Military Review English Edition January-February 2017 | Page 25

REDUCING HQDA

Sharing meeting notes with all leaders could create
support and enlist the army of volunteers that this
effort failed to achieve.
The initial reorganization research and planning
greatly benefited from the use of the support contractors. They augmented the staff, provided business
practices, and documented their findings. They were
crucial to the effort—not only for their expertise in
conducting a review, but also for serving to expand
the concepts and help move the project forward. This
need for contractor support made it apparent that
the Army lacks the specialty institutional training to
complete the art and science for an organizational redesign of this scale. This could be addressed in professional training. Army training builds deployable units,
and task-organizes for operations. However, current
training focuses on building instead of creating organizations by merging and sharing or removing existing

force structure. The Army could benefit from a greater
understanding of organizational design that focuses on
building lateral instead of hierarchical organizations
that support the rest of Department of Defense, the
joint community, and the Army.
The HQDA Comprehensive Review built a sound
design to achieve its reductions by FY 2019, along with
the rest of the Army. It enabled leaders at all levels to
redesign their organizations to effectively and efficiently meet their mission, while absorbing a mandated
25 percent personnel authorization reduction. This
comparative analysis discussed the challenges, successes, and hindrances of this dynamic and complex
effort. As the Army moves into more reductions and
the need for more innovative organizations becomes
the norm, it can benefit from looking back at this and
other previous efforts to learn from our mistakes and
to build on our successes.

Notes
1. Secretary of the Army, Memorandum for Under Secretary of
the Army, “Comprehensive Review of Headquarters, Department of
the Army (HQDA),” 17 July 2014, accessed 25 October 2016, https://
www.us.army.mil/suite/doc/43187208.
2. John Kotter, “The 8-Step Process for Leading Change,” Kotter International website, accessed 25 October 2016, http://www.
kotterinternational.com/the-8-step-process-for-leading-change/.
3. Army Regulation (AR) 10-88, Field Operating Agencies, Office
of the Chief of Staff, Army (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Publishing Office [GPO], 5 March 1990). HQDA field operating agencies
are organizations that directly support HQDA staff agencies and
principal officials. Field operating agencies are reliant on the supported unit for specific administrative functions.
4. Secretary of the Army Memorandum, “Comprehensive Review
of Headquarters, Department of the Army.”
5. Ibid.; Under Secretary of the Army and Vice Chief of Staff
of the Army Briefing, “HQDA Comprehensive Review Delayering Kickoff Meeting with HQDA Principal Officials,” 28 October
2014.
6. Secretary of the Army and Chief of Staff of the Army Memorandum for Distribution, “Focus Area Review Group Decision
Implementation,” 23 July 2014, accessed 25 October 2016, https://
www.us.army.mil/suite/doc/44288646.
7. A table of distribution and allowance is a document that
authorizes missions, equipment, and infrastructures for Army units

MILITARY REVIEW  January-February 2017

that are organized to perform specific missions and are made up of
military or civilian personnel, or a combination of both.
8. Secretary of the Army and Chief of Staff of the Army Memorandum, “Focus Area Review Group Decision Implementation.”
9. Kotter, “The 8-Step Process for Leading Change.”
10. Ibid. The design principles were approved by the under
secretary of the Army and presented at the HQDA Comprehensive
Review delayering kickoff principals meeting.
11. Harold W. Lord, ed., How the Army Runs: A Senior Leader
Reference Handbook, 2011-2012 (Carlisle, PA: U.S. Army War College,
2011), accessed 26 October 2016, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a551164.pdf. The Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and
Execution process is described in para. 4-14 and the Total Army
Analysis process is described in para. 5-16.
12. General Order 2012-01, Assignment of Functions and Responsibilities within Headquarters, Department of the Army (Washington,
DC: U.S. GPO, 11 June 2012), accessed 25 October 2016, http://
www.apd.army.mil/Search/ePubsSearch/ePubsSearchDownloadPage.
aspx?docID=0902c85180010c8d. This order assigns functions and
responsibilities to the Secretariat and Army Staff ag encies.
13. AR 71-32, Force Development and Documentation (Washington, DC: U.S. GPO, 1 July 2013), para. D-4.
14. Under Secretary of the Army and Vice Chief of Staff of the
Army Briefing, “HQDA Comprehensive Review BCG Final Report—
Project Context, Approach, and Executive Summary,” March 2015.

23