Changing bureaucratic behavior

In 1994, then-Secretary of Defense William Perry directed the military services (Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines) to begin the process of reinventing their acquisition systems and policies. One of the most important elements of the "Perry Initiatives" was the elimination of all military specifications (milspecs) and standards from use in military acquisition. At the request of the U.S.^ Army, this study examines three policy questions: (1) Is military specification and standard reform being implemented successfully by Army acquisition bureaucrats? (2) What factors or determinants affect the willingness and ability of Army acquisition employees to implement milspec and standard reform? (3) Having assessed implementation to date and understanding better what affects bureaucratic behavior, how can the Army best affect the underlying beliefs and perceptions of its personnel in order to influence behavior in support of milspec and standard reform? This study employed a theoretical model of volitional behavior called the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). A multimethod research approach was employed, using both expert interviews and a survey of Army personnel.^ Using causal modeling techniques (latent variable analysis), it was determined that reform behavior within the Army acquisition work force is determined by: (1) employee attitudes toward the reform, and (2) their perceptions of behavioral control. In addition, multiple regression analysis of these factors revealed that attitudes and control perceptions vary based on the functional perspectives of acquisition employees. Three conclusions emerged: (1) Resistant employees are less likely to believe that the elimination of milspecs and standards will result in positive programmatic outcomes; (2) resistant employees were much more likely to view training and communications efforts as inadequate; and (3) current training efforts are effective in changing underlying attitudes.^ This study presented two overarching recommendations: (1) Use and improve existing training programs; and (2) target implementation efforts to the resistant elements of the work force, focusing on changing the beliefs and perceptions important in attitude and control perception formation.