These planning tools can be effective in streamlining the decision-making processes involved in any type of public program. The decisions, of course, remain the responsibility of the authorized officials, but the facts required to arrive at these decisions can be made more readily available and useful.

Other types of management techniques developed recently are concerned with the control of complex programs during their implementation. These management tools are identified by such acronyms as PERT, PERT/Cost, PAR, and many others. Basically they can be described as near real-time computer-based information systems, such as those being developed in New York State, which provide the feedback information on program activities that is necessary to quickly isolate problem areas for prompt management action. These techniques have been proven in some of our largest weapon system developments such as the Polaris and Minuteman ballistic missile systems. They now need to be studied as they relate to public programs in the nondefense area, where success involves a large human and social element rather than the hardware-oriented output of the defense and space fields.

THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

Overriding all of this is the question of an optimum organization-both at the public and private level-to accomplish effective system planning and implementation. This question of organization leads logically to a Commission review of the appropriate relationships between and among several overlapping systems and the demands thus placed on intergovernmental coordination at the Federal, State, and local levels.

Should there be a program manager responsible for all activities in a given problem area and organizationally located in one level of the several State and local jurisdictions which may be involved? Or should the responsibilities be divided among several jurisdictional authorities? In either case, should an industrial prime systems contractor be hired on a turnkey basis? Or should the systems management responsibility reside within the Government, with major pieces of the job given to several associate contractors? These and many other questions need studying to determine the best of the multitude of systems management techniques for use in any given situation.

The geographic boundaries and historic charters that once created obvious administrative divisions are no longer of central importance. For example, the problem of pollution in the Merrimac River is one involving at least two States and several local communities. They must find new means for working together to solve this problem, irrespective of jurisdictional lines.

Functional interests have already been the foundation for hundreds of new governmental units: agencies and boards to run airports and ports, to administer reservoirs, to build highways and to educate children. The resident of Boston is governed not only by the city government, but by the Massachusetts Port Authority, the Metropolitan District Commission, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, and a plethora of other boards and commissions. An awareness of these revolutions in jurisdictional authority must be included in any thorough analysis of government's partnership in public programs.

We are all aware of the problems which can arise when two programs or two levels of government, in pursuit of separate but somewhat overlapping objectives, proceed with tunnel vision toward their respective goals. This situation arises on the national level as well as on the local leve. The need for intersystem management to coordinate such efforts is apparent, but the optimum methods for accomplishing it need to be determined.

One source which can be tapped to assist in this endeavor is the wealth of experience in the systems approach residing within those Federal research and development agencies involved in the Nation's defense and space effort. There is a need to determine how the other Federal administrative agencies and State and local governments can best expose their own personnel to this experience by cross-training programs with the Department of Defense and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. There are attempts now being made to accomplish some of this interagency transfer of system's experience. For example, the Institute for Defense Analysis and the Department of Defense have developed the defense systems analysis education program. Officer and civilian personnel from the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the CIA are receiving training by IDA and University of Maryland personnel in an effort to fill the need for decisionmarkers skilled in systems management tech

niques. The stimulus of a national commission investigating the opportunities and procedures for transfer would be most welcome in encouraging and advancing this trend for nondefense agencies.

GOVERNMENT-INDUSTRY RELATIONSHIPS

Another area for Commission study would most certainly involve an appraisal of the proper relationships between the various levels of government and the private sector. The question of the proper balance between public and private investment must receive careful analysis. The level of governmental activity will vary with each class of problems and it is doubtful that the approach that satisfies one class will be useful in another. The Commission would be expected to recommend the best means for stimulating private investment wherever possible. Conversely, where direct Government investment is necessary, the Commission would provide suggested guidelines for the proper balance between Federal and local funds.

As we proceed past the initial phases in the application of the systems approach to public problems, it will become more important to use the best possible techniques for supporting private industry. The possibilities include several types of modern contracting methods, such as incentives and award fees; and various other financial transactions to stimulate private effort, such as loans, tax incentives, and cost allowances. Also needed is an analysis of which level of government is best qualified to handle the end funding and with what control from other authorities. It is likely that different procedures will be suited to different situations. It is quite possible that the Commission's efforts can lead to better methods than have yet been devised for solving the procurement problem.

INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS CAPABILITY

Along with study of the applicability of the systems approach and the Government relationship to systems, management, the Commission can investigate the requirements which will be placed on private industry-both in aerospace and nonaerospace companies. It is highly probable that even those aerospace companies with the most experience with the systems approach will find that the application of this approach to new kinds of public problems is different from their past experience. The California studies have shown that the systems approach is feasible, but that its application requires a certain amount of experimentation to determine the best way to proceed. In other words, the systems approach cannot be transferred directly from the aerospace environment to socioeconomic concerns without some modification and a learning process by all those involved.

In fact, the review of these studies by the California Department of Finance points out many problems which require further study. Systems analysts from the aerospace industry are used to working for large, rich, monolithic organizations. State or local agencies, and even the Federal agencies concerned with socioeconomic problems, must operate with limited budgets which cannot readily be expanded beyond estimates. Changes in legal authority and in budgets and procurement regulations may be required.

In the aerospace context, the value of a system is usually well defined in terms of capability versus dollars. But in government these values may be less clear. The value of murder prevention or a 50-percent reduction in air pollution is difficult to define quantitatively.

The California evaluations also noted weaknesses in certain broad areas common to each study. There was a feeling that conclusions were perhaps too positive for the brief nature of the studies and the size of the problems. There was a feeling that some of the ideas presented were imaginative and appealing and very probably workable, but not totally and adequately proven. In some cases, the cost factors for implementing the presented recommendations were considered inadequate. There was concern that many of the legal and political problems in implementing the recommendations had been slighted. It was found that the establishment of criteria for the evaluation of any activity was extremely difficult and frequently highly arbitrary. Similarly, the analysis of methods of evaluation against these criteria was often inadequate. A potentially serious problem is that of communication between the systems oriented scientists and the specialists in the substantive areas. It was found that

scientists and engineers whose background is in military culture and hard sciences often find it difficult to communicate with those steeped in social, economic, political, and behavioral sciences.

These points are mentioned not to degrade in any way the notable success of the California studies and the excellent jobs done by the aerospace companies involved. They do emphasize, however, the need to iron out some of the natural problems of transition from one frame of reference to another.

ROLE OF SMALL BUSINESS

An important area for investigation is the role of small business in the solution of public problems. It is clear that the industrial teams required for implementation of these socioeconomic systems will not be made up entirely from big industry. The unique talents of small business will be required as much here as they have been in the development and deployment of weapon and space systems. Yet to be determined, however, are the specific contributions which small business can make, and even more importantly, how they can best be brought into the scheme of things.

An excellent example of one of the approaches which has already been taken in this area is a recent executive seminar entitled "The Management of Growth and Technological Change," conducted by Northeastern University and Harbridge House and sponsored jointly by the Small Business Administration, the Department of Defense, and the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. This seminar provided a forum for 30 corporate executives, representing small technically based firms in the Boston area, to explore, by means of case studies, the experiences of firms which had responded successfully to drastic changes in their product markets. The seminar also highlighted the management techniques involved in analyzing corporate capabilities, market prospects, and the development and execution of a strategic plan for growth. Even more importantly, it served to stimulate the collection and analysis of data by the participating firms and the development of a plan for individual company growth. The program was so successful that Northeastern University is now undertaking additional case studies for use in future seminars.

The Commission could undertake an expansion of this seminar concept in cooperation with universities throughout the country. Its findings can provide an important service to the small business segment of our economy as it strives to keep pace with rapidly moving technology.

In addition, these findings can be expected to speed the adoption of modern systems analysis and management techniques by smaller companies in nonaerospace industries, so that they too will be capable of attacking public problems using the systems approach. We would expect the final Commission report to be a highly educational monograph which can be used by these companies and, in the field.

LABOR PARTICIPATION

We consider it most important that organized labor play a significant role in the activities of the Commission. There will be many questions to answer concerning the requirement for retraining and relocation of the labor force in response to the application of new technology and modern management in public programs. Other groups, such as the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, have studied this area, but more effort is required. We must insure that the high productivity and capability of this Nation's labor force is utilized as efficiently as possible in any of our planning for the future. For in the end, no matter how good our scientific and management tools may be, it is the worker who digs the holes, lays the bricks, and connects the wires which give any project its final form.

USING UNIVERSITY RESOURCES

The university community can also participate in and contribute to this endeavor in several important ways. A number of colleges and universities are already offering courses and degree programs in operations research, and business and engineering administration programs reflect the emphasis on new management techniques. The number of data processing complexes in the universities has nearly doubled in the past 3 years. In fact, the requests of the 36 colleges and universities seeking assistance under the National Science

Foundation computing facilities program totaled $14,664,316 for fiscal year 1966. The effectiveness of these programs should certainly be a subject for careful study by the Commission.

In addition, there is an obligation to utilize the intellectual resources of the university in both an objective determination of the problems suitable for investigation and in the applicability of the various management techniques to these problems. This will provide the universities with an important opportunity to gain intimate knowledge of the real problems confronting the managers of public programs. This knowledge will enable the universities to prepare future generations of managers through revision of current curricula and addition of new courses. One educator has called for the development of "highly qualified generalists-men able to correlate knowledge in different fields in a meaningful and predictable way. Furthermore, there is a logical argument that engineering is now taught backwards," producing specialists in various technical disciplines instead of graduates with "broad systems understanding” which puts business, engineering, economic, social, and other problems in perspective.

To counteract this tendency, the Commission could study the feasibility of Government cooperation in establishing or encouraging the formation of interdisciplinary groups within the university which would combine the study of all aspects of current and future public sector problems.

COMMISSION OPERATION

With these and many more questions and issues to study and investigate, the Commission should have a busy and fruitful existence. The Commission would conduct a full schedule of hearings, receiving testimony from the recognized experts in the systems field representing all segments of our society. It could draw on the advice of consultants as required, and could contract directly with private organizations to conduct more detailed studies of certain specific subjects, if this were deemed necessary. In addition, it would be appropriate for the Commission to sponsor one or more seminars in order to stimulate informal discussion and help to generate additional support from both public and private leaders. The seminars could be held on a geographic or functional basis.

At the end of the first year, or definition phase, the Commission will have completed its preliminary analysis of the subject and prepared an interim report for submission to the President and Congress. This report will include a precise description of the problems to which the Commission is addressing itself, a preliminary analysis of the applicability of various systems analysis and management techniques to these problems, and a detailed plan for a continuing study leading up to the final report to be submitted 18 months later.

This final report will contain explicit plans, including completed case examples, for applying particular systems analysis and management procedures to specific public problems. These plans would contain estimates of cost, staffing requirements, schedule, skills required, and other hard data for each application, so that any government agency at the Federal, State, or local level would have ready access to usable guidelines. In addition, the Commission's final report would be expected to contain recommendations for legislation, Federal executive action, and State and local governmental action in order to better facilitate the application of modern technology and systems analysis to the solution of current and future public problems.

We have attempted to describe some of the benefits and accomplishments which can be foreseen from the initiation of an effort at the national level to analyze in depth the application of these systems techniques to our many national and community problems. We are sure that none of us can forecast the full measure of worth to this Nation which such an endeavor may ultimately provide. We are equally certain that the use of modern technology coupled with the application of modern management techniques may provide solutions to many of the problems which now appear insoluble. It is up to us in the Congress to insure that these steps are taken in a timely fashion.

[From the Congressional Record, Jan. 10, 1967]

NATIONAL COMMISSION ON PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

Mr. MORSE of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, last August more than 40 Republican Members of the House introduced legislation to create a National Commission on Public Management with the mandate of determining whether the

management techniques of systems analysis, developed so successfully in our space and defense programs, could be applied to the solution of nondefense public problems such as transportation, pollution control, health services, and others. Since that time we have received considerable expressions of interest and support for the legislation and for the concept of using our most modern management tools to improve the quality of American life.

On November 4 the board of directors of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce gave its endorsement to the measure and we have been most heartened by the expressions of interest from the business community.

There is also increasing evidence at all levels of government that the old approaches are no longer sufficient. In our initial statement we commented at length on the California research contracts, and we have also been made aware of the efforts in New York State, New York City, and other areas to use these new tools to improve governmental efficiency and effectiveness. Vice President Humphrey, speaking on November 16, said:

"We have seen, too, what government research and development contracts given to the university and to private corporations have produced in overcoming scientific and technological obstacles in the remarkably short time.

"The same partnership concept, the same systems approach; the same investment in research and development, applied to other public needs may prove to be the way in which our rich nation may finally be able to overcome economic and social problems which have been generations in the making."

Senator NELSON of Wisconsin has also introduced legislation that would approach the application of modern management to the public sector. In short, Mr. Speaker, there is growing agreement that rational management will be required if we are to allocate our resources wisely and develop comprehensive approaches to our mammoth public problems. Right here in the Congress we made a start in this direction last year in passing the Demonstration Cities and Clean Rivers Restoration Acts, each designed to encourage a comprehensive program to revitalize our cities and clean up our rivers and streams.

I am very hopeful that we can focus attention on these new tools at our disposal in the 90th Congress and am reintroducing the bill along with 40 of my colleagues. Early hearings on the measure would help to educate the Congress and the public on the possibilities for a completely new attack on our national problems, on the dimensions for participation that these tools open up for the private sector, and on the experience of States and cities in applying these techniques.

Mr. MORSE. I would also like to submit for the record and call to your attention, Mr. Chairman, an editorial which appeared in the Washington Star on January 16 endorsing the approach which I have discussed.

Senator NELSON. That will be printed in the record also. (The editorial referred to follows:)

[From the Washington (D.C.) Evening Star, Jan. 16, 1967]

WANTED: SPACE-AGE GOVERNMENT

Amid the uproar as the 90th Congress opened for business was a little-noticed bill introduced by Representative F. Bradford Morse of Massachusetts. We will hear of this measure again. For it not only has the backing of 40 other Representatives and 10 Senators, but it proposes a remarkable idea: Applying private management techniques of the space age to our creaking government machinery. The bill would create a National Commission on Public Management. Members, appointed by the President, would study and recommend ways in which sophisticated tools of industry, such as computers and systems analysis, would be used to solve public problems.

There already is precedent for such action at the state level. New York State, for example, is developing a computer-based intelligence system for law enforcement. California, aided by the Ford Foundation, has farmed out contracts to aerospace firms to study how the state can best solve problems in transportation, waste disposal, crime and information control.

The point of all this is that while the problems of urban life have been mounting and increasingly thrust upon the federal government, the techniques of

76-510 0-67- -3