PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
John G. (Jerry) McGinn
Executive Director
Greg and Camille Baroni Center for Government Contracting
Costello College of Business
George Mason University
BARONI CENTER FACULTY RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
Edward Hyatt
Jeffrey S. Kojac
Olivia Letts
Pursuant to Sec. 1004(f)(2)(C), conduct “a review of how the process supports joint efforts, capability and platform lifecycles, and transitioning technologies to production.”
One of the alleged issues with PPBE that has received a lot of attention is that it can cause the failure of technology transition through the “valley of death” between experimental projects and programs of record. For example, the October 2021 Department of Defense (DoD) Prototyping Handbook finds that “DoD’s Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process makes it difficult for prototyping projects to obtain necessary funding when it’s needed. The PPBE process takes nearly two years from the time a funding need is identified to the time funding is available. In the fast-paced world of technology development, this lag in funding can prevent the timely development and deployment of a capability needed to address an emerging threat.”
While there have been numerous articles decrying the “valley of death” problem in the DoD, there is little empirical evidence or root-cause analyses. Certainly, not every experimental or commercial technology is viable for transition into operational use. The “valley of death” thus provides a useful screening process. In its Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 final report, the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense recognized that discussions of PPBE reform have been closely linked with the “valley of death” issue but cautioned that the goal of the resourcing process is to “increase military capabilities” rather than measure “how many technologies can be transitioned.” This makes it clear that there is an opportunity cost to every potential capability for technology transition.
Crucial questions of technology transition include:
- Are higher-valued opportunities foregone at the expense of continuing lower-valued programs?
- Is the PPBE process a significant root cause of failure to reallocate resources to higher-valued uses as distinct from the JCIDS or Small “A” acquisition process?
The study team for this task at the Baroni Center for Government Contracting at George Mason University (GMU) developed six case study vignettes of roughly 5 to 10 pages to assess the impact of the PPBE process on technology transition.:
- Case Study 1: Navy Large and Medium Unmanned Surface Vessels.
- Case Study 2: Air Force Collaborative Combat Aircraft.
- Case Study 3: Army Robotic Combat Vehicle.
- Case Study 4: Space Development Agency.
- Case Study 5: Tactical Intelligence Targeting Access Node.
- Case Study 6: Joint Rapid Acquisition Cell