ASSURING THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE A STRONG
Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics [STEM] Workforce
Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Workforce
Needs for the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Board on Higher Education and Workforce
Division on Policy and Global Affairs
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING AND
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by contract number HQ0034-10-D-0003, delivery order 0003, between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26213-2
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26213-5
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS WORKFORCE NEEDS FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE U.S. DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE
C.D. (DAN) MOTE, JR. (NAE), Co-chair, University of Maryland, College Park
BURT S. BARNOW, George Washington University
JAMES S.B. CHEW, L-3 Communications
LAWRENCE J. DELANEY, Titan Corporation (retired)
MARY L. GOOD (NAE), University of Arkansas at Little Rock
DANIEL E. HASTINGS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
ROBERT J. HERMANN (NAE), Private Consultant, Bloomfield, Connecticut
J.C. HERZ, Batchtags, LLC
RAY O. JOHNSON, Lockheed Martin Corporation
ANITA K. JONES (NAE), University of Virginia
SHARON LEVIN, University of Missouri-St. Louis
FRANCES S. LIGLER (NAE), Naval Research Laboratory
AARON LINDENBERG, Stanford University
PAUL D. NIELSEN (NAE), Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University
DANIEL T. OLIVER, Naval Postgraduate School
C. KUMAR N. PATEL (NAS/NAE), Pranalytica, Inc.
LEIF E. PETERSON, Advanced HR Concepts and Solutions, LLC
STEPHEN M. ROBINSON (NAE), University of Wisconsin-Madison
MICHAEL S. TEITELBAUM, Harvard Law School
RONALD WILLIAMS, The College Board
TERRY JAGGERS, Lead Board Director
MARTIN OFFUTT, Study Director
CATHERINE DIDION, Senior Program Officer
GAIL GREENFIELD, Senior Program Officer
DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Program Officer
KAMARA BROWN, Research Associate (through January 2012)
SARAH CAPOTE, Research Associate
MARGUERITE SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator
DIONNA ALI, Senior Program Assistant
1 NAS = member, National Academy of Sciences.
2 NAE = member, National Academy of Engineering.
This report on the science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) workforce of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the U.S. defense industrial base marks the conclusion of an 18-month study to assess the STEM capabilities that the DOD will need in order to meet its responsibilities and priorities; to assess whether the current DOD workforce and personnel strategies will meet those needs; and to identify and evaluate options and recommend strategies that the department could use to enhance its effectiveness in meeting its future STEM needs. The study was undertaken jointly by the National Academy of Engineering and the National Research Council at the request of the Honorable Zachary J. Lemnios, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD[R&E]).
The committee preparing this report, the Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Workforce Needs for the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base, initially convened a workshop on August 1 and 2, 2011, in Rosslyn, Virginia, for the purpose of gathering a broad range of views from the public sector and the private sector, including major defense contractors, and from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), all of which are stakeholders in the future STEM workforce. A report issued in early 2012 summarized the views expressed by individual workshop participants.1 An interim report was issued in June 2012 for the purpose of assisting ASD(R&E) with its fiscal year (FY) 2014 planning process and with laying the groundwork for future years.2
The present report highlights and addresses the critical need for scientists and engineers within DOD and its contractors, the latter to the extent they are engaged in defense-related activities.
1 National Research Council. 2012. Report of a Workshop on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce Needs for the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
2 National Research Council. 2012. An Interim Report on Assuring DOD a Strong Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
It is emphasized that this report does not examine fulfilling the nation’s overall demand for science and engineering talent. Indeed, important differences exist between defense and commercial needs in these fields, not the least of which is the result of the steep decline projected for defense spending, which portends a reduction in opportunities for most, but not all, categories of engineering and scientific talent within the defense sector. The foreseeable consequence for defense is primarily the need to assure the high quality of the workforce as opposed to its quantity.
Most commercial activities have become sufficiently internationalized and globalized that the STEM talent base is itself a global pool. Under these circumstances, the demand for scientists and engineers physically based in the United States often does not, per se, drive personnel decision making. Rather, in this instance, the issue becomes a national one of whether the jobs created through the efforts of scientists and engineers are located in the United States or elsewhere. The latter question, although critically important to the nation as a whole, was not a subject of this report.
We wish to express our appreciation to the members of the committee for their diligent and dedicated contributions to the study and to the preparation of this report. The committee’s diverse experiences contributed greatly to the broad perspective on STEM workforce evident in this report. We also wish to thank Stephanie Brown of the Naval Postgraduate School for her dedicated attention to the committee’s discussions and its preparation of Chapter 5. The committee cannot thank the NRC staff members, Terry Jaggers, Martin Offutt, Gail Greenfield, Daniel E.J. Talmage, Jr., Kamara Brown, Sarah Capote, Marguerite Schneider, and Dionna Ali, and NAE staff member Catherine Didion, too effusively for their dedication to the study and to the preparation of this report.
Norman R. Augustine, Co-chair
C.D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., Co-chair
Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Mathematics Workforce Needs for the
U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S.
Defense Industrial Base
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Wanda Austin, NAE, The Aerospace Corporation
Lynda Carlson, National Science Foundation (retired)
VADM (ret.) Paul Gaffney, NAE, Monmouth University
Maj. Gen. (ret.) Robert Latiff, Independent Consultant
Kaushik Rajashekara, NAE, University of Texas at Dallas
Steven Ramberg, National Defense University
Harold Salzman, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
John Sommerer, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Paula Stephan, Georgia State University
David Whelan, NAE, The Boeing Company
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Lawrence D. Brown, NAS, University of Pennsylvania, and Martha A. Krebs, University of California, Davis. Appointed by the NRC, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
This page intentionally left blank.
This page intentionally left blank.
Figures, Tables, and Boxes
2-2 R&D performed in the United States by U.S. affiliates of foreign companies, by investing region, and R&D performed abroad by foreign affiliates of U.S. multinational corporations, by host region, 1998 and 2008
This page intentionally left blank.