Article ID: | iaor20081874 |
Country: | United States |
Volume: | 37 |
Issue: | 3 |
Start Page Number: | 253 |
End Page Number: | 264 |
Publication Date: | May 2007 |
Journal: | Interfaces |
Authors: | Trainor Timothy E., Parnell Gregory S, Kwinn Brigitte, Brence John, Tollefson Eric, Downes Pat |
Keywords: | cost benefit analysis, decision: applications |
Senior leaders responsible for managing US Army installations asked the United States Military Academy to analyze the regional organization of the US Army's Installation Management Agency (IMA) and recommend alternatives. They wanted an analysis of IMA's use of four geographical regions to manage installations in the continental United States. We interviewed stakeholders to identify the functions of the IMA regional organization. We used decision analysis to define the potential value added of various regional alternatives by measuring how well each alternative would perform the functions. The measures captured the effectiveness and efficiency of the regional organization for each function. We then developed and evaluated several regional alternatives (one region, two regions, three regions, four regions, five regions, and eight regions). Using decision analysis, we showed that four was a reasonable number of regions to manage installations effectively. We demonstrated that decreasing the number of regions below four would significantly reduce the value regions added to installation management and increasing the number would provide little additional benefit.