad and, in general, has found acceptable levels of analytical preparation, especially in terms of theory. This level varies from a high in more technologically advanced countries to lesser levels in the developing world. Regardless of the level of preparation, all countries seem to be lacking in terms of their ability to apply the analytical ideas and concepts. Practical exercises and applications of analytical methods are essential and highly valued.
Obviously the study of analytical decision making implies that it ``pays to think.'' Many of the countries are just now starting their own planning. The former members of the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union had their defense planning done for them by the Soviet government in Moscow. They received strategic guidance and directives telling them what to do. Now they must look at their situation, assess and decide the tradeoffs among competing alternatives for their scarce resources.
The experience in Latin America has been varied and challenging. DRMI has worked closely with the new Honduran National Defense College since its creation in 1991. The school offers a year-long program to a mix of military and civilian leaders. DRMI has provided a two-week seminar on managing resources as part of the curriculum. In this setting, the analytical skills vary greatly and it is quite a challenge to provide a product that truly gives something of value to everyone. Focusing on the value and use of analytically derived information, rather than the production of such information, has been a key element of success.
In Colombia, DRMI has worked with a group of top level planners and decision makers in 1994 and again in 1995. Colombia has asked for additional assistance in the development and implementation of a defense planning, programming, and budgeting (PPB) system. DRMI faculty have continued to work closely with the Colombians as they move ahead with their own PPB system. The experience in Colombia is in the process of being repeated in the Philippines. The Armed Forces of the Philippines have recently established a PPB Commission to work on the development and implementation of a PPB system. DRMI will conduct a special three-week course in 1996 to help with these efforts. This course will focus on how good analysis is critical to the defense planning process in order to help ensure the defense budget is buying what a country really needs.
Most of the courses in Africa have been regional in nature, with up to ten different countries participating. These courses have served as effective forums for the presentation of basic analytical ideas and their application to the management of resources. A valuable spillover has been the provision of an open non-hostile environment for many of the countries to talk with each other.
The end of the Cold War has clearly resulted in exciting opportunities. Working with international participants for thirty years, DRMI has been able to expand its educational programs into many new countries. The analytical message is a simple one. Resources are scarce; alternative uses for these resources are abundant. It is necessary to compare and evaluate alternatives in order to make the wisest use of the resources; comparing alternatives requires an assessment of relative costs and benefits. Uncertainty is always present; systems thinking is a must. When the analysis is finished, you don't have answers or a decision. If you are lucky, you have new insights and understandings of the problem that allow for better decisions.