opportunity rather than a contract disruption consistently deliver more relevant capability. Recent reform efforts encourag - ing trade-offs among cost, schedule, and performance reflect a move to - ward adaptability. What this means in practice is simple: The ability to ad - just becomes a strength rather than a liability. Agile emphasizes that decisions should be made by those with the most relevant knowledge. Cross- functional teams are expected to collaborate and respond quickly to emerging challenges. Traditional acquisition systems rely on hierarchical decision-making and layered oversight. While these structures support accountability, they can also slow execution and distance the decision authority from operational understanding. Efforts to reduce approval layers and empower program managers re - flect an important step forward. How - ever, structural changes alone are not enough. Real progress depends on trust—specifically, trust in decentral - ized decision-making. One acquisi - tion office that focused on minimum viable product found a material solu - tion that, with a quick test excursion, was shown to be effective in solving multiple performance issues. Em - powered team members assessed, received user feedback, catalogued, approved for use, and fielded the product in six months’ total. The work did not change. The decision author - ity did. And the product became the standard military rifle ammunition Agile and Lean thinking both em - phasize eliminating activities that do not contribute directly to value. Sim - plicity, or maximizing the amount of work not done, is not about do - ing less but about focusing on what matters most. Over time, acquisition systems ac - cumulate processes and documenta - magazine across all Services. Optimize Whole System, Eliminate Waste
tion requirements that increase fric - tion. Each requirement may have been introduced for a valid reason, but the combined effect can slow ex - ecution without improving outcomes. The Secretary of War’s ATS memo - randum, with its emphasis on elimi - nating the Joint Capabilities Inte - gration and Development System, streamlining the Federal Acquisition Regulation/Defense Federal Acquisi - tion Regulation Supplement require - ments, and replacing Analysis of Al - ternatives with rapid prototyping are all expressions of this principle. Each individual reform targets a specific source of friction. Taken together, they reflect a coherent effort to rede - sign the system around throughput rather than compliance. A useful way to test any process against this stan - dard is to ask a simple question: If this step were eliminated, would the Warfighter receive capability faster or slower? If the honest answer is faster, the step deserves scrutiny. Barriers to Full Adoption Despite strong alignment between Agile principles and the objectives
of the ATS, the memorandum stops short of naming the framework it is describing. This matters more than one might surmise. When a workforce lacks a shared vocabulary for what it is asked to do, implementation be - comes uneven. Some program offices will interpret “speed and flexibility” as license to skip documentation. Others will treat it as encouragement to compress traditional timelines while keeping every existing process intact. Neither outcome advances the transformation. Naming Agile as the underlying philosophy would not constrain the reform—it would accelerate it. The warfighting acquisition workforce already has meaningful exposure to Agile methods through the Software Acquisition Pathway, Warfighting Ac - quisition University coursework, and industry partnerships. That founda - tion can be built upon. But without an explicit connection between the memorandum’s direction and the broader Agile framework, much of that existing knowledge remains siloed in software programs rather than applied across the acquisition
Suggested Reading Beck, K., et al. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development . Department of Defense. (2019). Software Acquisition and Practices (SWAP) study . Defense Innovation Board. Department of Defense. (2022). Operation of the Adaptive Acquisition Frame - work (DoDI 5000.02). Highsmith, J. (2009). Agile Project Management: Creating Innovative Prod - ucts . Addison-Wesley. Reinertsen, D. (2009). The Principles of Product Development Flow: Second Generation Lean Product Development . Celeritas Publishing. Rigby, D. K., Sutherland, J., & Takeuchi, H. (2016). “Embracing Agile: How to Master the Process That’s Transforming Management. Harvard Business Review , 94 (5), 40–50. Takeuchi, H., & Nonaka, I. (1986). “The New New Product Development Game.” Harvard Business Review , 64 (1), 137–146.
MAY – JUNE 2026 | DEFENSE ACQUISITION MAGAZINE 17
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker