共查询到18条相似文献,搜索用时 140 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
美军物流系统优化战略研究与启示--美《国防部供应链管理实施指南》启示录之一 总被引:6,自引:1,他引:6
在高技术战争成为主要战争形态的21世纪,精确化后勤是必然的趋势。精确化后勤,反映信息时代军事后勤的本质,是实现保障有力和走投入较少、效益较高的军队现代化建设之路的具体体现。供应链管理是先进的物流管理思想,军方借鉴该思想进行物流管理是一条可行之路。美军国防部报告《国防部供应链管理实施指南》讲述了如何将供应链管理思想和军事后勤实施战略融为一体,如何运用供应链管理的原则来提高管理国防部供应链的运作绩效。本刊特邀国防科技大学张志勇博士及其合作者就该报告有价值的部分进行了编译,形成了《美〈国防部供应链管理实施指南〉启示录》系列文章,将在本刊连续刊出。文章不仅对美军的供应链实施情况进行了详细介绍,而且还结合我军实际提出了若干建议,并得到了中国物流学会副会长、中国物流与采购联合会专家委员会委员、我军军事物流的开拓者王宗喜教授对文章内容的评述。这些研究成果和意见对我军军事物流的研究将会起到一定的推动作用,对我军军事物流全面建设具有一定借鉴意义。 相似文献
10.
11.
随着诸军种联合作战的规模和频率不断增加,为改进联合作战能力,美军对联合作战指挥结构进行了改革,出台了联合军官管理制度,对联合军官的选拔、教育和晋升等作出了具体的规定。 相似文献
12.
13.
14.
许园园 《中小企业管理与科技》2020,(5):54-55
为适应军队调整改革的新形势新要求,准确判断军队财务集中支付电子化管理改革所面临的新要求,提高军队资金使用保障效率和效益。论文在分析推进军队财务集中支付电子化管理制度建设重要意义的基础上,从清理账户的四个方面理清了重点工作,并建议从加强互联互通,促进系统自动衔接,注重协同运作,建立配套改革机制,强化系统培训,拓展数据应用分析等方面同步推进,确保军队财务集中支付电子化管理落地见效。 相似文献
15.
W. F. Dennison 《Journal of Management Studies》1979,16(3):270-282
Explanation of the rapid rise to prominence in many government activities of the U.S.A. federal government inspired P.P.B.S. are considered. In too many situations P.P.B.S. was viewed as a revolutionary management technique and not an evolutionary development in resource allocation. The form of many of the publications by proponents of P.P.B.S. – often written from a military standpoint – were insufficiently related to the environment in which most public decision-making occurs. As a result, by promising much and achieving little, the search for better solutions to many of the management problems that P.P.B.S. highlighted has received little help from the enormous activity generated. 相似文献
16.
浅析美军供应链保障模式及对我军的启示 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
精确、及时、高效的后勤保障是夺取现代战争的关键因素。美军利用供应链理论。借鉴现代物流企业先进的供应链管理理念,优化其物流系统,使其后勤保障系统不断成熟与发展,实现了适时、适地、适量的后勤保障。美军应用供应链理论的成功经验及其存在的不足为我军提供了有益的启示。 相似文献
17.
Mason Gaffney 《American journal of economics and sociology》2018,77(2):331-417
Military defense is generally treated in economics texts as a “public good” because the benefits are presumed to be shared by all citizens. However, defense spending by the United States cannot legitimately be classified as a public good, since the primary purpose of those expenditures has been to project power in support of private business interests. Throughout the course of the 20th century, U.S. military spending has been largely devoted to protecting the overseas assets of multinational corporations that are based in the United States or allied nations. Companies extracting oil, mineral ores, timber, and other raw materials are the primary beneficiaries. The U.S. military provides its services by supporting compliant political leaders in developing countries and by punishing or deposing regimes that threaten the interests of U.S.‐based corporations. The companies involved in this process generally have invested only a small amount of their own capital. Instead, the value of their overseas assets largely derives from the appreciation of oil and other raw materials in situ. Companies bought resource‐rich lands cheaply, as early as the 1930s or 1940s, and then waited for decades to develop them. In order to make a profit on this long‐range strategy, they formed cartels to limit global supply and relied on the U.S. military to help them maintain secure title over a period of decades. Those operations have required suppressing democratic impulses in dozens of nations. The global “sprawl” of extractive companies has been the catalyst of U.S. foreign policy for the past century. The U.S. Department of Defense provides a giant subsidy to companies operating overseas, and the cost is borne by the taxpayers of the United States, not by the corporate beneficiaries. Defining military spending as a “public good” has been a mistake with global ramifications, leading to patriotic support for imperialist behavior. 相似文献