With the termination of supplementary funds looming, the U.S. military is bracing for the acquisition environment of the future. Much of the defense budgets in the near term will be allocated to replace critical equipment worn out faster than anticipated by wartime operations. As a result, other programs will have to vie for the funding they require. In the information technology sector, acquisitions experts also are striving to reduce the time required for accepting delivery of new technology so troops can stay ahead of the development curve.
 
The U.S. Defense Department is moving toward more realistic requirement schedules and cost estimates to avoid cost overruns and other problems it has experienced. “In general, we’re moving to programs of less risk,” explains Tim Harp, acting deputy assistant secretary of defense for command, control, communications, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and information technology acquisition. The department is looking more closely at technical readiness levels and other factors as well.
 
In terms of communications procurement, the biggest program is the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS). As the JTRS family of systems nears its production phase, each piece will be central to communications acquisitions. Another important factor in communications procurement is increased emphasis on information assurance across the Global Information Grid (GIG). One such program that relies on improved information assurance is the U.S. Army’s Warfighter Information Network–Tactical, a backbone communications network with high-speed, on-the-move capabilities that will link soldiers on the ground with commanders and with the GIG.
 
The biggest change in procurements will be the trend to reduce the acquisition cycle time significantly. For information technology, this is especially important because the refresh rates of the technology are shorter than the military’s acquisition cycle. The Defense Department is aiming to integrate agile acquisition cycles to reduce the time to market for emerging technologies. In the past, military programs have been large, departmentwide development efforts. In the future, Harp expects to move to smaller, shorter development efforts that will draw from different sources. The change is both mandated by Congress and a natural result of the way technology is moving.
 
Another major change facing acquisitions across the Defense Department in the near future is the reduction of supplemental funding that has existed in the past few years. Whether the scarcity of resources and tighter budgets occur in 2008, 2009 or beyond, sooner or later the military will have to address the decrease in funding. The results will ripple through acquisitions. “That will be a belt tightening for the department whenever that happens,” Harp says.
 
The affect on information technology will depend on a spectrum of priorities. Some aspects of the field are easy to defer; others need immediate attention; and some have a strong business case for immediate action. Issues such as defending the network will be a high priority, but in general, the information technology community has a nature that says it can make do. Harp describes this as a “we can live with legacy one more year” attitude.
 
Although information technology professionals may strive to work with what they have, Defense Department technology officials want to keep up with Moore’s Law and the rapid acceleration of the technology refresh rate. The military needs to depend on industry because defense systems are becoming increasingly dependent on commercial applications. As the Defense Department transitions to service-oriented architecture, the individual services will be more commercial based, and the military will look to buy even more tools off the shelf. Harp explains that the department is looking to industry to continue its independent research and development so the military can take advantage of maturing technologies as they become available.

According to the assistant secretary, it is critical that industry lead the military in technology, especially in information technology. Private organizations have more capability in-house than the military does to develop the necessary tools and systems. The most pressing areas for industry to address are cybersecurity and the emerging cyberthreat.
 
The goal for the military as it moves to its new era of acquisitions is to manage time constraints, schedules and cost estimates to deliver programs at cost and on time. All of the efforts by industry contribute to that. “It’s going to be an exciting couple of years here,” Harp says.
 
 
The full version of this article is published in the January 2008 issue of SIGNAL Magazine, in the mail to AFCEA members and subscribers January 2, 2008. For information about purchasing this issue, joining AFCEA or subscribing to SIGNAL, contact AFCEA Member Services.