The Carney government is improving the speed and agility with which it executes defence procurements, and the pace of change has been remarkable. It has already moved to abandon the old byzantine business model involving multiple departments and ministers, and is transitioning to a more integrated structure – the signature element of which is the Defence Investment Agency. While the agency does not fundamentally solve the perennial problem of dispersed ministerial accountabilities, it does have considerable potential to improve the efficiency of the procurement system.
However, the government will need to pursue deeper reforms if the Canadian Armed Forces are going to meet the fast-evolving challenges of today and, even more, tomorrow. The problem it faces, particularly when it comes to AI and other advanced technologies, is that many of these are developing at light speed. Even if the government is able to substantially enhance its procurement processes, that alone will still not be enough to keep up with the evolution of key technologies.
Other countries have recognized the need for accelerated procurement processes able to meet these challenges, among other things adopting policies that enable simplified contracting for seamless and rapid transitions from prototyping through development to production of innovative solutions. Ukraine’s remarkable success in quickly fielding a wide array of low-cost drones and other battlefield systems provides but one stark illustration of what is possible.
Nowhere is this type of agile procurement approach indiscriminately applied. It typically operates alongside more traditional methods designed for higher-cost, higher-risk acquisitions. The rapid approach is most useful where operational needs or technologies are quickly evolving and low-cost advanced solutions can deliver outsized results. Funding pools are typically limited, and policies governing contracting are kept flexible and simple, with authority delegated to those best placed to understand the requirement and work with the contractor and the military client to see the solution through to delivery.
Unfortunately, Canada is far behind in this kind of procurement. Companies with good ideas and the ability to quickly develop needed solutions are still finding themselves shunted back into the traditional, plodding acquisitions pipeline when it comes to moving past initial development to putting a contract in place for production and delivery.
Contrast this with an initiative from as far back as 2016 to replace outdated technology in US Central Command’s air operations centre in Qatar – well described in a book by Raj Shah and Christopher Kirchhoff titled Unit X. It took just months for a rapid procurement team to partner with a tech company to prototype, develop, and deliver an app that not only simplified and sped up the work involved, but also significantly boosted the efficiency of air-to-air refueling operations – saving 25 million US gallons of jet fuel a year and recouping the $1.5 million development costs in three days of operations.
Ukraine too has become highly adept at rapid exploitation of technology in its war with Russia. Innovation is broadly embraced: even front-line brigades are able to do their own contracting for speedy delivery of urgently needed solutions.
Canada needs to catch up. Certainly, establishing a rapid and agile prototyping, development, and production procurement pathway will not be easy. The US team that contracted for the air operations centre solution had to overcome deeply entrenched bureaucratic skepticism, opposition, and even sabotage, and it was only through top-level personal leadership from the US Secretary of Defense, and the results delivered, that the ingrained opposition was overcome.
We can expect similar resistance within Canada’s bureaucracy. Among other challenges, these procurements often need to adapt to a very different business model, widely used by technology companies globally, which involves starting not with a product but rather with the customer, identifying a problem, and working back from there. This kind of contractual relationship is anathematic to government procurement orthodoxy, as is the fact that “good enough” solutions delivered promptly, with improved iterations to follow, often have to be prioritized over “perfect” solutions that take time to deliver.
The lesson for the Government of Canada is that, to deliver these kinds of quick, low-cost, and innovative solutions, it cannot get the intended outcomes by simply directing the bureaucracy to find a way to move files faster. Rather, ministers will need to personally lead the effort to create an effective pathway for engaging with industry. Deeply ingrained bureaucratic culture will need to be upended, and the effort to make the necessary institutional changes will need to be sustained and disciplined. Arguments that existing procedures can enable rapid procurements, as was demonstrated during the COVID 19 pandemic, will need to be refuted – these exceptions have always been one-off acquisitions personally led by ministers in times of urgency.
This “heroic effort” approach will not work to meet the rapid technology adoption needs of today and tomorrow; ministers simply cannot be expected to exercise direct oversight of the volume of files involved. What is required is a purpose-designed policy and business process framework for quickly responding to smaller requirements for rapid prototyping, development, and production – executed by competent public servants empowered to achieve results. Absent sustained political leadership to build and institutionalize this framework, the bureaucracy will quickly bury the concept and revert to its status quo comfort zone.
The views expressed in this op-ed are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of the Institute or its staff.
Colonel Charles Davies (Retired) served for four years as the strategic planning director for DND’s Materiel Group and three years as senior director responsible for defence materiel acquisition and support policies, business processes, and standards. He is a Senior Fellow of the CDA Institute and the author of “True North Strong? A Canadian Citizen’s Guide to National Defence”.
