March 12, 2026
The auditory version of this piece is provided courtesy of the Air & Space Forces Association, commemorating and assisting our Air Force personnel, Guardians, and their relatives. Discover further details at afa.org
Even though the Department of Defense has indicated its aim to expand technological capabilities, deploy novel systems more rapidly, and collaborate extensively with unconventional suppliers, a recent study pinpoints enduring obstacles related to production capacity, allocation of resources, labor force, and updating efforts, which might impede its success in achieving those objectives.
The yearly National Security Innovation Base assessment by the Reagan Institute evaluates the Department of Defense’s efficacy and advancement across several domains the institute considers vital signs of a robust, varied military production sector.
“We observe foundational elements, yet we haven’t reached our destination,” Roger Zakheim, serving as the Reagan Institute’s Director in Washington, informed journalists on March 11. “Significant ambitions exist for the developments within our innovative foundation and the consequent influence it ought to exert on our nation’s security. However, in our estimation, we have not witnessed adequate headway in that regard. The manufacturing output and the updating processes are not manifesting throughout the military establishment as we believe they ought to.”
The ambitions Zakheim alluded to are predominantly encompassed within Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s plan to revolutionize how the Department of Defense procures and deploys systems—and with which enterprises it collaborates to achieve this. This novel methodology, disclosed in November, mandates that military branches embrace a ‘commercial-first’ procurement philosophy and devise customized fabrication blueprints aimed at escalating output volumes. Furthermore, it supports several modifications advocates have urged for lately, such as abolishing the unwieldy Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System and establishing swiftness as a key performance indicator for initiatives.
These alterations, coupled with indications from the Trump administration suggesting the fiscal year 2027 budget proposal might elevate the DOD’s overall allocation to $1.5 trillion, convey a potent signal regarding financial emphasis to firms seeking collaboration with the agency, as the study highlights. Nevertheless, notwithstanding an uptick in military technology expenditure—and an expressed desire to integrate more civilian technology—grants to unconventional defense enterprises continue to constitute under 1 percent of all agreements.
Moreover, an unprecedented governmental closure, combined with an absence of more profound program administration changes and erratic financial backing, renders that communication even more intricate.
“The ‘Procurement Revitalization Strategy’ bolsters a conscious drive for swifter, outcome-oriented purchasing,” the study declares. “Nonetheless, implementation is hampered by budgetary holdups, temporary financing, and restricted transparency from fund allocation to expenditure.”
The agency persistently encounters difficulties with crucial updating initiatives, as indicated by the report. Although the DOD has highlighted advancements in significant developmental endeavors such as the Air Force’s B-21, the various branches are still contending to launch hypersonic armament projects, and the F-35’s Block 4 upgrade initiative lags behind its timeline.
Expansion poses another difficulty, partly attributable to a vulnerable procurement network and insufficient capital injection into novel fabrication methods that could enhance the efficiency of assembly lines. The agency is progressing appropriately, the report asserts, referencing the DOD’s commitment to vital minerals and a five percent rise in output. However, uncertainty persists regarding the readiness of the supply network and industrial foundation for a prospective confrontation with China.
“The United States is striving to augment military production capacity, encompassing everything from securing and processing essential minerals to sophisticated fabrication and expanding operational presence,” the study indicates. “Both governmental and private funds are boosting output across the entire spectrum, yet inherent weaknesses persist—especially within lower-tier procurement networks.”
Eric Snelgrove, a domain specialist instrumental in formulating the study, suggested that supplementary financial backing in fiscal year 2027 might aid in tackling certain difficulties, particularly if directed towards boosting the manufacture of more cost-effective self-governing platforms and missile defense systems. Zakheim warned that although greater financial provision would be beneficial, a substantial increment in just one year might prove detrimental, particularly if not maintained in subsequent fiscal plans.
“My view is that attempting it for a single year would result in a less effective utilization of those resources and likely wouldn’t yield the outcomes we are discussing here in an ideal manner,” he commented.
Further structural changes aimed at the industrial sector are anticipated soon—prominent legislators in Congress, among them House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), have declared that the 2027 National Defense Authorization bill will place particular emphasis on revitalizing the military production foundation, analogous to how the 2025 legislative act concentrated on the well-being of military personnel and the 2026 act zeroed in on procurement regulations.
The auditory version of this piece is provided courtesy of the Air & Space Forces Association, commemorating and assisting our Air Force personnel, Guardians, and their relatives. Discover further details at afa.org