For decades, the U.S. defense-industrial base has been a force multiplier—delivering unmatched capability at scale. But if we’re honest with ourselves, we know the old formula is showing signs of strain. Traditional defense primes continue to dominate, but innovation today is increasingly being driven by smaller, non-traditional firms—firms that operate on commercial timelines, not Pentagon budgeting timelines.

That tension is where the real challenge lies. How do we preserve the reliability and reach of our legacy systems while tapping into the creativity and velocity of newer players? What’s the smartest path to unite speed with scale in the defense industrial base?

I asked this very question to my network on LinkedIn—senior leaders, acquisition professionals, innovators, and policymakers. Here’s what they said.

Closing the Gap Between Traditional and Non-Traditional Players

The U.S. defense-industrial base is split between traditional primes and fast-moving non-traditional firms. I polled my audience: What’s the best way to close the gap?

Create joint R&D and prototyping pipelines – 31%

Modernize acquisition to match commercial cycles – 31%

Fund scaling infrastructure for non-traditionals – 23%

Require integration testing earlier in programs – 14%

The split between the top two choices speaks volumes. “Create joint R&D and prototyping pipelines” and “Modernize acquisition to match commercial cycles” both earned 31%—a clear signal that the community sees collaboration and acquisition reform as equally essential to solving this divide.

Joint pipelines allow us to test early, fail fast, and succeed faster. It’s about getting the right people—primes and non-traditionals—at the same table early, aligned around shared outcomes. On the other hand, aligning acquisition cycles with the speed of the commercial market would allow the government to meet industry halfway, instead of putting innovation through a bureaucratic meat grinder.

“Fund scaling infrastructure for non-traditionals” came in at 23%—a reminder that the tech startups we want to attract can’t make the leap from prototype to production without serious investment. If we want commercial speed, we need to build a runway for them to take off.

Trailing at 14%, “Require integration testing earlier in programs” shows us that process tweaks aren’t the big fix here. People are looking for systemic shifts, not Band-Aids.

Naval Shipbuilding: Where Tech Meets Steel

Our shipbuilding capacity is under strain—and that’s not news to anyone reading this. Whether it’s meeting production timelines or modernizing legacy platforms, the Navy and its industry partners face constant pressure. I turned to my audience again to ask:

“In your view, which technological advancement will most effectively enhance U.S. naval shipbuilding capacity?”

Advanced automation and robotics – 57%

Modular and additive manufacturing – 23%

Digital twin and simulation technologies – 10%

AI-driven supply chain optimization – 10%

An overwhelming 57% identified advanced automation and robotics as the game-changer for naval shipbuilding. That’s not just about efficiency—it’s about solving a labor shortage, improving precision, and compressing build timelines. With labor costs and availability posing serious constraints, automation isn’t optional—it’s a lifeline.

Modular and additive manufacturing at 23% reinforces a growing belief that shipbuilding should be more plug-and-play. That’s how we get speed and agility into a domain that’s historically been anything but.

The Golden Dome: Space, Security, and Strategy

And then came a seismic announcement: President Donald Trump revealed an initial $25 billion investment—part of a broader $175 billion vision—to launch the Golden Dome, a space-based missile defense system. The goal? To finish it within his term and reshape how the U.S. defends against threats from Russia, China, and North Korea.

It’s ambitious. It’s strategic. It’s controversial. And it raises massive questions around feasibility, diplomacy, and sustainability.

So I asked:

“In your opinion, what is the most significant challenge the U.S. faces implementing the Golden Dome system?”

Securing sustained funding and political support – 47%

Technical feasibility and integration of advanced technologies – 23%

Coordinating with international allies and managing geopolitical sensitivities – 19%

Addressing concerns over the militarization of space – 11%

Nearly half (47%) of respondents zeroed in on one critical truth: sustained funding and political support will make or break this program. We’ve seen promising initiatives fizzle when the political winds change. The Golden Dome won’t succeed on vision alone—it needs a consistent, bipartisan commitment with serious staying power.

That said, the 23% who identified technical feasibility are asking smart questions. Integrating AI, sensors, interceptors, and battle management in a space domain is no small feat. It’s one thing to dream of a Star Wars-era capability—it’s another to engineer it into being.

And at 19%, the geopolitical realities aren’t lost on us. How will allies respond? What message does this send to China? How do we balance deterrence with diplomacy?

Lastly, 11% raised the alarm on militarizing space. It’s a valid concern—and one that will likely be used by our adversaries to frame their own escalatory actions.

Final Thoughts: The Next Era Needs a New Model

What we’re seeing—across every poll—is a convergence. The defense industrial base can no longer operate as two separate economies: one for speed, the other for scale. The next chapter demands a hybrid model that allows us to move fast when we need to and build big when we must.

Whether it’s aligning acquisition with commercial reality, doubling down on automation, or tackling moonshot programs like the Golden Dome, the common denominator is alignment—across industry, government, and strategy.

Let’s not wait for the next crisis to finally get serious about closing the gap. We have the tools. We have the talent. What we need is the will to act.

As always, I’ll keep listening, analyzing, and challenging the assumptions that hold us back. Thank you to those who continue to engage in these important conversations—your insight is shaping the future.