Defense Acquisition Processes

Thinking of entering defence? Good. But read this first, or get crushed. You’re not building a startup. You’re entering a war zone with Excel sheets instead of bullets. And here’s the first landmine: Defence doesn’t care about you. Not until you matter. And by the time you matter, it might be too late. So here’s your brutal, field-tested playbook 👇 🔻 1. Run a Dual-Use Strategy or Die Trying Don’t “pivot into defence.” Don’t “add military as a target customer.” Build something with teeth in both markets — or you’ll starve while waiting 24 months for a MoD reply. Dual-use = survival. Omni-use = dominance. 🔻 2. Your Actual Competitor? Paper. You're not fighting primes. You're fighting outdated workflows, 94-page requirement PDFs, and evaluation committees who’ve never used the tech. You’re not selling innovation. You’re selling the idea that innovation should exist. 🔻 3. Never Ask for Feedback — Ask for Budget Lines Everyone will “love” what you’re doing. They’ll invite you to panels, workshops, incubators. None of that pays your team. Ask: “Which budget pays for this in Q4?” If they can’t answer, walk. 🔻 4. Find a Uniformed Insider, or You’re Screwed No matter how good your pitch is, you need a believer inside the system. Someone who speaks procurement and can say, “This solves my mission.” Without that: enjoy limbo. 🔻 5. If You’re Not Testable, You’re Not Real Defence doesn’t buy PowerPoints. You need a testable MVP fast. No test = no traction. No traction = no procurement route. No route = you're just theatre. 🔻 6. The First Deal Will Break You It’s slow. It’s painful. It’ll take months, maybe years. But once you break the wall once, you become “pre-approved.” Then the real business begins. 🔻 7. Ignore All of This If You're Building Slideware This advice is only for builders. For founders ready to live in uncertainty, raise from niche VCs, and get 50 no’s before one test flight. If you're not all-in: stay in SaaS. This is the most misunderstood opportunity of our time. Europe is waking up. The U.S. is doubling down. And the next industrial revolution will wear camouflage. Startups who learn the terrain will dominate. Speed. Testability. Dual-use. Insider access. That’s your survival kit. Use it. #DefenceStartups #DualUse #InnovationInDefence #OmniUse #MilitaryTech #InsiderIntel #BoldMovesOnly #WakeUpEurope

RAPID CAPABILITIES OFFICES (RCO): How the DoD Delivers When Time Is the Enemy! Most defense programs take years—sometimes decades—to move from concept to capability. But what happens when we don’t have that kind of time? In JRAC, we often turn to the RCOs for an example of speed at scale. The Rapid Capabilities Offices (RCOs) are elite teams that operate across the Department of Defense to deliver critical technologies fast—often in months, not years. And they do it by rewriting the rules. Each RCO is a small, mission-driven unit with direct access to senior leadership and a singular goal: get warfighters what they need before the threat evolves. No endless PowerPoints. No multi-year delays. Just speed, focus, and execution. Examples *corrected*: • The Air Force RCO (DAF RCO) delivered the B-21 Raider bomber, leveraging advanced stealth and survivable C2. • The Army RCO, now part of the Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office (RCCTO), fast-tracked hypersonic and directed energy weapons. • Marine Corps RCO: Rapidly fielded Autonomous Low-Profile Vessel (ALPV)—a semi-submersible drone boat inspired by narco subs—to stealthily transport supplies or launch missiles. It’s now undergoing front line operational testing. • The Space RCO is fielding tactically responsive launch and resilient satellite constellations for the U.S. Space Force. These aren’t demo labs. They’re operational accelerators. They de-risk cutting-edge tech, prove it in real-world scenarios, and transition it into service programs at scale. So how do these RCOs fit into the bigger DoD picture? Think of them as spearpoints—complementing traditional acquisition systems by showing what’s possible when bureaucracy doesn’t get in the way. They partner with labs, Combatant Commands, and PEOs to translate innovation into impact. And increasingly collaborative with JRAC. If you’re a private sector company with a game-changing capability, here’s how to engage: 1. Align to the mission—RCOs aren’t looking for flashy tech, they’re looking for solutions to urgent warfighter problems. 2. Engage through the ecosystem—AFWERX, DIU, SpaceWERX, and other innovation hubs often serve as on-ramps. 3. Come ready—Classified work, rapid prototyping, and non-traditional contracts (like OTAs) are the norm. This model isn’t theoretical. It’s operational—and it’s helping the U.S. stay ahead in a world where our adversaries aren’t waiting around for a JROC brief. The bottom line? RCOs are what acquisition looks like when urgency, trust, and warfighter outcomes are in charge. Links follow. DAF RCO: https://lnkd.in/eS_tCVnF Space RCO: https://lnkd.in/eBsDNBrN Navy RCO: https://lnkd.in/ekzhvxeS USMC RCO: https://lnkd.in/e_arcFUF Army RCCTO: https://www.army.mil/rccto #RCO #RapidCapabilitiesOffice #JRAC #Defense #Innovation #Warfighter

Here's a draft version of the Department of War's latest acquisition reform memo that is scheduled to be released on Friday. This is a must read for current and prospective defense contractors. What stood out to me from all the various reorganizations/re-delegations of authority/rebranding is the direction to implement a commercial-first and alternative proposals policy. Specifically it says commercial products and offerings, in whole or in part, should be the default acquisition approach. It also says Non-FAR-based instruments, including OTA, are preferred agreements. It even stipulates an open mind to alternative proposals that achieve operational objectives through technical approaches other than those specific (Yes!! Be creative!!). It's clear that the Pentagon wants to make it much easier and faster to get weapons, sensors, and other critical equipment into the warfighters hands. We have a lot of catching up to do against our enemies. Is your organization ready to prove that its warfighter-critical goods or services are commercial products? Adjust your DOW sales strategies accordingly! Is this policy enough to bring in commercial-focused only companies that are sitting on the sidelines? Tan Wilson Dr. Dolores Kuchina-Musina Marcia Watson Krystn Macomber (Gull), CP APMP Fellow, LEED AP Chris Hamm Donna Huneycutt

In a dynamic world, why are we still anchoring defense programs to outdated Acquisition Program Baselines (APBs) set when uncertainty is highest? Matt MacGregor and I challenge the status quo and propose a new approach to managing acquisition programs. APBs, set at Milestone B, rely on optimistic estimates with incomplete data. This leads to: • Misaligned incentives that prioritize outdated targets over warfighter needs. • Bureaucratic paralysis when baselines need revising. • Stifled innovation, discouraging the agility needed for AI, hypersonics, or cyber. The DoD needs to shift to rolling capability targets, warfighter feedback loops, and adaptive management. Imagine dynamic baselines that evolve with new data and mission needs. Continuous warfighter input through prototyping and real-time dashboards. Flexible funding and streamlined oversight to empower program managers. Data-driven decisions using digital twins, AI, and predictive analytics. Success should be measured by mission impact—delivering what warfighters need, when they need it—not adherence to early guesses. From fighter jets to cyber defenses, this approach could transform how we deliver capability. Is it time to rethink APBs? What barriers do you see in adopting a more flexible, outcome-focused model? Read our post and share your thoughts below! https://lnkd.in/eKcJjQ9u

Tech Entrepreneur Reinvents Artillery Shell—and How the West Buys Weapons Introduction: Silicon Valley Meets the Battlefield In a bold challenge to traditional defense procurement, Chad Steelberg, a tech CEO turned weapons innovator, has launched Tiberius Aerospace and unveiled “Sceptre”—a next-generation 155mm artillery shell. While its enhanced range and precision are impressive, the real disruption lies in how the system is designed, produced, and delivered. ⸻ Key Highlights from the Tiberius Aerospace Launch 🧠 Open Weapons Platform Model • Unlike traditional arms manufacturers, Tiberius licenses the Sceptre design to governments rather than selling them finished products. • Governments are encouraged to produce the shells locally, which can speed up availability and reduce reliance on centralized supply chains. • The model allows faster updates, akin to software iteration, improving performance over time. 📏 Breakthrough Performance with Sceptre Shell • The Sceptre 155mm round reportedly offers unprecedented range and accuracy, outclassing conventional artillery shells. • Its modularity and upgrade potential may help Western militaries outpace adversaries in a rapidly evolving battlefield environment. ⚙️ From R&D to Rapid Deployment • By focusing solely on research and development, Tiberius Aerospace avoids the slowdowns of traditional manufacturing and bureaucracy. • Steelberg draws on Silicon Valley principles—agility, scalability, and openness—to revolutionize defense development timelines. 🌍 Inspired by Ukraine, Geared for Global Adoption • The model reflects lessons from the war in Ukraine, where nimbleness and tech-forward solutions have proven critical. • Licensing encourages global co-development and operational sovereignty, a significant shift in Western military strategy. ⸻ Why It Matters: A Paradigm Shift in Defense Procurement Steelberg’s approach with Tiberius Aerospace represents a tectonic shift in how advanced weapons are conceived and distributed: • Governments gain more autonomy in defense production. • Weapon systems evolve faster and more efficiently, countering threats with greater speed. • Defense spending can be optimized for innovation rather than legacy contracts. If widely adopted, this open-platform model could mark the beginning of a new era in Western military capability—one defined less by bureaucracy and more by adaptability. https://lnkd.in/gEmHdXZy

𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗪𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗥𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗶𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗙𝗮𝗶𝗹𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗣𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗠𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗔𝗰𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻? In many defence organisations, poorly written requirements are one of the biggest failure points in the entire acquisition process. Cost overruns, delays and capability gaps often trace back to unclear, incomplete or unrealistic requirements set at the start. In my 20+ years in military procurement, I’ve seen most requirement documents built around technical specifications of a desired solution rather than the operational effects and capabilities actually needed. This reversed logic is a key reason why acquisition so often struggles. Another recurring issue is the lack of prioritisation. Without a clear hierarchy between capabilities must-have, nice-to-have and luxury features, organisations tend to chase a “jack-of-all-trades” device – expected to do everything, but optimised for nothing. The result is predictable: • cost overruns • schedule slips • and a system that fails to satisfy the end user A strong capability-based approach, combined with disciplined prioritisation, would prevent many of these pitfalls. Take infrared observation devices as an example. A fundamental capability question is: How quickly do you need to operate the device? This drives key requirements: • Startup time – seconds or minutes? • Accessibility and size – on the vest for immediate use, or in the backpack? If you need a small, rapidly accessible device with very fast startup, something like the Pixel on Target VooDoo-R fits in a mag pouch and starts in under five seconds – but you “only” get an IR channel plus range finder/target locator. If you need multiple channels, you must again prioritise capabilities vs. size and weight. For example: • Safran Moskito TI: 3 channels (direct optics, LWIR, low light) and long-range target location – but larger and heavier. • Elynxo Virtuose: smaller, faster startup, 2 channels (direct optics, LWIR) and shorter range target location – a compromise between versatility and portability. The lesson: if requirements are written as a shopping list of technical features, without operational context and prioritisation, procurement will almost always pursue a “do it all” system that ends up too big, too costly, too slow or too complex for real-world use. With more than 100 successfully executed projects at Special Forces Command, I can support you in defining and refining clear, capability-based equipment requirements. Don’t hesitate to contact me. #Dashuyn #DefenseConsulting #DefenseProcurement #CapabilityDevelopment #DefenseInnovation #MilitaryAcquisition #MilitaryRequirements #SwissArmedForces #SpecialForces #PixelOnTarget #VoodooR #Safran #MoskitoTI #Elynxo #Virtuose

🇨🇦 Canada is quietly entering one of the most significant shifts in its defence ecosystem in decades, a move that could reshape how we equip the Canadian Armed Forces | Forces armées canadiennes, build national capacity, and align with our closest security partners. At the centre of this shift is a new institution with big ambitions: the Defence Investment Agency. Its goal is - on paper anyways -simple but transformative: to move Canada from slow, siloed procurement to a model that treats defence acquisitions as a strategic national investment. Only after digging into this initiative does the full picture come into focus, and that’s exactly what I explore in a recent piece I was asked to write for the International Institute for Strategic Studies IISS Strategic Comments. Here are the core arguments I make in the analysis: ➡️ Procurement needs a reset For years, Canada’s defence procurement system has been defined by fragmentation, long timelines, and unclear accountability. The new Agency aims to consolidate authority, streamline processes, and deliver capabilities faster to the CAF. ➡️ This is industrial strategy, not just defence spending The Agency is built to leverage procurement as a driver of jobs, innovation, and advanced manufacturing, treating defence as a pillar of national economic resilience. ➡️ Earlier, smarter engagement with industry By bringing military planners and defence firms into the conversation early, Canada can avoid mismatched requirements, unrealistic timelines, and costly spirals. ➡️ A chance to align more deeply with allies From the UK to Australia, partners are reinforcing their defence-industrial bases. Canada’s new agency could help it plug more effectively into trusted supply chains and multilateral initiatives. ➡️ But big questions remain The rub: this reform will collide with Canada’s structural challenges: limited domestic production scale, labour shortages in defence-relevant industries, legacy procurement cultures inside government, and a political environment that often swings between ambition and restraint. It also raises real questions about how Canada will manage cost escalations, balance domestic content expectations with urgent capability needs, and ensure that centralization doesn’t come at the expense of transparency or independent oversight. A special thanks to colleagues, especially Richard Shimooka who is the authoritative defence expert on this, whose insights and conversations helped shape the analysis. Link to article below, including one that is free and open-access: #Canada #Defence #SecurityPolicy #Procurement #IndustrialStrategy #IISS

The Pentagon just rewired the acquisition system—and it’s not just reform. It’s a call to arms. Secretary Hegseth’s Warfighting Acquisition System flips the script on legacy procurement. This isn’t about tweaking process—it’s about delivering capability at the speed of relevance. 🔧 Portfolio Acquisition Executives (PAEs) now own outcomes. No more diluted accountability. PAEs report directly to Service Acquisition Executives and drive delivery across entire portfolios. 📈 Scorecards track time-to-field, not time-in-meetings. The warfighter doesn’t care how many reviews you held—they care how fast you delivered. ⚙️ Wartime Production Unit is built to surge. Think rapid capability insertion, elite talent, and direct alignment with operational priorities. 🛒 Commercial-first mindset. If a product meets 85% of the requirement and can iterate fast—it’s in. The perfect is no longer the enemy of the fielded. 🧨 JCIDS is gone. That’s not a typo. The system that slowed down innovation for decades has been retired. 📦 Vendor lock is out. Two qualified sources minimum for critical components. Competition is back. ⏱️ Aggressive timelines. 45 days for guidance. 60 days for service implementation plans. The clock is ticking. This is a moment for the DIB to lean in. If you’re building fast, integrating smart, and ready to deliver—this is your terrain. If you’re still optimizing for compliance over capability, it’s time to pivot. The warfighter deserves urgency. The system just got a shot of it. 📖 Full article: https://lnkd.in/g8M4HU29 #DefenseIndustrialBase #AcquisitionReform #WarfightingAcquisition #SpeedToField #MissionDriven #DIBReady

Did you see joint #requirements reform was a big part of the United States Department of War "Arsenal of Freedom" rollout on Nov 7? There's been a lot of reporting and analysis of Secretary Hegseth's speech, but the plan for reforming joint #requirements might have gone overlooked. Let's not overlook them. Here are the highlights (warning: details ahead) - Key objectives: ➡️ Streamline the identification of Joint Force needs ➡️ Enhance industry engagement ➡️ Better integrate requirements determination with resource prioritization Actions from the memo: ➡️ Disestablishment of #JCIDS: The Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (#JCIDS) will be phased out within 120 days ➡️ Creation of #RRAB: A new Requirements and Resourcing Alignment Board (RRAB) will be established to align fiscal resources with the Joint Force's most critical operational problems ➡️ Establishment of #MEIA: A Mission Engineering and Integration Activity (MEIA) will be created to engage with industry, refine capability requirements, and conduct experimentation campaigns to address prioritized Key Operational Problems (#KOPs) ➡️ Joint Acceleration Reserve (#JAR): A funding reserve will be implemented starting in the Fiscal Year 2027 budget cycle to address critical capability gaps and accelerate delivery of impactful joint capabilities ➡️ Military Service Requirements Process Review: Military Departments will review their requirements processes within 90 days to expedite outcomes, enhance industry engagement, and adopt experimentation-led approaches. Findings and reform plans must be submitted within 180 days ➡️ Policy Updates: Office of the Under Secretary of War for Acquisition & Sustainment will update relevant policies and regulations to align with the new processes, removing references to #JCIDS and revising directives and instructions I'm still unpacking the "Arsenal of Freedom" actions and initiatives. There's clear energy here, including these changes to the #requirements process. Link to this memo from the United States Department of War is here: https://lnkd.in/epqWpTCT #requirements #JCIDS #RRAB #MEIA #KOP #JAR