Navy scientist Charles Miller and mathemetician Jessica Hildebrand perform pre-flight checks on a modular, UAV-mounted chemical, biological, and radiological detection system developed by junior scientists and engineers at Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren. (U.S. Navy)
For the past 58 years, the U.S. Navy has provided strategic deterrence with its Fleet Ballistic Missile (FBM) program. The current FBM is the Trident II D5 submarine-launched ballistic missile on board the Ohio-class submarine. This weapon system is a marvel of modern technology and systems engineering. The Trident II is a descendant of the first generation of FMB, the Polaris A1, developed in the late 1950s. During the past six decades, the FBM has grown into a cornerstone of U.S. strategic defense, providing unrivaled survivability and reliability.
The Navy’s management of FBM development has been hailed as one of the most successful acquisition programs in the service’s history.1 This did not happen by accident. A confluence of technological, political, and programmatic factors drove the success of the program. When the Navy Special Projects Office (SPO) was created in 1955 to develop what would become the Polaris missile, much of the technology that would ultimately be fitted on the first operational missile was conceptual at best. Yet in less than five years, the FBM went from a futuristic concept to an operational weapon system. As the Navy today looks toward future challenges, it may benefit from looking back at one of its greatest accomplishments to see what lessons can be applied.
SPO’s success can be credited to several strategic management decisions. The first was to partner with industry, the national labs, and the rest of the Navy in an entirely new way. SPO couldn’t just come up with technical specifications for a weapons system and let a prime contractor figure out how to make it work. It needed to lead the development and coordination of the technology as it matured. This approach allowed SPO to determine not only what was feasible at that moment in time, but also what would be in the future.
For such a daunting technological innovation to go well, SPO had to recruit the best civilian technical expertise it could find. Due to the importance of the project, the Civil Service Commission was convinced to rate many of the positions at relatively high grades to attract the best talent. SPO’s ability to recruit the brightest minds to work on the program proved beneficial as it coordinated development, sponsored research, and oversaw the transition of the technology being created in the research labs into functional systems produced by the industrial base. This process would not have worked without a staff of technical experts to foster the development and deployment of the weapon system.
Applications to Today’s Navy
Two elements instrumental to the success of the FBM development have particular relevance to the broader Navy today: cultivating partnerships and developing a technically talented civilian force.
Partnerships are crucial to solving the complex challenges facing the Navy. SPO relied on partnerships with other Department of Defense functions, academia, defense contractors, private-sector research and development, and international collaborators. The Special Projects Office excelled at finding partners that could help achieve the program’s mission and set up program offices co-located with these partners. Similarly, today’s Navy must find and tap into the resources of new partners that have a common interest in developing new technologies and solving technological challenges.
Today’s Navy cannot fully address technical challenges, particularly in information warfare and cyberspace, without collaborating with industry. Nor can these goals be attained without a highly talented, youthful civilian technical cadre that is invested in the mission enough to stay the course for the long haul. While competition for this type of expertise is intense, attracting recent graduates equipped with the latest skills and ideas is crucial.
Unfortunately, the service has not been very effective over the past several years in attracting the next generation of technical talent. According to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), in December 2017, of the 25,472 Navy civilian positions classified as technical, only 4.3 percent were occupied by persons under the age of 30. There are more technical positions held by those over age 65 than under 30. This poses a major risk to the Navy’s ability to meet future staffing requirements for technical positions. The service should increase direct-hire authority for technical positions and expand recruitment at colleges and universities. To attract new talent, aspects of federal service should be promoted that appeal to younger generations, such as diverse and desirable duty stations, student-loan repayment programs, flexible schedules, overtime/compensatory time, job security, Thrift Savings Plans, and pension programs. It’s no secret the next generation of innovators prefers living in urban areas. The Navy will have much more success attracting civilian talent to areas like Washington, D.C.; San Diego; and the Pacific Northwest than to China Lake, California; Dahlgren, Virginia; and Crane, Indiana.
Civilian retention is also key to maintaining a technically proficient organization. According to OPM, in 2017, 13 percent of Navy civilian personnel under the age of 30 holding technical positions left government service. On the 2017 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, 26 percent of Navy civilian personnel indicated they were considering leaving their organization for another job within the next year. The Navy must more closely examine retention to better understand what attracts civilians to federal service, and what factors influence career decision-making.
Building partnerships with industry goes hand in hand with attracting and retaining a talented workforce. The Defense Innovation Unit Experimental (DIUx) is an example of this. DIUx works together with commercial innovators on cutting-edge technology and rapid capability development to benefit the Department of Defense. The DIUx program offices are in Silicon Valley, Boston, and Austin, where these partners are located. Special hiring authorities are used, and desirable locations attract technology experts experienced in commercial innovation.2 While DIUx is still a new, small organization, the initial results are promising and show how partnerships and technical innovation can produce solutions for the warfighter.
The Navy is embarking on a period of ship growth, where agility and innovation are essential to confront an unknown security landscape. The FBM program showed how a national security imperative can mobilize the Navy and the industrial base to achieve impressive accomplishments in a short time. To be sure, this was possible with relatively unlimited financial and political resources— but also through smart acquisition, rich partnerships and adept talent management.
The Navy saw an opportunity for a sea-based ballistic missile and managed the political, technical, and programmatic challenges necessary for success. The partnerships, personnel, and organizational agility that contributed to the program’s feats are just as important today as they were 60 years ago.
- Government Accountability Office Report to the Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Fleet Ballistic Missile Program Offers Lessons for Successful Programs, 1992.
- Defense Innovation Unit Experimental Annual Report 2017.
Mr. Russell currently works as a program analyst at Navy Medicine West. He previously worked as an engineer at the U.S. Navy Strategic Weapon Facility Pacific.