Innovation in Government Business

The new (2023) Other Transactions Guide was waylaid by the DoD acquisition bureaucracy for a few years.  Now out, the new guide, as expected, reflects business-as-usual thinking and a desire to limit the potential of these flexible authorities before folks even bother to understand them.  The new guide contains misinformation, eradicates emphasis on smart interdisciplinary teaming and upfront problem-solving, and will serve to further narrow thinking... the Empire Strikes Back!   

Creating workforce guidance (acting as policy), such as this, should be a rigorous intellectual and scholarly activity.  However, in this case, it appears, the bureaucrats sought to bring these flexible acquisition authorities to heel.  This guide, in a very real sense, represents a retreat from innovation, just at the time DoD needs to be charging toward it.   For those hoping for a 'virtuous insurgency', it is a kick in the teeth.  Now cliche, Other Transactions continue to be met with the same mindset that created the problems in the first place, therefore they cannot see the forest for the trees.   The paradigm has not shifted or even budged.  The federal acquisition bureaucracy is very predictable,  it's always the same, preserve business-as-usual and "innovate" at the fringes, equaling, one step forward, two steps back.


Government Contractor article:  New Other Transactions Guide: Retreating from Innovation

A June 2023 Government Accountability Office report shows that DoD has a plethora of flexible authorities to use for more effectively pursuing and advancing knowledge and capability that are going unused or little used.   Why?  In this episode try to answer that.

What these authorities have in common, when it comes to R&D, is they give the government a lot of flexibility and the workforce license to think.   However, this is antithetical to how things are currently done and this seems to be a problem.  For DoD, process has become the mission, and process is out of control.   When it comes to research and development and delivering new capability, it turns out that flexibility, collaboration, and creativity are extremely valuable.   DoD has a conundrum.  How do you introduce problem-solving, critical thinking, and creativity into a workforce, and indeed, an entire system mired deeply in process?  Flexible authorities for R&D ask the bureaucracy to give up some control to allow for greater creativity and good business judgement... and to cultivate these qualities within teams and the workforce.    

Whatever is prioritized gets done... few statements are truer.  For advancing knowledge and delivering new capability, does prioritizing process over accomplishing mission goals make sense?    

The time is ripe to be a virtuous insurgent, or to be disruptive and innovative; current acquisition authorities permit incredible opportunities for teams to apply creativity and be inventive in pursuit of accomplishing mission goals.   That is no joke.  There are authorities sitting on shelf that allow just that.  Pioneers needed.

Given the pitiful state of defense acquisition for R&D and delivering new capability defers risk to the warfighter, wastes taxpayer funding, shrinks the industrial base, steals from the future, and is an obvious threat to national security, one would think that there would be serious and concerted efforts to change it. You would be wrong! In order for something like that to happen, someone in charge would have to be responsible or held accountable. As witnessed, only subordinates are ̶t̶h̶r̶o̶w̶n̶ ̶u̶n̶d̶e̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶u̶s̶ held accountable. The status quo unquestionably benefits government and industry insiders, even the tiniest perceived threat to the gravy train, careerism, and comfort afforded by the system is vehemently rebuffed by bureaucrats and influential special interests. This is done, in part, by constricting and restricting thinking along with a host of perverse incentives, making it difficult for individuals to conceptualize change and unpalatable.

DoD leadership's longtime failing to lead when it comes to this issue is confounding and frustrating. They have ignored Congressional mandates, directives, and policies. They defend business-as-usual, by casting doubt and shade over innovative acquisition authorities created specifically to remediate the obvious and long known problems. Instead they undermine them while talking out of both sides of their mouth, publicly stating support, but behind the scenes it is different story and substantive action is always absent. They fashion the status quo as the "gold standard" and cast doubt over anything different or new. Then there are the government lawyers, who consistently have been acknowledged as a barrier to consequential positive change in federal acquisition. Practically every group or team who musters the energy and gathers the courage to be innovative in their business processes for R&D finds legal staff obstructing their way. It is like they are Storm Troopers protecting the "Soviet-style" institutionally corrupt acquisition system from would be rebel insurgents. It is rare to find a government lawyer who is an enabler of innovative business and teaming strategies who is following the Congressional mandates (law). These actions regularly hinder and demoralize their colleagues, who are trying to explore better ways to accomplish goals and objectives.

Today the DoD is still indoctrinating the acquisition workforce in the old ways, business-as-usual. The calls for more ̶f̶a̶i̶l̶u̶r̶e̶ barriers and bureaucracy to fix the problems of the existing bureaucracy and barriers is once again in vogue. The only thing different this time is, it's the Millennials enforcing their updated branding of the exact same status quo. They are the latest generation who believe they can just kick-the-can.

The failing of defense acquisition to appropriately accommodate the age and times in which we live, in favor of furthering an institutionally corrupt system is a tragedy. The government created this problem and is responsible for solving it. Plenty of remedies and solutions have been provided. BUT it requires the will, some know how, new education, and leadership articulating actionable strategies and goals, and clearing the way. The longer one looks at the problems that ail federal acquisition, the more one realizes they are straight-forward, identifiable, and totally solvable if desired. That this has been allowed to continue for so long is truly a national disgrace.

OUSD R/E recently published "National Defense Science and Technology Strategy 2023"  that contains ZERO consequential strategy and parrots what others have said ad nauseam.   The document correctly identifies that there is a very serious problem with the government system for delivering the fruits of taxpayer funded R&D efforts.  It identifies point A and points to B, but offers absolutely no practical guidance or ideas of how to get there.  In the case of contracting and the business of taxpayer funded, government R&D activities, it's always  groundhog day.  Each workforce generation does what the last one did, but pretends this time it is innovative... always 1 step forward, 2 steps back.     

The problems are known, remedies have been provided, even mandated, in policy and law.  Solutions and potential solutions are known or are waiting to be explored.  Yet, the DoD remains entrenched in business-as-usual, as insiders are extremely invested and well furnished in the status-quo.   Leadership, lawyers, and academia generally admonish innovative contracting and business practices, instead they actively instill fear, road block, and narrow thinking within the workforce...  obey and comply, do not think!  They say the current system is the gold-standard, and everything else weird, evil, or must illegal.  They prefer what they know, the "Soviet-style" acquisition system, a perfect example of institutional corruption, for R&D.  It is a system of controls contrived by bureaucrats lacking in practical and applied business experience, or an appreciation for the gestalt.   The worsening trajectory, the extraordinary waste of the system will continue unabated until leaders are held accountable and take responsibility.   It shouldn't be too much to ask that government leaders follow the law.  For if they did, many problems and issues would already be solved.

It's time for action!  The talk, incessant rhetoric, and never ending analysis is a doom loop.  Who will take up the mantle for positive change, returning value, and providing timely and appropriate solutions to benefit something greater than self?  It could be you. 

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Krishnamurti

“It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage, than creation of a new system.  For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old institutions and merely lukewarm defenders in those who would gain by the new ones.”  – Niccolo Machiavelli

 National Defense Science and Technology Strategy 2023 

In this episode Rick Dunn, former DARPA General Counsel, talks with TC Hoot, a long time DoD Acquisition Program Manager, currently Senior Program Manager at MISI, a Partnership Intermediary serving U.S. Cyber Command, about how to move out on acquisition and business process innovation to more efficiently and effectively deliver knowledge and solutions resulting from defense R&D efforts and spent resources.

This is an intelligent discussion offering solutions to common and well known problems in federal acquisition.  It's time to start taking this seriously, it's time to take action.  Decades have been wasted stuck in "analysis paralysis", there is no more time.  The can has been kicked, the potato passed.  It is no longer just a matter of waste or poor value, the failings of DoD's acquisition system is a serious national security threat,  a clear and present danger, and it is getting worse.  What is going to take for the old guard and insiders to loosen their grip on business process innovation?   The solutions are there, but where is the will?  

Most people have a good idea of what fraud, waste, and abuse looks like, but few recognize institutional corruption, because it's "normal". 

From Harvard's, Safra Center of Ethics:  "Institutional corruption is manifest when there is a systemic and strategic influence which is legal, or even currently ethical, that undermines the institution’s effectiveness by diverting it from its purpose or weakening its ability to achieve its purpose, including, to the extent relevant to its purpose, weakening either the public’s trust in that institution or the institution’s inherent trustworthiness." - from "Institutional Corruption, Defined" by Lawrence Lessig.   

Does the DoD have processes, policies, systems, or add-ons that negatively effect its existential purpose?  Are bureaucratic and industry insider's cognizant of the purpose of Defense acquisition for R&D?  Bureaucrats, seeking control, created a "Soviet-style" system, which is at odds with the business ingenuity and adeptness that the Nation is/was known for.  

We discuss this and more in this podcast...

Sobering quote for the defense industry:
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children…” ~ Dwight Eisenhower, 1953

In this episode Rick Dunn with the Strategic Institute, talks with Maj. Ben Leaf currently assigned to USSOCOM about his experiences utilizing Other Transactions Agreements to deliver excellent results.  Ben discusses his experience that highlights the importance of the team, open mindedness, and lawyers who enable business process innovation.   This is story of how goal oriented action produces positive outcomes.     

 

In this episode, Strategic Institute's Founder, Rick Dunn hosts Professional WWII Historian, Justin Taylan,  to discuss how major events are effected by numerous small events and decisions behind the scenes, as is the a case for acquisition and R&D. 

For those who like to nerd-out to the WWII Pacific Air War and present day defense acquisition, this is your podcast.  

In this episode Rick Dunn, former DARPA General Counsel and pioneer of DoD's Other Transactions (OTs) authority, talks with Bill Greenwalt, a long time Senate Staffer and former Deputy Undersecretary, who was instrumental in the creation of Middle Tier Acquisition, and bolstering the power and potential of OTs, about the intent to create an alternative acquisition system to better deliver the fruits of DoD's R&D activities.  

"The leadership, the military services are suffering from an incredible amount of delusional thinking." - Bill Greenwalt

This is a terrific discussion between two long time mission-driven professionals who delivered solutions to the Department.  However, leadership remains committed to an inept "Soviet-style" acquisition system, while restricting the workforce's ability to learn and apply the numerous solutions and Congressionally directed to use.   The business-as-usual crowd vehemently resists the creation of an alternative to the "costs too much, takes to long" system, characterized by waste and poor performance, thus stifling the DoD's ability to deliver thoughtful, intelligent solutions in a timely and appropriate manner.  

Among the points touched upon, is that the current system is a relic from the middle of the last century and an outmoded mindset,  insider thinking has become delusional, using speed as metric, looking to what has worked and much more...

If you care about supporting the warfighter, delivering solutions for national security, and the intersection of federal R&D and it's effects our nation's future and fate, this podcast should not be missed.  

In the episode Strategic Institute cuts through DoD's myth and lore to highlight the reason why Other Transactions were created and what problems they are intended to solve.  

Other Transactions authorities (OTs) have realized increased use, but so too has misunderstanding.  A dearth of education and misinformation from the top-down are obvious culprits, as is leadership's lack of vision.  DoD acquisition for R&D is stuck in a bad place.  It is dreadfully slow, wasteful, irrational, and lacks common business  sense.  DoD desperately needs the flexibility that allows for radically different ways of doing business to creatively engage, perform, and execute to better deliver the fruits of federal R&D, but there is little will and know-how.   If we are being honest, leadership's answer has been tantamount to shrugging, as changing the system is said to be too difficult.   Plus, insider's are comfortable and are doing well.  They have concocted many stories of their heroism while wallowing in self defeat.  

Other Transactions present an entire suite of acquisition authorities to create alternative acquisition pathways more appropriate for federal R&D activities and delivering new capability.  From the beginning, OTs are intended to provide a total alternative to the FAR-based acquisition system that is evidently inappropriate for R&D. 

DoD leadership continues to try to fix what ails the acquisition system by applying the same thinking that created the problems in the first place, and doing so repeatedly.  Is it insane?  Yes!  Is it absurd?  Even more so.   Remedies and solutions exist, policy is light-years ahead of practice, yet self imposed blinders prevent many from seeing them.   Aim to solve problems, not excuse them.