Managing Risk and Innovation in Army Modernization

Defence Capability Layers – Layer 6: Innovation Innovation is one of the most overused words in defence today. It appears in strategies, conferences, funding programs, and startup pitches. But in many discussions the word becomes detached from the reality of what innovation actually means in the context of war. This layer is not about technology hype. It is about how systems learn, adapt, and evolve under pressure. Innovation in defence is not simply inventing something new. It is the ability to turn ideas into capabilities that can be deployed, integrated, trusted, and sustained in real operations. A prototype is not innovation if it never reaches the field. A clever technology is not innovation if it cannot survive electronic warfare, contested logistics, or the pace of combat. What modern conflict shows very clearly is that innovation is less about novelty and more about learning speed. Ukraine has demonstrated this brutally since 2022. Systems are built, deployed, broken, adapted, and rebuilt in continuous cycles. Drones evolve in weeks, not years. Countermeasures appear quickly. Electronic warfare reshapes the environment constantly. Innovation in that context is not a laboratory exercise. It is a survival mechanism. This layer therefore looks at the innovation ecosystem as a whole, not just the technology itself. It examines how different parts of the system interact: startups trying to move fast, primes managing complex long-term programs, research institutions producing excellent science, investors pushing growth timelines, and militaries trying to adopt capabilities that must work reliably under extreme conditions. The challenge is that these worlds operate on different incentives and different timelines. Startups optimise for speed. Defence systems optimise for trust and reliability. Research focuses on discovery. Industry focuses on production. Investors focus on growth. Militaries focus on survivability and mission success. When these incentives collide, innovation slows down or gets trapped at prototype stage. This layer therefore explores several key questions: * How innovation in warfare has historically evolved and why today’s tempo is different * What Ukraine’s battlefield innovation cycle teaches about adaptation and feedback loops * How Russia adapts differently and what China is learning from these dynamics * Why many defence innovations fail to scale despite strong technology * The structural challenges involving startups, primes, research institutions, and investors * And finally, what innovation must become if it is to produce real capability rather than demonstrations Because in modern conflict, innovation is not about who invents first. It is about who learns, adapts, and scales faster. And that makes innovation not just a technology question, but a system question. #DefenceInnovation #DefenceIndustry #MilitaryTechnology #EuropeanDefence

How do we get critical technology to the warfighter faster? Our acquisition system has powerful tools like Other Transactions and SBIR Phase III, but we're often slowed down by legacy processes, appropriation, risk aversion, and a misalignment with the commercial tech world. It's time for targeted, common-sense reforms. I've been developing a few concrete proposals for the next NDAA (or sooner if some DoW innovators want to take them and run). 1. Demystify Innovation Authorities (OTA & SBIR): Mandate robust, role-based training and create a "safe harbor" for the good-faith use of these authorities. Empower our workforce to use the tools they already have. 2. Buy Software Like It's 2026, Not 1986: Officially define Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) as a commercial product, not a level-of-effort service. This simple change aligns acquisitions with the commercial market and eliminates a major bottleneck for buying modern software. 3. Fix Out-of-Cycle Funding: Transform the unpredictable Unfunded Requirements (UFR) scramble into a structured 'Innovation Readiness Fund.' This provides a dedicated, rapid funding vehicle to get proven, warfighter-demanded tech to the field without waiting for the next budget cycle. 4. Create a "Buying Cell for DoD Marketplaces": Pilot a centralized buying cell that acts as a "Contracting-as-a-Service" for DoD's innovation marketplaces. This removes the burden from local contracting shops and ensures any program with funding can buy quickly. These fixes unlock the speed and potential we already have. They empower our people and deliver better capability, faster. What are your thoughts? Which of these ideas would have the biggest impact on your work? #DefenseAcquisition #NDAA #GovCon #Innovation #OTA #SBIR #ProcurementReform #DigitalTransformation #MilitaryModernization #DoD COL Christopher M. Hill Sr. A.V. W. Marina Nitze Arun Seraphin Joshua McMillion Ryan Connell Jenna Roueche' Arun Nair Matt Nelson Joshua Marcuse David Bonfili Noah Sheinbaum Tyler Sweatt Bryon Kroger Nikhil Shenoy Justin Fanelli Eric Lofgren Agile Acquisitions, LLC

FEAR AND LOATHING IN DISRUPTION: We Say We Want Innovation—But Do We Actually Mean It? In Defense—and across the broader national security ecosystem—we love to talk about innovation. We commission glossy reports, stand up innovation cells, and speak the language of “disruption.” But when the real thing shows up—messy, unpredictable, built on failed prototypes, and challenging our assumptions—our instincts often betray us. We resist. We delay. We punish failure. We defend the status quo. Here’s the uncomfortable truth: disruptive innovation is almost always inconvenient for those in power. It threatens legacy programs, established hierarchies, and known processes. It introduces ambiguity into systems that thrive on certainty. And that’s why, despite our best intentions, many leaders default to suppressing the very innovation they claim to support. Why? Because we’ve created an environment where risk is seen as a threat to careers, not as a path to progress. We punish failure, even if it was in pursuit of a bold idea. We reward compliance, not creativity. We equate “mistake” with “misconduct.” This mindset is lethal to innovation. We need a fundamental shift: From a culture of risk avoidance to a culture of risk management and opportunity. From viewing failure as a dead end to viewing it as a fast-forward button to learning. Here’s what leaders and managers in national security can do today: 1. Reward calculated risk-taking. Praise the effort, not just the outcome. Make it clear that thoughtful experimentation is valued—even if it doesn’t work the first time. 2. Provide safety nets. Give teams the psychological and organizational cover to try new things without fear of professional ruin. Innovation requires room to breathe. 3. Decriminalize failure. A failed prototype or pilot should never be a career-ending event. If we’re serious about innovation, we must normalize failing forward—and fast. 4. Balance your portfolios. Mature programs are necessary, but make space (and budget) for the new, the weird, the unproven. That’s where the future is hiding. 5. Champion the mavericks. Protect and promote the people who bring new thinking—even when they challenge your own. Don’t isolate them. Empower them. Its time we stopped punishing our best warriors for stepping into the unknown. Let’s stop saying we want innovation unless we’re ready to back it up with the courage to reward failure, embrace uncertainty, and actually change how we lead. Because in the end, the greatest risk to national security isn’t trying something new. It’s clinging to the old while our adversaries race ahead. #NationalSecurity #Innovation #Leadership #FailForward #DisruptiveInnovation #MissionFirst

“We can no longer afford to wait a decade for our legacy primes to deliver the next ‘perfect system’… only to find that it is delivered years behind schedule and costs ten times what it should.” Secretary of War Pete Hegseth didn’t mince words when he laid out the U.S. military's vision for the future of defense tech innovation in a speech on Monday. And with good reason: the breakneck evolution of drone warfare in recent years is a stark reminder that innovation “is happening at a pace we can't even foresee,” as Hegseth put it – and the Pentagon must adapt just as quickly or suffer the consequences. The United States Department of War memo accompanying Hegseth’s speech at Starbase details how military leaders plan on making this vision a reality – namely, by attacking the “tangle of overlapping organizations and confused authority” that defines the current innovation ecosystem. Here’s how: - Unifying that ecosystem under the department’s Chief Technology Officer (CTO) to ensure that organizations are in lock-step around producing “outcomes that matter for the warfighter” - Streamlining efforts through a CTO Action Group that operates with standardized tools and shared priorities – one innovation body to rule them all - Integrating the fragmented innovation organs like the Defense Innovation Unit and Strategic Capabilities Office under a DoW Field Activity designation - Empowering service program offices to organize their own innovation communities around shared objectives - Sending stronger demand signals to the defense industry through clear channels rather than chaotic and incoherent outreach These policies are designed to replace decades of bureaucratic inertia with a CTO-led, outcome-driven innovation ecosystem. No more competing councils and overlapping org charts; instead, a unified technical direction, empowered execution teams, and direct engagement with industry will shape the Pentagon's path forward. If this is implemented with urgency, it could unlock a wave of commercial tech adoption, modular systems development, and tactical innovation at exactly the moment when the U.S. military needs it most. The adversary isn’t waiting for our acquisition timelines to catch up – now, hopefully, we’re not either. This is the kind of framework that gives startups like ACS a shot to get critical tech in the hands of warfighters faster. Let’s make sure this transformation is more than a memo.

AI INTEGRATION IS NOT A QUESTION OF PLATFORMS — IT IS A QUESTION OF FORCE COHERENCE Secretary Pete Hegseth’s decision to push AI into the hands of 3 million personnel signals a strategic understanding: modernization cannot be isolated to advanced platforms — it must touch every echelon of the force. Leadership at this scale reflects a recognition that AI capability must advance across the entire Joint Force — not just select domains. That direction sets the foundation for coherence rather than fragmentation. Much of today’s public discussion still frames GenAI.mil as an upgrade to specific capabilities: jets, ISR, targeting, cyber operations, or battle-management systems. But senior leaders understand something deeper: 𝗢𝗣𝗘𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗔𝗟 𝗔𝗗𝗩𝗔𝗡𝗧𝗔𝗚𝗘 𝗢𝗡𝗟𝗬 𝗘𝗠𝗘𝗥𝗚𝗘𝗦 𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗜𝗥𝗘 𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗖𝗘 𝗢𝗣𝗘𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗦 𝗢𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗦𝗔𝗠𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗚𝗡𝗜𝗧𝗜𝗩𝗘 𝗧𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗢. We are already seeing, in the civilian world, what happens when AI maturity is uneven. Some organizations accelerate. Others stall. Others become dependent on those who mastered it first. That fragmentation creates power imbalances, loss of trust, and operational friction. Inside a military force, that same dynamic would be far more dangerous. If AI proficiency 𝗚𝗥𝗢𝗪𝗦 𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗧𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 — elite units accelerate while logistics, sustainment, transport, contracting, and cybersecurity functions lag — the result is a fractured operational tempo. Not a critique — a structural reality. Warfighting effectiveness depends on alignment, not isolated modernization. Mission Command requires every echelon to operate with shared awareness, synchronized timing, and trust in the data shaping decisions. That means AI cannot be vertical. It must be 𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘇𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 — 𝘀𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴: Sustainment & mobility Joint logistics Readiness & maintenance Contracting & acquisition Operational planning Intelligence preprocessing Cyber defense & risk monitoring Compliance & reporting The battlefield runs on these systems just as much as on advanced platforms. And in an era of escalating cyber intrusions, supply-chain compromise, and algorithmic manipulation, the risk is not simply “AI adoption.” The risk is adopting AI without simultaneously strengthening: cybersecurity posture provenance and auditability model oversight continuity of operations human-in-command authority Civilian society is already providing a preview of the strategic risk: AI 𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗱 — 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗼𝗲𝗱. A Joint Force where every element — from air dominance to last-mile sustainment — shares one integrated cognitive framework. That is how AI becomes a strategic advantage rather than a localized upgrade. And that is how national power is preserved. — Inner Sanctum Vector N360™ #GenAI #MilitaryAI #DefenseInnovation #JointForce #MissionCommand #Cybersecurity #AIinDefense #NationalSecurity #DigitalWarfare #OperationalTempo

The July 2024 Defense Innovation Board study, “Aligning Incentives to Drive Faster Tech Adoption,” addressed the pressing issue of misaligned incentives that prevent workforce innovation and faster tech adoption. The study findings were stark: Current incentive structures within the DoD are not designed to promote urgency, seamless integration, and rapid deployment of innovative technologies needed to support the Warfighter. Empowering decision-makers and helping them transform from members of the “frozen middle” to innovation force multipliers who provide top cover and support also will empower innovators to take calculated risks and adopt and field new technologies to our Warfighters. My latest article in the Defense Acquisition Magazine highlights two related and complementary efforts that point to early progress in aligning incentives to drive faster tech adoption: DAU’s #InnovatetoWin Playbook and the U.S. Navy’s successful use case with #PEODigital and Justin Fanelli’s amazing team who put these tools to work!

One of the big issues I see with modernization efforts is the inability to quickly and easily transition modernization projects to operations. Today's modernization is tomorrow's operations. Here are a few things I have learned: 1. Prepare for Change with a Comprehensive Change Management Plan Develop a Change Management Strategy: Change management should be a key part of the transition process. 2. Develop a Detailed Transition Plan Set Clear Milestones: Break down the transition into clear phases with specific, measurable milestones. Define Success Criteria: Set measurable objectives for what constitutes a successful transition. 3. Ensure Proper Training and Support for End Users Ongoing Support: Establish a clear plan for ongoing support. This can include setting up a helpdesk, assigning key internal “champions” or super-users who can assist others, and providing a platform for employees to ask questions or report issues. 4. Implement Robust Testing and Quality Assurance Pilot Testing and Feedback Loops: Before full deployment, run pilot programs to test the new systems with real users. Collect feedback on usability, functionality, and performance. Performance Monitoring: Implement mechanisms to monitor the performance of the new systems in real time. 5. Gradual Rollout (Phased Approach) Phased Implementation: If possible, implement the modernization effort in phases to reduce risks. 6. Align the New Systems with Operational Processes Integration with Existing Workflows: Ensure the new systems or technologies integrate seamlessly with existing workflows. Automate Where Possible: Where applicable, automate manual tasks and processes to increase operational efficiency. 7. Monitor and Optimize Post-Implementation Post-Implementation Review: Conduct regular reviews of the new systems and processes to ensure they are meeting the desired goals. Continuous Improvement: Modernization is an ongoing process. Establish a framework for continuous improvement, where feedback is continuously incorporated into future updates and optimizations. 8. Maintain Strong IT and Security Support Technical Support and Maintenance: Ensure the IT team or third-party vendors provide ongoing support for system maintenance, troubleshooting, and upgrades. 9. Track and Report Performance Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): Track KPIs to measure the success of the modernization effort post-transition. These KPIs should be aligned with the organization's goals, such as increased operational efficiency, cost savings, customer satisfaction, or improved system performance. 10. Foster a Culture of Innovation and Adaptation Encourage Adaptability: Foster a culture where employees are encouraged to embrace new technologies and processes. Let me know how either Service Management Leadership or I can assist your organization's next modernization effort.

War is not a math problem. It is a chaotic, human endeavor that evolves faster than any committee can adjudicate. When I took command of the Army's Rapid Equipping Force (REF) in 2010, we learned this the hard way. We stopped asking soldiers for "requirements" and started asking for their problems. We ditched the 500-page spec sheets for simple "10-liners" and found that American ingenuity responds instantly when you lead with the problem rather than the solution. For years, I have argued that the REF shouldn't have been an anomaly—it should have been the model. With the 2026 NDAA, Congress finally agrees. We now have the statutory authority to prioritize speed and empower portfolio managers to take risks. But laws don't win wars; people do. To make this reform work, we have to kill the "requirements-first" culture that has paralyzed modernization. In my latest op-ed for The National Interest, I outline five immediate actions—from institutionalizing "Problem Curation" to retraining our workforce for curiosity over compliance—that the DoD must take to finally unleash its problem solvers. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/ggkX38ts BMNT BMNT, Ltd. Common Mission Project #DefenseInnovation #NationalSecurity #DoD #Pentagon #Innovation #AcquisitionReform #NDAA2026 #GovTech #MissionEngineering #HackingForDefense #ProblemSolving #ProblemCuration #RapidAcquisition