Today’s New York Times had a story on the problems the US government is having in attracting young engineers and computer scientists into defense work. As I noted a while ago, engineers and computer scientists would rather work in the commercial sector than in government.
The article interviewed Dr. Paul Kaminski, the former Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology from 1994 to 1997, about the brain drain which has become a “big factor in a breakdown in engineering management that has made huge cost overruns and long delays the maddening norm.”
The loss of expertise from the retirement of engineers/computer scientists has coincided with the inability to recruit replacements. As a result, both the engineering and management talent needed in defense programs is lacking.
Kaminski also highlighted in the article the critical deficiency in systems engineering expertise found in defense programs. He recently headed a National Academy study on systems engineering (or better put, the lack thereof) in the US Air Force which resulted in a report published earlier this year titled, “Pre-Milestone A and Early-Phase Systems Engineering: A Retrospective Review and Benefits for Future Air Force Acquisition.”
So what happens when systems engineering expertise is missing?
Kaminski noted a military satellite system, for instance, that was “designed to detect foreign missile launchings that ... [which] was inexplicably designed with two sensors that cannot operate simultaneously on the same spacecraft without extensive, costly shielding to prevent electromagnetic interference generated by one from disabling the other.”
Another? How about “a complex network of communications satellites that the Pentagon started building without a coherent plan for integration with an existing system or a consistent set of requirements to accommodate the needs of the four military services.”
Obviously, when these types of basic elements are missing, program costs and schedules increased dramatically, and the systems don't deliver what was originally promised or expected.
As a side note, I interviewed Dr. Kaminski among many other former and current defense acquisition officials for an upcoming article on defense acquisition which is scheduled for publication in IEEE Spectrum this fall. He is a very fascinating person to talk to as well as one who is universally and very highly respected by his peers in both industry and government.
Comments (2)
In the early 1980's I worked for a now retired Air Foce Major General to identify data that would support the idea that we had an engineering shortage in the US. One day while driving from Andrews AFB to the Pentagon, I told the General I couldn't find the data to support the putative shortfall. The General said to me "You damn engineers are all the same: you want to dig around in the facts and figure out wjhat they mean. All you understand is deductive logic. Have you ever heard of inductive logic?" I answered affirmatively. He then said, "Then why don't we start this way? Is the defense of America important?" I said it was (and is). He replied, "Then everything else follows."
What premise are Dr. Kaminski and his cohorts starting from to make the assertions they are making?
Posted by Joseph Carl | June 26, 2008 2:23 PM
Posted on June 26, 2008 14:23
As one of those mid-career engineers who *could* have worked in the defense sector, I am not...and not just because my career path didn't take me that way...I got lots of help from two gulf wars, the second of which is rapidly bankrupting the US and ethically unsupportable.
I am sure the defense sector has a shortage of talent...it turns out, that there is a theorem that says that a certain level of expertise (with its prerequisite of talent) is required to effectively source a sufficiently complex product.
It is also true that bureaucracy, which is generally hostile to talent (think back to Clara Barton if you need examples) is a military specialty...only overcome in times of great need, of which this is not one.
Posted by Eric Christenson | July 6, 2008 1:48 AM
Posted on July 6, 2008 01:48