Earlier this week, the Pentagon issued a news release titled “Prestigious Fellowship Program Arms Military Officers with Private Sector Perspective.” The release described the Secretary of Defense Executive Fellows program, which, in the words of Deputy Assistant Secretary Caroline Baxter, enables 18 talented mid-grade officers “to fully immerse themselves in industry, broadening their understanding of mission-critical challenges, cultivating relationships outside of government, exposing them to private sector approaches and lessons learned and equipping them to drive change in the department.”
Some companies utilize the fellows as special assistants to the highest-level corporate officers, thereby giving them the broadest exposure to a firm’s planning, management and operations. Others employ the fellows in more specialized roles.
In addition to affording the fellows a stint inside industry, the program also enables them to “participate in congressional visits and think-tank engagements and complete executive-level business coursework through the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business.” As the press release points out, the program is “highly selective” and “has served as a springboard for post-command, field-grade officers to expand their skill sets and leverage best practices to drive innovation within the Defense Department.”
Having both worked with and lectured to members of the program, I can confirm that the department is not exaggerating its importance. But it is precisely because the program is so valuable for exposing officers to defense industry, financial and technology firms that it is far too small given the challenges that the department faces, especially in its efforts to incorporate cutting-edge technologies into its acquisition system. Given the size and scope of the Pentagon’s business-related activities, the program should provide for an annual class that is at two to three times the current number of fellows.
The Department of Defense currently supports a variety of opportunities for a broader swath of acquisition managers to develop or sharpen their skills. Yet the acquisition system is still hobbled by bureaucratic inertia.
One reason for the continuing existence of the “Valley of Death” — and other less publicized acquisition challenges — is the absence of any incentive for managers to remain current with technological change that is taking place at breakneck speeds. An expanded SecDef Executive Fellows Program should have a specialized track aimed solely at grooming talented officers for leadership of the acquisition corps.
Moreover, there should be an equivalent program for top civilians who serve, or will serve, as acquisition leaders. Both sets of what might be termed “SecDef Acquisition Fellows” should attend a semester’s worth of courses in schools such as MIT, RPI, CalTech and Georgia Tech to be exposed to the latest cutting-edge technologies that have the potential to enhance the military’s battlefield capabilities.
In addition, Congress should require that no acquisition manager can attain general or flag officer rank (or, in the case of civilians, enter the Senior Executive Service) unless that person has spent at least six months working in industry and two semesters at a top technology institute. Moreover, fitness reports for managers should include an evaluation of their willingness to take risks, a trait that is sorely lacking in today’s acquisition community.
In mandating such requirements, Congress would in effect reprise its empowerment of the Joint Staff in the Goldwater-Nichols legislation that resulted in the most talented officers migrating to what had previously been a relatively weak Joint Staff. A similar approach for acquisition managers would guarantee that they will be incentivized to obtain the necessary credentials and demonstrate the requisite behaviors that are critical to accelerating the department’s belated and sluggish transition to a true 21st-century acquisition system.
The Pentagon continues to operate under the assumption that it remains technologically ahead of any potential “peer competitor.” That may still be the case, but China’s efforts are upending America’s prospects for maintaining its long-term technological lead. In particular, the longer Beijing continues to steal American intellectual property, and then develop and field systems at a faster pace than that of the DoD, the less likely it becomes that America can maintain its lead.
Successive Pentagon leaders have certainly attempted to revitalize the acquisition system, but it is still deeply troubled. Its success critically depends on the capability of its workforce. The time has therefore come for Congress to legislate a new “Goldwater-Nichols” Act specifically dedicated to ensuring that the acquisition community is led by those who have the most current background and the willingness to take the necessary risks to ensure that the American military maintains its technological dominance for years to come.
Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.