Implementation, Absorption Capacity, and Bridging the Gap from Innovation to Sustainment (AFCEC/CB & HAF A5SM): Both the USAF (and U.S. Joint Force) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have ambitious modernization plans. The PLA has a very aggressive spiral development cycle, but little is known about the PLA’s process of turning capability into operational utility. Understanding how the PLA converts knowledge (technology) for use when introducing a new capability will be valuable in determining timelines for future capability and concept employment. While the USAF’s capability development to fielding timeline may lag behind, the United States benefits from a strong history of concept and doctrine development. Using unitary analysis or comparative analysis, how can researchers examine either or both of the USAF/Joint Force and PLA’s capacity to absorb new capabilities and concepts into demonstrated operational utility, and what are the recommendations for accelerating change and innovation at scale within the USAF and DoD?
As part of this effort to accelerate change at scale, there are numerous different processes and procedures to follow from idea creation to enterprise distribution depending on the type of innovation, development needed, programming, acquisition of, or sustainment of the innovation through the Category Management spectrum. While the current Air Force Category Management Program illustrates the responsibilities of the Category Managers, it does not clearly illustrate the process to follow for each of the 10 Categories when navigating an innovation through the respective processes or coordinating offices for enterprise distribution. Often, the lifecycle of an innovation is much shorter and faster than the development of the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP), which leads to a lack of development funds and long-term sustainment of the innovation. Without clear processes to follow in bringing an idea from Air Force acceptance to long-term sustainment, many ideas and innovations languish before enterprise distribution, never clearing the 'Valley of Death'.
Ultimately, what processes and procedures can help bridge this 'Valley of Death,' and how can consideration to doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) be included in these mapped processes?
- Gipper, Daniel P., "Innovate with Caution: Culture, (Mis)Calculations and (In)Capacity," SAASS Thesis, 2022, 150 pgs.
- Meyers, Maj. Stuart, "A Financial Manager's Role in Business Reform," GCPME 2020, 26 pgs.
- Moeller, Lt. Col. Christopher L., "Components for Successful Squadron Innovation," AWC Strategic Studies Paper, 2020, 24 pgs.
- Petrushev, Capt. Daniel, "Improving B-1 Flight Instructor Training," SOS AUAR, 2025.
- Petrushev answers this by showing how units can bypass the slow, administrative "Valley of Death" by executing changes "here and now". While establishing a standardized, Air Force-wide flight instructor program is highly desirable, the resources required to stand it up far exceed what is currently feasible. Instead, Petrushev demonstrates how individual units can absorb and execute changes immediately by analyzing existing external syllabi—such as Pilot Instructor Training (PIT) and civilian CFI programs—and manually writing, testing, and implementing simulator-based deliberate practice scenarios that immediately enhance safety and instructor readiness.
- Ramirez, Maj. Juan, "The Innovation Journey: a Quest for Continued Survival," Innovators by Design RTF, 2020, 18 pgs.
- Rhylander, Lt. Col. Erik P., "Key Factors to Achieving Significant Military Innovation," AWC Strategic Studies Paper, 2020, 25 pgs.
- Smith, Lt. Col. Benjamin, "Stop Strangling Innovation: Creating Space for Innovators in the Air Force," AF Global College thesis, 2024, 43 pgs.
- Tedder, Captain Nathan L., "Research and Development Strategy: Next Generation Technology Defeat Mechanisms," SOS AUAR 2021, 7 pgs.
-
- Bartles, Maj. Kristopher H., "Bridging the Innovation Valley of Death: Incentivizing the Transitioning of Rapid Acquisition Technology to the Warfighter Using Risk Stratification," AF Global College thesis, 2024, 51 pgs.
- Bordeau, Capt. Adam et al, "BBP on Engineering Support to Deployable Combat Wings," SOS AUAR, 3 pgs. and slides, 2025.
- Bordeau answers this question by demonstrating how embedding engineers at the operational level creates a direct pipeline from rapid tactical innovation to long-term enterprise sustainment. Because the traditional acquisitions process is not postured to develop technology at the pace of a peer conflict, he explains that embedded engineers can quickly identify requirements and prototype solutions. He illustrates this with a case study where an embedded engineer restored a broken RQ-4 application within 48 hours and then successfully transitioned the expanded capability to the commercial company Palantir for continuous development and sustainment. Through this model, operational requirements are delivered directly to the acquisition community, effectively bridging the gap between immediate battlefield innovation and long-term sustainment.
- Caruso, Tristan A., "Thwarting Antiquation: Efficient Decisions and Effective Systems for the US Air Force," ACSC paper, 2021.
- Fredrickson, Maj. Brian M., "The Laird-Packard Way: Unpacking Defense Acquisition Policy," ACSC paper, 2018.
- Kehoe, Ashley, "Preparing the Department of Defense Workforce for Supply Chain Operations," GCPME 2023, 41 pgs.
- Lodico, Maria GM, "The Race to Acquire: Rethinking Program Management Strategy for Supply Chain Risk in Defense Acquisition Programs," GCPME thesis, 2023, 32 pgs.
- Moeller, Lt. Col. Christopher L., "Components for Successful Squadron Innovation," AWC Strategic Studies Paper, 2020, 24 pgs.
- Moore, MaryLou, "A Culture of Innovation for National Defense Supply Chain Resilience," GCPME thesis, 2024, 51 pgs.
- Montoro, Lt. Col. Joseph G., "Swift Sustainment is Key to Effective Logistics," AWC Strategic Studies Paper, 2024, 28 pgs. Winner of the AWC Senior Leadership Innovation Award
- Wiegold, Maj. Benjamin R., "CI2 Shortfalls and the Case for Reform," AFGC 2025.
- What processes and procedures can help bridge this 'Valley of Death'? Weigold answers this by exposing the flaws in the USAF's current Continuous Improvement and Innovation (CI²) program and its Guardians and Airmen Innovation Network (GAIN) platform. He argues that GAIN prioritizes administrative processes for decentralized, one-off innovation submissions but fails to require structured implementation methodologies. To successfully bridge the "Valley of Death" from isolated ideas to enterprise-wide sustainment, Weigold recommends reintroducing rigorous, industry-standard procedures like the Lean Six Sigma (LSS) DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) framework. By mandating these formal processes, deploying cross-functional teams, and linking CI² projects directly to readiness metrics, the USAF can ensure that grassroots innovations are systematically scaled and integrated into long-term sustainment efforts.
- White, Cameron A., "Can the United States Air Force Deliver in a Near-Peer Fight?" AF Global College thesis, 2025, 49 pgs.
- Wright, Lt. Col. Jessica, "Rank and Rigor: Navigating Power Dynamics in Defense Acquisition," Air Force Fellows Paper, 2024, 3 pgs.
- Varga, Lt. Col. Jennifer, "Breaking the Cycle: Delivering More Stable and Predictive Funding for Rapid Acquisitions," AWC Professional Studies Paper, 2019, 30 pgs.