www.ngs.edu | 800.838.

2580
 HSM 700bl – Principles and
Applications in Homeland
Security & Defense
Module 4:
HS&D Performance Measures & Targets & QSM Applications (Benchmarking, HS&D Six
Sigma Analysis, HS&D Metric Development), HS&D Intra-agency Cooperation,
Coordination, Communication & Measuring Success
This material is protected by United States copyright laws. You must treat this publication like any other proprietary
material. No part of this material may be copied, photocopied, reproduced, translated, or reduced to any electronic
medium by individuals or organizations outside of the National Graduate School without prior written consent from
the National Graduate School. For information, please call 800.838.2580 or visit www.ngs.edu.
 Process of the Benchmarking Class
Module
1

Understand “process” of benchmarking:

Secondary vs. Primary; Internal vs. External; Strategic, and Operational
“Fast Cycle Benchmarking”

Organize for benchmarking, plan for secondary benchmarking; Module

using library and electronic resources and APA Style; Benchmarking 2
Code of Conduct

Reach out; Apply “Creative Benchmarking;” Module

Continued planning for benchmarking 3

Complete Secondary Benchmarking,

Review Integron case study; design Module
data collection instrument 4

Present plan for Primary

Benchmarking Module5
and
6-Jan-09 beyond 3
 Benchmarks
 Benchmark:
– “A standard of excellence or achievement against which
other products or services can be measured and
compared.”
– Can be used to spur exploration into reasons for
differences, to motivate planning and implementation of
changes, and to seek continuous improvement.
– Typically, there is not one benchmark, but a set of
benchmarks or measurements for a product or service.
Those metrics can be used to compare a best process,
product, or service to your own.

6-Jan-09 4
 Benchmarking
 Benchmarking:
– “A method for identifying, analyzing, and using
information and experience of other organizations in
order to improve your own business processes,
products, or services.”
– Note that benchmarking can lead to benchmarks, but the
latter
metrics can also result from routine reporting in
an industry, such as cost per unit or revenue per
dollar spent.

6-Jan-09 5
 Benchmarking
Basic Benchmarking Definitions

 Primary Benchmarking -- Comparison of one or

more of an organization’s processes directly with
another organization.
 Secondary Benchmarking -- Information about
a best practice obtained through a review of
literature or using a third party as a resource.

6-Jan-09 6
 Benchmarking
Sources of Benchmarking Data
 Internal -- Comparisons of processes, products, or
services with others within the same organization.
 Competitive -- Products, services and processes of
competitors compared with the organization’s operations
data.
 Functional -- Focus on practices of a specific type
(marketing/manufacturing) not necessarily specific to the
company/organization’s industry. Cross-industry
comparisons.
 Generic -- Comparison of processes with those of a world-
class company not part of the same industry, but with
similar processes.

6-Jan-09 7
 Types of Benchmarking
 Operational – Comparison of a work process or
functional area to determine enablers or best
practices
 Strategic – Strategies used by organizations
(strategic plan). An example would be the
innovative ideas from any of the seven Baldrige
categories, or a company’s continuous
improvement targets.

6-Jan-09 8
 NGS Model for Benchmarking…
Drivers 1.0 Launch 2.0 Organize for 3.0 Reach Out 4.0 Assimilate the 5.0 Act on the
Investigations into Benchmarking Information Information
Possibilities

Initiation team Benchmarking project team operates here

operates here

Strategic Identify customers’ Determine Analyze the primary

Define the needs performance data Seek agreement
planning opportunity or measures of interest among all involved
problem in the changes
Analyze process flow Analyze the Compare
and metrics secondary data performance levels,
Target the process present and future
or the function Plan the
Continuous implementation
process
Identify process Select organization Target new
improvement
inputs and outputs to benchmark performance levels
efforts
Enlist sponsors and and compare to
mgmt support earlier objectives Implement
Collect baseline Develop survey
data or interview guide

Select the project Analyze processes

Operations Monitor and
team Develop hypotheses Develop plan for and practices of
performance adjust as needed
to investigate by collecting primary partner organization
review
benchmarking data

Conduct secondary Conduct primary Develop

Observations
benchmarking benchmarking recommendations
of other Set expectations for change
companies
spur ideas
Benchmarking Full benchmarking plan Comparative Recommended Implementation
Deliverables Team Charter analysis improvement

6-Jan-09 9
 Force Field Analysis
 Force Field Analysis is a method for listing, discussing,
and evaluating the various forces for and against a
proposed change.
 When a change is planned, Force Field Analysis helps
you look at the big picture by analyzing all of the forces
impacting the change and weighing the pros and cons.
 By knowing the pros and cons, you can develop
strategies to reduce the impact of the opposing forces
and strengthen the supporting forces.

6-Jan-09 10
 Force Field Analysis
 Forces that help you achieve the change are called
"driving forces."
 Forces that work against the change are called
"restraining forces."
 Force Field Analysis can be used to develop an action
plan to implement a change. Specifically it can . . .
1.Determine if a proposed change can get needed
support
2.Identify obstacles to successful solutions
3.Suggest actions to reduce the strength of the
obstacles

6-Jan-09 11
Rationale for Using Force Field Analysis
 Indentifies forces/factors that:
1. support change
2. work against change

 So that:
1. Positives can be reinforced
2. Negatives can be eliminated or reduced

6-Jan-09 12
Reasons for Using Force Field Analysis

 Provides comparison of positives and negatives

 Illustrates all factors influencing change

 Provides method to identify priorities for/against

change

 Stimulates discussion about the “real” problem and

how to solve it.

6-Jan-09 13
 Steps in Using Force Field Analysis

1. Write out the change issue

2. Brainstorm the reasons why people/organizations/etc.

will be for/against the change

3. Prioritize:
1. Issues that can be strengthened
2. Issues that, if removed/mitigated, would create the greatest
acceptance of the change.

6-Jan-09 14
 What does it look like?
Issue: _____________________

+ -

6-Jan-09 15
 Measuring Progress
 Progress may be defined differently by terrorists.
 In a search for meaningful measurement criteria,
measurements need to be clearly defined and
linked to goals and objectives.
 Existing methodologies for measuring progress in
combating complex social phenomena such as
drug trafficking and crime provide solid examples
for HS&D Metrics.

6-Jan-09 16
 Framework for Measurement:
Incidents
 Past measurements included “Number of attacks”.
 In attempting to measure incidents, some in the United
States tend to define success in familiar ways: body
counts and numbers.
 A common pitfall is overreliance on quantitative data at the
expense of its qualitative significance.
 In previous years’ Patterns of Global Terrorism reports,
incidents were counted equally without regard to their
broader impact.

6-Jan-09 17
 Framework for Measurement:
Incidents
 To the degree that terrorist constituencies are not from
western cultures, their mindsets may not necessarily place
a premium on quantification metrics, but rather on other
values such as religious precepts, or honor or revenge.
 Western policymakers often tend to define success by the
absence of attacks.
 Terrorists sometimes define success in terms of making
governments expend limited resources trying to defend an
enormous number of potential targets.

6-Jan-09 18
 Framework for Measurement:
Attitudes
 Attitudes drive both terrorism and the world’s response to
terrorism.
 Shaping attitudes to break or weaken the political will to combat
terrorism is a central terrorist goal and an important indicator of
success or failure.
 Terrorists often see success as breaking their opponents’ will.
 They want the public to push governments to adopt policies of
appeasement to force governments to spend beyond their means
and to become increasingly oppressive and draconian towards
their own populace.
 They may see public opinion concerning anti-terrorism policies as
an Achilles heel, counting on protracted reaction of protest.

6-Jan-09 19
 Framework for Measurement:
Attitudes
 Attitudinal criteria include:
(1) Negative psychological or behavioral impact of terrorism
on a society.
(2) Loss of public confidence in governments, or in their
security measures
(3) The degree to which terrorists are able to radicalize and
polarize Islam against the West and vice versa
(4) The level of anti-American or anti-Western sentiments,
and (5) the level of religious bigotry in countries which are
breeding grounds for terrorists.

6-Jan-09 20
 Framework for Measurement:
Attitudes
 Attitudes drive both terrorism and the world’s response to
terrorism.
 Shaping attitudes to break or weaken the political will to
combat terrorism is a central terrorist goal and an
important indicator of success or failure.
 Terrorists often see success as breaking their opponents’
will.
 They want the public to push governments to adopt
policies of appeasement to force governments to spend
beyond their means and to become increasingly
oppressive and draconian towards their own populace.

6-Jan-09 21
Framework for Measurement: Trends
 Trends are changes of incidents, attitudes and other
factors, over time.
 Measurement of trends is particularly relevant with regard
to trends in terrorist infrastructure.
 Is their leadership being weakened; is their recruitment
base, network, or target list growing?
 Relevant also are intentions (tactical and strategic goals).
Have the intentions of a movement or group changed and
if so are they more or less radical — more or less focused
on causing widespread damage?

6-Jan-09 22
Framework for Measurement: Trends
 Capabilities are important as well. What are the capabilities
of a terrorist group to inflict serious damage? Are they
increasing or decreasing?
 Other trends that might be measured include are:
(1) The number of governments that do not embrace
appeasement policies,
(2) The number of defectors from the terrorist ranks
(3) The terrorists’ levels of Internet activity
(4) The amount of media coverage they receive
(5) The number of supporters and recruits they gain.

6-Jan-09 23
 Measuring HS&D Performance
 Performance is fundamentally measured by a
positive change in the problem you are aiming to
address.
 From a client perspective, change is defined by a
measurable improvement in client knowledge,
skills, behavior, or condition.

6-Jan-09 24
 Measuring HS&D Performance
 Performance Measure: This is an indicator, statistic, or
metric used to gauge program performance and assess
progress in meeting the program performance goal, and
in turn, the objectives and goals of the Department.
 Performance Target: A target is the projected level of
performance for each performance measure during a
fiscal year. A target is a quantifiable or measurable
characteristic that communicates how well or at what
level a program aspires to perform.

6-Jan-09 25
 Measuring HS&D Performance
 Performance Result: A result is the actual level
of performance for each performance measure
achieved during a fiscal year. Results are
compared to targets to determine how well actual
performance measured up to that which was
planned.

6-Jan-09 26
Building a Performance Measurement
System

6-Jan-09 27
 Performance Measurement
Framework
 Program Design. If you haven’t already, now’s the time to
articulate the client needs that your program is trying to
address and your program’s goals.
 Performance Measurement Framework. If you’re starting
from scratch, start backwards with the outcomes, followed
by determining the activities you think you need to achieve
those results.
 If you’re starting with an existing program, then work
through current practice to document what you are
currently doing and its impact.
 Revise current practice if you are not satisfied with the
results you document.

6-Jan-09 28
 Lean Definition
 Lean is defined as a management approach that seeks to
maximize value to customers, both internal and external,
while simultaneously removing wasteful activities and
practices.
 It is based on the management system used at Toyota
Motor Corporation, with Shigeo Shingo and Taiichi Ohno
generally considered to be its architects.
 Womack, Jones, and Roos in a worldwide study of
automobile manufacturing, used the term “lean” to
describe the activities that seek to minimize waste, such
as excess inventory and defective products.

6-Jan-09 29
 Lean Definition
 Their study concluded that Lean was preferable to “mass
production” prominent in the United States and Europe.
 Lean manufacturing gradually found its way in the
mainstream jargon during the mid to late 1990s.

6-Jan-09 30
 Six Sigma
 Six Sigma can be defined as a management approach that
seeks to maximize profits by systematically applying
scientific principles to reduce variation and thus eliminate
defects in product and service offerings.
 Six Sigma has evolved into a comprehensive management
system. Many practitioners, however, continue to view Six
Sigma as a set of techniques that promote variance
reduction.

6-Jan-09 31
 Six Sigma
 Six Sigma projects are formalized and highly structured,
making use of scientific approaches in the selection and
management of projects.
 Six Sigma projects use a DMAIC structure, considered by
many practitioners to be the primary reason for Six
Sigma’s success. DMAIC enforces a high degree of
discipline and commonality in project organization,
problem-solving tools, software, and terminology.

6-Jan-09 32
 Six Sigma Processes
 Six Sigma is the constant striving to take what you
are doing today and improve it.
 Can Six Sigma be used for improving security and
emergency management? Yes it can.
 One must start with the DMAIC process taught
within Six Sigma as a disciplined approach to
project management.
 DMAIC stands for, Define, Measure, Analyze,
Improve, and Control.

6-Jan-09 33
 Lean Six Sigma
 Lean Six Sigma encompasses many common
features of Lean and Six Sigma, such as an
emphasis on customer satisfaction, a culture of
continuous improvement, the search for root
causes, and comprehensive employee
involvement.
 In each case, a high degree of training and
education takes place, from upper management to
the Programmatic operations.

6-Jan-09 34
 Lean Six Sigma Processes

6-Jan-09 35
 LSS & Security Processes

6-Jan-09 36
 HS&D & Cross Jurisdictional
Coordination
 Domestic preparedness relies on cross-
jurisdictional and cross-professional
cooperation and coordination between
agencies, non-governmental private, and
non-for-profit organizations, and levels of
government that are not accustomed to
working together.

6-Jan-09 37
 HS&D & CS Coordination
 HS&D and CS mission areas require detailed
planning and interagency coordination to
develop operational relationships with other
federal departments and agencies.
 In certain circumstances DOD’s dependence
on non-DOD organizations, information,
assets and infrastructures could be critical in
the accomplishment of HD as well as CS
mission areas.

6-Jan-09 38
6-Jan-09 39
 PDD-56 Interagency Coordination
Tools
 Executive Committee (ExComm) provides unified
planning guidance and improves day-to-day crisis
management.
 Political-Military Implementation Plan (Pol-Mil Plan)
lays out a coordinated multi-dimensional strategy to
achieve mission success.
 Interagency Rehearsal refines mission area plans to
achieve unity of effort.
 Interagency After-Action Review assesses interagency
planning efforts and captures lessons for dealing with
future complex emergencies.

6-Jan-09 40
 PDD-56 Interagency Coordination
Tools
 Interagency Training creates a cadre of officials familiar
with improved interagency management and establishes
working relationships among key offices across the
interagency to strengthen overall interagency readiness.

6-Jan-09 41
 Interagency Assessment Components
 Collecting relevant information about what
happened during the planning, execution, and
transition phases of the operation
 Analyzing the information and determining useful
lessons to be learned distributing those lessons
throughout the interagency
 Integrating critical lessons into policies and
procedures so they can help improve interagency
operations during the next crisis.

6-Jan-09 42
 Interagency Collaboration Practices
 Agree on roles and responsibilities, including leadership.
 Establish compatible policies, procedures, and other
means to operate across agency boundaries, including
compatible standards and data systems, and communicate
frequently to address such matters as cultural differences.
 Develop mechanisms to monitor, evaluate, and report on
the results of the collaborative effort.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0615.pdf

6-Jan-09 43
 Interagency Collaboration Practices
 Collaboration can be broadly defined as any joint activity
that is intended to produce more public value than could
be produced when organizations act alone. Agencies can
enhance and sustain their collaborative efforts by
engaging the following practices:
 Define and articulate a common outcome.
 Establish mutually reinforcing or joint strategies designed
to help align activities, core processes, and resources to
achieve a common outcome.
 Identify and address needs by leveraging resources to
support the common outcome and, where necessary,
opportunities to leverage resources.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0615.pdf

6-Jan-09 44
 Interagency Collaboration Practices
 Reinforce agency accountability for collaborative efforts by using
strategic and annual performance plans to establish complementary
goals and strategies and by using performance reports to account for
results.
 Reinforce individual accountability for collaborative efforts through
performance management systems by identifying competencies
related to collaboration and setting performance expectations for
collaboration.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d0615.pdf

6-Jan-09 45
 Communication, Cooperation,
Collaboration Relationships
 Collaboration involves a group of independent individuals or organizations
working together to achieve a common purpose directly or indirectly affecting
output or outcomes or other goals.
 This working together involves varying degrees of integration or sharing of
functions and can be described according to the intensity of the relationships.
 Collaboration requires each partner to give up some autonomy in the “interests of
mutual gain or outcomes.
 True collaboration involves actual changes in agency, group, or individual
behavior to support collective goals or ideals.

(Corbett & Noyes, 2008)

6-Jan-09 46
 MITRE Multi-Agency Full Readiness
Model

6-Jan-09 47
 MITRE Multi-Agency Full Readiness
Model: Operational Coordination

6-Jan-09 48
 MITRE Multi-Agency Full Readiness
Model: Operational Cooperation

6-Jan-09 49
 MITRE Multi-Agency Full Readiness
Model: Operational Collaboration

6-Jan-09 50
 MITRE Activity Readiness Model

6-Jan-09 51
 Module 4 Reading Requirement
 Instructor’s Module/Week 4 PPT presentation.
 Kamien, D. (2006) the McGraw-Hill Homeland Security
Handbook. McGraw-Hill Publishing. New York, N.Y.
Chapter 71,16,18 p. 283-296.
 U.S. Department of Homeland Security (2008), Strategic
Plan Fiscal Years 2008–2013: One Team, One Mission,
Securing Our Homeland, Washington D.C. p. 26-28.
 Six Sigma And The Security Plan, Jack Freson, Sigma
Team Solutions, LLC Associate of: Six Sigma Security,
Inc.

6-Jan-09 52
 Module 4 Reading Requirement
 Perl, R. (2007) Combating Terrorism: The Challenge of
Measuring Effectiveness. CRS Report for Congress,
Congressional Research Service, Washington D.C.
 Mayleff, J. (2007) Improving Service Delivery in
Government with Lean Six Sigma.
 Freson, J. (2008), Six Sigma and the Security Plan, Sigma
Team Solutions. Retrieved from website:
www.sixsigmasecurity.us

6-Jan-09 53
 Module 4 Reading Requirement
 Instructor’s Module/Week 4 PPT presentation.
 Sowell, P., Reedy, M., Hailegiorghis, M. (2005) MITRE
Technical Report: Application of a Readiness Model for
Multi-Agency Interaction, Center for Enterprise
Modernization, McLean, VA.
 National Security Council (1997) Handbook for
Interagency Management of Complex Contingency
Operations, Washington D.C.

6-Jan-09 54
 Team Assignment
 Develop and establish a Benchmark for the
Project recommendation and proposal.
 Develop Key Performance Metrics to be used for
evaluation.
 Produce and submit PPT slide 7 (Benchmark &
Key Performance Metrics) and submit into
Blackboard Digital Drop Box.

6-Jan-09 55
 Team Assignment
 Develop an implementation methodology that
defines how the proposed recommendation will be
implemented into the overall process.
 Develop an Evaluation and Measures of Success
Criterion that describes how the proposed
recommendation will be evaluated using the metrics,
and measured to determine success criteria.
 Produce and submit slides 8 (Implementation
Methodology) and 9 (Evaluation and Measures of
Success Criterion), and submit into Blackboard
Digital Drop Box.

6-Jan-09 56
 Individual Essay Questions
 Individual Essay Question 1: Does the DHS
Performance Management Framework provide a
substantial enough methodology to measure
effectiveness and success for today’s HS&D
challenges?

6-Jan-09 57
 Individual Essay Questions
 Individual Essay Question 2: Discuss the
necessity of Inter and Intra-agency Cooperation,
Coordinate and Communication as a viable
component of HS&D operations.
 Does the Mitre Full Readiness Model for Multi-
Agency Interaction provide a sound model for
HS&D agencies to measure success for
Cooperation, Coordination, and Communication?
 Justify response.

6-Jan-09 58
Please Complete the Blackboard
Requirements for This Module
Before Moving to Module Five