Introduction
As much as the army standards are concerned, the truth is that it all relies on the readiness as well as the operability of the existing systems. Ideally, in the process of managing and maintaining these systems will have to take into consideration the utilization of the existing resources. In the process of using the military legacy system, there was the need of taking into account their availability and the frequency at which they are updated (Wang, 2000). It has been realized that the implementation of the customer wait time was absolutely aimed at ensuring that the required equipment have been availed so as to foster functionality of the military legacy system (Dumond & Arroyo Center, 2001). Despite that, it has been realized that the continued implementation of the customer wait time cannot be easily applied to the current system (gcss army) because of the various reasons discussed below
To begin with, what can be realized from this scenario is the fact that in case the army personnel desires to ensure that the legacy system parts are dependably and quickly supplied, what can be depicted is the fact that the department had managed to recruit enough supplies. Due to the fact that this is one of the efforts that can be used to foster effective implementation of the customer wait time, the truth is that what could have also made the department of the army standard to effectively function was the need of measuring the general performance of the existing army legacy system (Joseph, 2005). Conversely, in order for the customer wait time to suit the military using the legacy system, it was possible to use such a technique to measure continued performance. This is what makes the effective evaluation of customer wait time parking requisition to function effectively whilst ensuring that it has suited the military legacy system (Dumond & Arroyo Center, 2001).
Nonetheless, the effectiveness of taking into account the significance of managing the customer wait time (CWT) is to ensure that there is no confusion with each activity to be undertaken. Ideally, there are various reasons that compel the department to ensure that the existing system is not obsolete. One of them is that the legacy system that the army department could have continued to use might have been perceived to be similar in terminology as well as related to the concept that is already outdated. Another reason is the fact that the same system would have already failed to have the potential of responding or complying with the same graphical format as well as the prevailing customer waiting time measurement protocol. This is what ended up resulting to the overlapping of the existing functions whilst applying it to the current system (gcss army) (Wang, 2000).
In addition to that, the obsolescence of the army customer waiting time metrics that the department might have been using might have been dedicated for serving distinctive purposes. The same strategy could have ultimately differed from the manner in which they are defined as well as computed in the customer waiting time (CWT). Therefore, what might have made the department of army standard to be out dated when it comes to the need of evaluating customer wait time is the failure to provide feedback to all the processes owners, for instance, combatant commanders), and activity managers (Dumond & Arroyo Center, 2001). The reason for that is because such individuals have been perceived to have the ability of assisting the army department to pursue progressive improvements in CWT. This then implies that the obsolescence of the army standard could have resulted from the ineffective identification of the processes required to enhance improvement of the current system (gcss army). As a result of that, another associated negative effect is the failure to increase the army understanding of each individual CWT metric as well as using it as the ultimate means of fostering their logistic chain (Joseph, 2005).
According to the modern research, customer waiting time in the army department is used for the purpose of measuring the aggregate performance of the existing logistic system. The reason for that is because is the one that can aid in offering all the resources that are required for the purpose of repairing broken equipment. All these processes will have to take into consideration the need of fulfilling customer requirements, procurement, component repair, and so on. Therefore, from the perspective of such reasoning, the reason as to why the army department could be perceived to be outdated in terms of handling customer waiting time is the delay in providing the requested stock at the right time. This is also in line with the failure of first understanding the strategies to be used to better implement the use of the customer wait time which could have in return assisted in matching it with the gcss army program. In return, the effect of this is that it results to the unavailability of the demanded stock (Joseph, 2005).
Similarly, it should be understood that customer waiting time in the army department is something that has varied orientations. For instance, taking into consideration the views of the army unit mechanic, the truth is that in most cases he or she could end up failing to obtain the required parts that could be used for the purpose of repairing their weaponry system. Consequently, what makes such a system to be outdated is the fact that the concerned authorities could have failed to take into account the time in which their logistic takes to serve customers (Wang, 2000).
Conclusion
The maintenance of the existing army standard is what is perceived to have the potential of quickening the evaluation of customer wait time. To do so, it is important for the department to ensure that they have determined the manner in which the available resources are used for the purpose of updating the customer wait time parking requisition. Despite that, the need of holding requisition until the organization have managed to pay for it is what continues to hinder the evaluation of customer wait time hence making the existing standard to be outdated in terms of the services it offers. Last, but not least, it is therefore important for the army department to ensure that the standards they use allows the orders to go through as well as taking into account the method to use in tracking them. This is what will enable the department not to incur losses whilst developing the gcss program and matching it with the customer wait time.
References
Dumond, J., & Arroyo Center. (2001). Velocity management: The business paradigm that has transformed U.S. Army logistics. Santa Monica, Calif: RAND.
Joseph, L .W. (2005). Velocity Management in Logistics and Distribution: Lessons from the Military to Secure the Speed of Business. CRC Press.
Wang, M. (2000). Accelerated logistics: Streamlining the Army's supply chain. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
