Editor’s note: The following is an exclusive piece shared with Breaking Defense by four of the Pentagon’s top acquisition officials: Gen. Dale R. White, the first-ever Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapons Systems; Lt. Gen. Robert M. Collins, the Principal Military Deputy, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology); VADM Seiko Okano, the Principal Military Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition; and Maj. Gen. Stephen G. Purdy, the Military Deputy, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Space Acquisition and Integration).
On Nov. 7, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth declared that “Acquisition is now a warfighting function.” With those six words, he did more than simply rename the Defense Acquisition System — he fundamentally transformed what it means to be an acquisition professional.
For the first time in the 55 years of modern acquisition history, we’re not asking our acquisition workforce to minimize risk and avoid blame. We’re asking them to own the fight.
Critics are already circling, dismissing this as another reshuffling of org charts with tough talk about “accountability,” focusing on punishing laggards. They’re wrong. This isn’t about punishment — it’s about liberation. And for those of us who’ve spent careers navigating the labyrinth of modern acquisition, it’s the opportunity we’ve been waiting for.
Accountability Isn’t Punishment — It’s Liberation
Let’s be clear about what “accountability” has meant in defense acquisition for the past half-century: blame without authority.
Program managers inherited detailed requirements etched in stone by the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS), received funding months late due to continuing resolutions, and faced a dozen different stakeholders with veto power over any decision. When changing world threats, shifting funding priorities, and supply chain challenges caused delays and cost overruns, we held program managers “accountable” for outcomes they never truly controlled.
Voyager is accelerating access to space
After manifesting 1,400 payloads aboard the ISS, Voyager is applying its mission management expertise to the next generation of space stations, ensuring uninterrupted mission readiness and success from the ground to space.
This wasn’t accountability; it was theater. True accountability, as organizational theorists have argued for decades, requires that decision rights align with responsibility. You can’t hold someone accountable for a race they’re not allowed to run.
This traditional approach has had unintended consequences. It has driven talented individuals to seek opportunities elsewhere, where they have greater autonomy and decision-making power. Those who remained were often incentivized to adhere strictly to process, even at the expense of speed and innovation. Following such processes resulted in an umbrella that protected individuals. Those that took prudent risks to drive outcomes opened themselves up to career uncertainty. We need to move past this cycle.
The key to unlocking the full potential of our acquisition workforce lies in aligning responsibility with genuine authority. We must empower our program managers and acquisition professionals with the tools, enablers, and decision-making latitude they need to succeed. This includes granting them greater flexibility in trading performance for schedule when appropriate, streamlining requirements, and making informed decisions within their areas of responsibility.
The new Portfolio Acquisition Executives (PAEs) aren’t just accountable for outcomes: they’re empowered to achieve them. For the first time, when we say someone “owns” a program or an outcome, we mean it. This connects to a deeper truth from behavioral science: Humans excel when they have psychological ownership — when they feel something is truly theirs. That requires three things: control over decisions, intimate knowledge of the work, and the ability to see it through to completion. The new system delivers all three.
Program managers are now assigned tours aligned with actual delivery cycles, ensuring they’ll be present when their decisions come to fruition. They’ll celebrate when capabilities reach the field. And yes, they’ll be removed if they fail: but that’s not punishment, it’s respect. We’re finally treating acquisition professionals like warfighters who can win or lose battles, not bureaucrats who merely process paper.
Trading Acquisition Risk For Operational Risk
Here’s what critics miss: we’re not eliminating risk, we’re choosing which risks to take.
For decades, the department has accepted massive operational risk — fielding some capabilities years late even as adversaries increase their speed of iteration — to avoid any acquisition risk. We’ve prioritized perfect requirements over timely capability, leading occasionally to exquisite systems delivered too late to matter.
Secretary Hegseth aims to reverse this trade-off. As he stated clearly: “We will accept acquisition risk to reduce operational risk.” That means fielding 80 percent solutions in two years rather than 100 percent solutions in ten. It means schedule-driven increments where the delivery date is sacred, but specifications can flex. It means treating acquisition like the warfighting function it is, where speed saves lives.
Keeping risk small by leveraging commercial-off-the-shelf solutions to enhance manufacturing and technology maturity, deploying equipment early in operational environments, and designing adaptable base capabilities will enable course corrections while keeping warfighters equipped.
This is not about recklessness; it’s about making informed decisions to optimize overall mission effectiveness. It’s about recognizing that speed and adaptability are critical force multipliers in today’s dynamic security environment.
The Attraction Effect
Something remarkable happens when you create high-accountability, high-authority positions: the right people compete for them. We see this in pockets today such as the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office, SOCOM’s acquisition apparatus, or DARPA. These organizations don’t struggle to recruit talent — they have to turn people away.
Why? Because exceptional individuals want to own outcomes that matter. They aspire to be the program manager who delivers a Collaborative Combat Aircraft increment in record time, not the one who successfully navigates 30 program reviews. When you match accountability with authority, add clear scorecards focused on time-to-field, and enable real wins within a single tour, you don’t have to beg for talent. Talent finds you.
This new model doesn’t isolate acquisition professionals with impossible choices. The reforms pair them with operational partners who understand that in combat, speed beats perfection. Operators will sit alongside acquisition teams, helping make the tough trades between capability and schedule.
When a program manager decides to field a good-enough solution to meet a critical deadline, they’ll have operators in the room who helped make that call — and who will defend it. This is shared ownership of hard decisions, not solo accountability for failure.
A Call To Arms
To the acquisition professionals out there: this is our moment. For years, we’ve operated in a system that treated us like potential failures to be managed rather than potential heroes to be unleashed. That era ends now.
Yes, the stakes will be high, and your name will be tied to outcomes. But the rewards will be higher as well — especially the profound satisfaction of knowing you personally accelerated American lethality.
The Warfighting Acquisition System isn’t asking for perfection. It’s asking for speed, adaptability, and boldness. To make trades others fear to make. To tell hard truths about what can be delivered when. To own victories that matter.
This is what’s different this time — we are not adding accountability to a broken system. We’re building a system where accountability equals ownership, ownership drives speed, and speed wins wars.
We are warriors, and our nation is counting on us. Let’s deliver.
Gen. Dale R. White is the Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Critical Major Weapons Systems.
Lt. Gen. Robert M. Collins is the Principal Military Deputy, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology).
VADM Seiko Okano is the Principal Military Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition.
Maj. Gen. Stephen G. Purdy is the Military Deputy, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Space Acquisition and Integration).