Restraint

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

more share options
Embed For WordPress.com

Without related presentations

Notes on slide 1

A Rogue Thought Piece by Maj Dan “FIST” WardIt seems to me that one of the big problems in defense acquisitions and technology development has been a consistent lack of restraint.

All too often, we start with a big budget…

And then spend even more than we said we would.

The same thing happens with our schedules. We plan to spend more time than we should…

And end up spending even more time than that.

And after busting our excessively large schedules and budgets, we complain about not having enough time and money!

The result is systems like the Comanche helicopter - WAY over budget and WAY behind schedule We spent 21 years and $7B on the Comanche before it got cancelled, having delivered zero helicopters.I could offer a dozen more examples just like this one, but I’ll restrain myself.

And like I said, we seem to be missing a little restraint.

Adding more time and money to a system development project is not a solution to acquisitions problems – it is the problem. And yet, all too often we complain about being underfunded. The truth is, we’re not underfunded. We’re OVERfunded. We have too much money. We have too much time. And this excess of funds and dollars, combined with excessive complexity, reduces accountability, increases the risk of operational irrelevance, and generally makes it harder to deliver systems that actually work.We can’t deliver an effective system in 30 years, or even in 20. We just might be able to do it in 5.We can’t do it for $65B. We can probably do it for $65M.

Why don’t we exercise restraint?I think some people fear that constraints limit our ability to act and put a damper on creativity.

But that’s not true. As Scott Dadich explained in a recent issue of Wired magazine, “The imposition of limits doesn’t stifle creativity – it enables it.”For example, the fact that I limited myself to only display one word per chart forced me to get more creative, not less.(Letters are from Flikr Letter Project)

Similarly, the restrictions in haiku are what make it beautiful, insightful and powerful.

Same with Bonsai(Image from Wikimedia Commons, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Water_Jasmine_bonsai_711,_October_10,_2008.jpg )

And same with the A-10.

Unfortunately, the current environment rewards and promotes the opposite of restraint.Right now, it’s better for my career to lead a cast of thousands and spend billions of dollars building a hugely complex system on an endless schedule, than to lead a small team and rapidly develop an inexpensive, simple system that gets fielded quickly.We are rewarding the wrong things. Instead of rewarding restraint, we encourage programmatic gluttony.Image source: http://www.conservativeoutpost.com/files/u3/Chart_arrow.gif

But if anyone can do restraint, it’s the US Military, right?Image source: http://www.defenselink.mil/home/photoessays/2005-01/p20050120a04.html

We have a tradition of self-control.We have a tradition of discipline.Image source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MCMAPstretch_MCRDSD_20060818.jpg

We have a tradition of sacrifice. Is this too blunt a statement to make? That the military services understand sacrifice?I don’t think it is. My grandfather is buried here, in Arlington Cemetery. In fact, both my grandfathers served in the US Navy, as did several of my great-grand parents. My father served in the US Air Force. That makes me fourth generation military. My family understands service. My family understands sacrifice. I was raised to appreciate restraint, and not to continually pursue, demand or expect large quantities of anything. That is part of the ethos of military service.Image source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Arlington_Cemetery.jpg

The history of the US military should teach us to appreciate the value of constraints.We can get the mission done with very little in terms of resources…Image source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Minute_Man.JPG

We have often done so. It’s part of our heritage, as Americans and as service members. It’s part of our DNA.

And when we have too much, when our budgets and schedules and architectures are bloated, when we recklessly pursue larger and larger budgets, to be spent by larger and larger organizations over longer and longer timelines, to develop bigger and bigger weapon systems with ever increasing degrees of complexity…Well, the outcome is that Hollywood makes a movie about it…

Instead of grasping after more, we should listen to novelist Richard Powel. He explains we should “Do only what is necessary to convey what is essential.”That’s good advice for life. It’s good advice for novelists. It’s also good advice for system designers, for people who write requirements, and people who make decisions about technology development projects.

The defense technology community can exercise restraint if we really want to.And if we want to ensure that we deliver affordable weapon systems that are available when needed and effective when used, we really need to look at constraints as something desirable and helpful, not as problems to be overcome.We can exercise some restraint, even if it means sacrifice on the part of the project leaders. Even if it means less power, less prestige, or less rank.

We’re not supposed to be in this business for our own interests. It’s not supposed to be about leading bigger and bigger projects and gaining more and more prestige for myself, so that I can get promoted.It’s supposed to be about service. It’s supposed to be about making sure American soldiers have what they need, when they need it, in sufficient quantities. Our lack of restraint is getting in the way of accomplishing the mission. It’s time to cut it out. It’s time for some restraint.Image source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Soldier%27s_Cross_in_Iraq-Operation_Matador.jpg