Background
TARDEC is the US Army’s Tank-Automotive
Research, Development, and Engineering
Center, located in Warren, Michigan.
TARDEC serves as the Army’s R&D facility
for military ground vehicles and their associ-
ated integration and logistics. TARDEC’s
team structure and quality journey traces
back to October 1989, with then-TARDEC
Director Dr Kenneth Oscar and his manage-
ment team. This team was determined to re-
establish TARDEC as the premier world
automotive technology research centre. Dr
Oscar was at the helm of TARDEC during the
world-changing events involving the Berlin
Wall and the Soviet Union. Dr Oscar did what
every textbook said to do but what many
managers fail to do – he led. At a time of crisis
and major change, employees want someone
to help lead them out of the crisis by providing
strategic direction and resources to support
that direction. Oscar crafted a vision to propel
TARDEC into the twenty-first century
through the development of ground vehicle
technologies that have dual use – military and
civilian. TARDEC’s employees, referred to as
associates, trusted Oscar to enhance the
probability of TARDEC’s survival. Oscar’s
successors have continued the momentum
towards the vision. This article briefly
describes TARDEC’s experiences in moving
towards a team-based organization.
TARDEC’s quality moves fell in line with
top-down efforts beginning with the President
of the USA, the US Secretary of Defense, and
the Army Material Command (AMC). The
AMC, which oversees TARDEC, had
embraced the transformation to a customer-
driven culture.
TARDEC in 1990 paralleled the military
chain of command. Eight levels of bureau-
cracy effectively served to stifle innovation,
compartmentalize employees and their tal-
ents, distance the employee from the cus-
tomer, and centralize power at the top, all in
the name of effective decision making. Serv-
ing the soldier in the field was done on
TARDEC’s timetable, although strings were
pulled and ways were found to go around
barriers when the need was critical, but these
barriers made everyone’s work more difficult
and stressful than it already was.
When visited by the National Science
Board for a peer review, TARDEC’s engineers
and scientists were found to be unclear as to
260
The TQM Magazine
Volume 9 · Number 4 · 1997 · pp. 260–264
© MCB University Press · ISSN 0954-478X
Case studies
Delayering in a US Army
R&D organization
Larry A. Mallak and
Pame S. Watts
The authors
Larry A. Mallakis Assistant Professor and Co-Director,
Engineering Management Research Laboratory, Depart-
ment of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering,
Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA.
Pame S. Wattsis Team Leader, Quality and Re-engineering,
US Army Tank-Automotive Research, Development, and
Engineering Center (TARDEC), Warren, Michigan, USA.
Abstract
Delayering has spread to the public sector with the US
Army going to a team-based structure in one of its R&D
organizations. This organization has wrestled with many
issues concerning team effectiveness, quality manage-
ment, and customer satisfaction during this delayering
process. Beginning with eight management levels, the
organization went to three levels and later back to five
levels. Summarizes their experience, including data from
an employee survey conducted after the delayering to
assess satisfaction with the new structure and to help in
improving the overall effectiveness of the organization.