AFP Roadmaps: A Comparison
Introduction
Roadmaps are very important in setting the direction of every organization. But what is a roadmap? Austin (2013) defines a roadmap as a document that establishes a plan for accomplishing a particular strategic goal and describes why the goal is in place. The basic road map includes a charter, strategy and an assessment tool.
Some people believe that roadmaps or strategic plans are just hurdles to development, because they inhibit changes and discourage the organization from considering out-of-the box alternatives. Mintzberg (1994, p.180) asserts that roadmaps may inhibit creativity and do not easily handle truly creative ideas. Moreover, Mintzberg (1994, pp. 180-202) enumerated some of the negative aspects of roadmaps or strategic plans, which include the following:
a) It is very hard to ensure commitment at the top, because in some ways, strategic planning reduces executive decision-making power;
b) If misused, roadmaps might become a tool for gaining control over decisions, strategies, present or future actions, management, employees, and customers;
c) Strategic plans may just be used as a tool to "impress" "influential outsiders"; and,
d) Strategic planning dismisses intuition and favors readily available, interpretable "hard" data.
However, our group is of the submission that roadmaps or strategic plans are still very important in laying down the general direction, strategy and initiatives of the AFP, including the Major Services in their journey towards excellence and better service to the Filipino people. The Seminar Group B will support this argument by initially providing the background of the different roadmaps in the AFP, which will subsequently be followed by the comparison and contrast of the PA, PAF and PN roadmaps vis-à-vis the AFP Transformation Roadmap. Finally, the group will give its assessment to the AFP roadmaps, before laying down its summary, conclusion, implications and recommendations.
Body
Background of AFP Roadmaps.
The pioneer of AFP Roadmap is the PMA Roadmap 2015, which was promulgated in 2005. It was laid down to rationalize PMA’s efforts, activities and initiatives to facilitate the implementation of its mandated mission. The Philippine Navy followed suit with its Sail Plan 2020 in 2007. The Air Force Flight Plan 2028 (Interim) was also crafted as early as 2009, but due to some unknown reasons, it has not been formally approved/signed to date. Subsequently, the Philippine Army Transformation Roadmap was promulgated in June 2010. Likewise, the AFP started crafting its Transformation Roadmap in 2012 and it is currently a work in progress.
There are some similarities among the AFP and the various Major Services’ Strategic Plans, which can be summarized through the following:
Components. Generally, all the AFP strategic plans have corresponding Charter, Strategy Map and Assessment tools (Targets and Scorecards). Specifically, all the AFP strategic plans have their respective statements of vision, mission, core values, strategic objectives and strategic initiatives.
Strategic Objectives. While there are misaligned objectives, there are also at least three (3) major service objectives, which are unanimously aligned with the following AFPTR objectives: a) Establish a stable and peaceful security environment. b) Develop a fully mission capable joint regular and reserve forces. c) Establish a purposive personnel management system.
There are also some distinct differences among the AFP and Major Services’ Strategic Plans, which include the following:
The promulgation or publication dates: The roadmaps of the AFP were crafted separately and were not deliberately synchronized; in fact, the Philippine Navy (PN) lead the way in crafting and promulgating its service-specific Sail Plan way back in 2007. It was followed by the Philippine Air Force (PAF) in 2009 but the flight plan has not been approved as of date. In 2010, the Philippine Army (PA) published its Army Transformational Roadmap; while the AFP started crafting its own transformational roadmap in 2012 and is being pursued up to this time.
Timelines: Except for the PN, whose final timeline is on 2020, all other strategic plans adopted 2028 as their ultimate destination.
Vision, Mission & Core Values: Understandably the four strategic plans differ in their vision and mission, which is attributed to the variance in their respective specific mandates. Moreover, the AFP and its three (3) Service components had caused the adoption of distinct sets of core values. The AFP adopted Honor, Service and Patriotism whereas the PA embraced Honor, Duty and Patriotism. The PN incorporated Honor, Dedication, Patriotism, Solidarity, Leadership and Professionalism as its core values. Meanwhile, the PAF adopted virtues of Integrity, Service, Teamwork, Excellence and Professionalism.
Strategic Objectives: Notably, the major services did not unanimously adopt or align themselves with the following strategic objectives of the AFPTR:
Assessment of Strategic Plans Execution.
The execution of the AFP and Major Services’ Strategic Plans can be assessed based on the following areas or perspectives as related to the Strategy Focused Organization (SFO) of the Strategy Execution lecture:
Buy-in of Leaders. (Principle 1: Mobilize Change Through Executive Leadership). This principle requires that top leadership should be committed; however, as per experience, problems seem to abound in the execution, because new commanders don’t have the ownership of their respective roadmaps. This is aggravated by the so-called legacy syndrome of some commanders that tend to support only the programs that would be associated with their names; rendering the roadmaps vulnerable to a personality-driven agenda.
The Strategies were Translated into Operational Terms: (Principle 2: Translate Strategy Into Operational Terms) All of the AFP and Major Service Strategic Plans were translated into operational terms by developing strategic maps, creation of balanced scorecard, establishment of targets, rationalization of initiatives and assignments of accountability. The AFP and major services’ roadmaps are equipped with assessment tools that include criteria, where evaluation can be benchmarked. All AFP roadmaps have established targets and scorecards to measure performance.
Alignment of Strategy & Execution. (Principle 3: Align Organization To The Strategy) It was observed that the execution of the roadmaps are not aligned or synchronized, because the crafting of each roadmap is not coordinated. Logically, the AFP should first craft a mother roadmap from which the major services may draw cogent basis and automatically align their respective roadmaps. However, material developments disclose that the major services proceeded to craft their own before the AFP instituted efforts to adopt an AFPTR, rendering the alignment of efforts quite difficult to achieve. This principle also requires establishment and alignment of outside partners, which the PN and the PA already complied. For the PA it is the Multi-sector Advisory Board (MSAB), while in the PN it is Philippine Navy Board of Advisers (PNBA). It is surmised that the noted failure to establish the said monitoring body in the PAF and AFP is attributable to the fact that their respective roadmaps are yet to be approved.
Absence of Rewards and Punishment System. (Principle 4: Motivate To Make Strategy Everyone’s Job.) One of the main weaknesses of many roadmaps is the fact that no established institution executes the accountability of those who fall short in their efforts to properly implement the plan; and to give due recognition to those who effectively implement them by way of an incentive. That is the main reason why many roadmaps had dismally failed to achieve their goals on time as demonstrated by the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) experience. Although strategic awareness had been adequately imparted through advocacy, the overall effort failed to factor the value of a reward system that could motivate those who respond to the daunting challenge posed by an effective implementation of these plans.
Resource Intensive. (Principle 5: Govern To Make Strategy A Continual Process). Although, there are reiterative reporting systems in place and strategic management offices established with review meetings being regularly set, everything will still boil down to the fundamental issue of resources. Lack of resources necessarily impacts on strategies and eventually restricts the pursuit and effective execution of such strategies. The 5th principle of SFO requires the integration of strategy and budget; however, while there are strategic objectives that won’t require fund support, the insatiable grandeur of all the visions indicated, necessitates gargantuan amount of resources to support the same. Since the AFP is not a revenue generating agency, it would be largely dependent and reliant on how much the national government allocates for the AFP. Given this predicament, sustainability can be hard to achieve at this point in time.
Conclusion
Summary
In sum, this essay makes one decent attempt to compare and contrast the four roadmaps of the AFP and the major services. Although the PAF and the AFP roadmaps are not yet approved, we can see a lot of similarities in terms of general components and certain strategic objectives. Likewise, the four roadmaps have also distinct differences, to include the publication dates, vision, mission, core values, timelines and majority of strategic objectives.
Additionally, this essay made an assessment on the execution of the roadmaps, vis-à-vis the five (5) principles of Strategy Focused Organization (SFO). The assessment tackled the issues on buy-in of leaders, translation of strategies to operational terms, alignment of strategy and execution, incentives and sanctions and finally resource intensive nature of the strategic plans.
Conclusion and Implications
This essay therefore concludes that while there are certain similarities obtaining from among the four (4) roadmaps in the AFP, there are also many differences in terms of structure and substance. Likewise the group concludes that some serious challenges in the execution of these plans must be adequately addressed. These conclusions imply that, indeed, roadmaps are complicated tools that must be given due attention in order to allow their effective and smooth implementation.
Recommendations
Based from the above discussions, conclusions and implications, Seminar Group B strongly recommends the following:
All the roadmaps of the Major Services should be reviewed and be deliberately aligned with the AFP Transformation Roadmap in order to maintain logic and synchronization of efforts.
The AFP should be allowed to generate additional funds to support its strategic initiatives through the following: a) Send more units and personnel to perform United Nation (UN) Peacekeeping duties, availing of UN refund to modernize and upgrade AFP capabilities. b) Intensify Self Reliant Defense Posture (SRDP) through aggressive development, support, patronage and market of local defense inventions, innovations and industry.
Establish rational system of sanctions to those who failed to execute the Roadmap and a reward system for those who successfully executed the Roadmaps.
Buy-in and extensive knowledge of the unit roadmaps should be considered as one of the criteria in selecting new commanders.
References
AFP (2012). AFP Transformational Roadmap 2028. (Unpublished). Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, J5, AFP. Quezon City.
Austin, S.N. (2013). How to Create a Strategic Road Map. Retrieved from www.ehow.com/how_5163040_create-strategic-road-map.html on 13 August 2013.
Lerner, A.L. (1999). Strategic Planning. Research Associate. College of Business Administration and Economics, California State University, Northridge. Retrieved from http://intranet.onec.go.th/world_ed/limitations.html on 15 August 2013.
Mintzberg, H. (1994). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Philippine Army (2010). Army Transformation Roadmap 2028. Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs, G5 Philippine Army. Quezon City.
Philippine Navy (2007). PN Sail Plan 2020. Center for Naval Leadership and Excellence, Philippine Navy. Manila.
Philippine Air Force (2009). PAF Flight Plan 2028 (Unpublished) Office of the Assistant Chief of Air Staff for Plans and Programs, A5, Philippine Air Force. Pasay City.
...
