top of page
Search

Innovation in Federal Procurement: A Paradox of Progress

  • brookeschamerhorn
  • Jun 24
  • 5 min read

Federal procurement has become a focal point for transformation. Executive Orders, congressional mandates, service-level innovation strategies, and high-profile memoranda; like those from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and A&S leadership have emphasized the need for innovation. The long-anticipated FAR rewrite is now underway, with a clear aim: modernize how the federal government buys by enabling speed, competition, and technological superiority. Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement The executive branch and Congress have unleashed a torrent of directives aimed at turbocharging innovation in federal acquisitions:

A Paradox: Tools Abound—But Culture Lags

Yet, amid this wave of changes lies a paradox. The FAR has always been rich with innovation tools; whether Part 12 for commercial buys, Part 13.5 for streamlined acquisition, Other Transaction Authority (OTA), or Commercial Solutions Openings (CSOs). Congress and DoD leaders have stressed speed and efficiency for years. Rapid Innovation Funds were already fostering agile development, and the Software Acquisition Pathway was designed to break procurement norms.

So what went wrong? The problem was never the tools, it was the lack of understanding and organizational will to use them. Tools without guidance are as ineffective as new rules without cultural change. Now, as we rewrite the playbook, the question remains: will changing the rules change behavior?

The mechanisms needed to drive innovation were already in place:

Yet, adoption remained limited. Why?

  1. Tools without know-how: Agencies often lacked the internal capacity and expertise to manage these pathways effectively.

  2. Risk-averse culture: Default behaviors reverted to old norms certainty and compliance over experimentation.

  3. Lack of incentives: Operational leaders weren't rewarded for using the new tools; misfires could stall careers.

Rule Changes Culture Change

Culture doesn’t transform through memoranda or executive mandates. You don’t achieve innovation by removing people, you cultivate it by empowering them. While some staff resisted change, many others had tried to lead reform but were thwarted by bureaucracy, risk aversion, or insufficient resources. After years of frustration, some have walked away; not because they didn’t care, but because they saw no path forward.

At the same time, recent cuts like Hegseth’s termination of $5.1 billion in IT consulting and advisory contracts may trim wasteful spending, but they also remove the support structures innovation leaders relied on. Pentagon Terminates $5.1 Billion in IT and Consulting Contracts. That scaffolding consultants, advisory teams, embedded expertise empowered cross-cutting change and surge capacity. Without it, innovation efforts may falter.

Changing the FAR and issuing directives is necessary, but insufficient without cultural infrastructure:

  • Memoranda and IT consulting bans may remove resistant staff, but may also displace champions of change - leaving innovation leaders understaffed.

  • Removing external 'hand-holders' (consultancies) might save money, but it also eliminates critical support for overburdened innovation teams.

Culture doesn’t pivot from mandates alone. Culture adapts over time through reinforcement, rewards, norms, and incremental change - not sweeping resets.

Too Much Change: Risk of Chaos

There’s always a delicate balance in any system. If you overhaul structure, process, personnel, and rules all at once, you may accelerate transformation but also introduce chaos. Technical and process debt accumulate. Staff become unsure which rules apply. Decision-making stalls. Innovation becomes a minefield.

Risk can drive growth, but when risk becomes the default state, even the most resilient innovators pause. Sustained uncertainty leads not to progress, but burnout.

When you overhaul every dimension at once - rules, processes, personnel, priorities, you may spark rapid transformation, but you also:

  • Create process and technical debt: teams struggle to keep up, priorities shift unpredictably.

  • Produce decision paralysis: uncertainty about which rules still apply.

  • Erode psychological safety: constant churn increases stress; the quest for innovation becomes a minefield.

For innovators, risk is a battlefield, but only when it's bounded and resolvable. When risk becomes perpetual, even the bravest may withdraw.

Will Talent Stay the Course?

Industry will adapt, it always does. But what about the government? With lower pay, outdated systems, and bureaucratic inertia, federal acquisition professionals are already stretched thin. Now, they face surging expectations and shrinking supports. How many will stay?

If we expect people to build new systems while tearing down the old without mentorship, clarity, or support we risk losing the very talent we need.

Industry is agile, it adjusts. But can the government be while:

  • Budget cuts, pay disparity, outdated equipment, and bureaucratic inertia make retention hard.

  • Expecting staff to accept lower pay and greater uncertainty, with less institutional support? That may deter even mission-driven employees.

  • Innovation needs patience, mentorship, and resilience, all difficult in today’s turbulent environment.

Recommendations: Tools, Talent & Time

If we genuinely want innovation to stick, we need:

  1. Rule clarity + implementation training: Not just updated FAR parts, but agency-wide guidance, workshops, standardized playbooks.

  2. Support teams, not just decrees: Reinvest some consulting dollars into coaching internal staff.

  3. Transition timelines: Move in phases, pilot, assess, refine, rather than blanket overhaul.

  4. Leadership incentives: Tie success metrics to adoption of innovation pathways and cultural transformation.

  5. Support stability: Acknowledge the psychological toll of change and provide buffers—mental health, peer networks, BCP.

Conclusion: From Edict to Ecosystem

Federal acquisitions are now in motion, with sweeping EOs, FAR rewrites, and multiple memos signaling real change. But transformation isn’t about deleting regulations, it’s about growing a new culture.

That takes time, investment, structured experimentation, and respect for the ecosystem we’re trying to change. Unless we pair mandates with enabling, guidance, and stability, we may achieve change—but not the kind we need.

True innovation starts not with what we take away, but with what we build next. Recent procurement reform news:




 
 
 

Comentários

bottom of page