National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25417.
×
Page R10

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Prepublication Copy – Subject to Further Editorial Correction Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes Committee on Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes National Materials and Manufacturing Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences A Consensus Study Report of PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This study was supported by Contract SB134117CQ0017/1333ND18FNB490281 with CMRC/National Institute of Standards and Technology. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25417 Cover: Complexity is free, not only in the 3D-fractal on the cover or in additive manufacturing, but complexity is also assured in the relationship between manufacturing and innovation. Wherever manufacturing takes place it spurs innovation, that in turn creates new opportunities for manufacturing in a complex never-ending spiral. Graphic artist: Erik Svedberg. This publication is available in limited quantities from National Materials and Manufacturing Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 nmmb@nas.edu http://www.nationalacademies.edu/nmmb Additional copies of this publication are available for sale 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 2019 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Strategic Long- Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25417. PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION

Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo. PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION

COMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC LONG-TERM PARTICIPATION BY DOD IN ITS MANUFACTURING INNOVATION INSTITUTES THERESA KOTANCHECK, Evolved Analytics, LLC, Co-Chair EDWARD MORRIS, Consequence Consulting, LLC, Co-Chair WILLIAM B. BONVILLIAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology SUSAN HELPER, Case Western Reserve University MICK MAHER, Maher & Associates, LLC MICHAEL MCGRATH, Independent Consultant THOMAS M. DONNELLAN, Applied Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University POL SPANOS, NAE,1 Rice University BEN WANG, Georgia Institute of Technology STEVEN J. ZINKLE, NAE, University of Tennessee, Knoxville Staff ERIK SVEDBERG, Senior Program Officer, National Materials and Manufacturing Board (NMMB), Study Director JAMES LANCASTER, Director, NMMB and the Board on Physics and Astronomy (BPA) NEERAJ P. GORKHALY, Associate Program Officer, NMMB HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Associate, NMMB BETH DOLAN, Financial Associate, NMMB and BPA JOSEPH PALMER, Senior Project Assistant, NMMB JULIA KOTLER, Research Assistant, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences 1 Member, National Academy of Engineering. PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION v

NATIONAL MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING BOARD BEN WANG, Georgia Institute of Technology, Chair RODNEY C. ADKINS, NAE, IBM Corporate Strategy (retired) JIM C.I. CHANG, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan LEO CHRISTODOULOU, Boeing, Inc. THOMAS M. DONNELLAN, Applied Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University STEPHEN FORREST, NAS2/NAE, University of Michigan ERICA FUCHS, Carnegie Mellon University JACK HU, NAE, University of Michigan THERESA KOTANCHECK, Evolved Analytics, LLC DAVID LARBALESTIER, Florida State University ROBERT MILLER, IBM Almaden Research Center EDWARD MORRIS, Consequence Consulting, LLC NICHOLAS A. PEPPAS, NAE/NAM,3 University of Texas, Austin TRESA M. POLLOCK, NAE, University of California, Santa Barbara F. STAN SETTLES, University of Southern California HAYDN WADLEY, University of Virginia STEVEN J. ZINKLE, NAE, University of Tennessee, Knoxville Staff JAMES LANCASTER, Director ERIK SVEDBERG, Senior Program Officer NEERAJ P. GORKHALY, Associate Program Officer HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Associate BETH DOLAN, Financial Associate JOSEPH PALMER, Senior Project Assistant 2 Member, National Academy of Sciences. 3 Member, National Academy of Medicine. PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION vi

Preface Over the past 6 years, 14 Manufacturing USA institutes have been established—eight by the Department of Defense (DoD), five by the Department of Energy (DOE), and one by the Department of Commerce (DOC). To date, more than $3 billion has been invested in establishing and operating the Manufacturing USA institutes, with the three federal agencies committing a total of $1 billion for the first 5 years of each institute, and industry and other non-federal resources providing the remaining $2 billion. DoD has invested $600 million directly in its eight Manufacturing USA institutes with the understanding that the initial federal investment included (1) one-time, start-up funding to establish the institutes within a period of 5 to 7 years and (2) a government share of core funding. As the institutes reach year five, continued engagement by the federal government is being assessed. DoD has special authorities and resources, and hence, it can address optimal sustainability approaches in manners different from institutes funded by other agencies. As a result, the National Materials and Manufacturing Board was asked by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and DoD to complete a fast-track study to review the role of DoD’s investment in establishing its eight institutes as public–private partnerships and its engagement with each institute after each has matured beyond the start-up period. The sponsors requested that the pre- publication version of this report be delivered within 7 months of task order award, with the final report to be delivered 2 months thereafter. As requested, the Committee on Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes assessed the effectiveness of the DoD Manufacturing USA institutes and best on- going roles for the federal government to ensure optimal benefit to U.S. competitiveness. This report presents options that the study committee developed, based on that workshop, that DoD could consider in developing its long-term role with existing and potential future DoD Manufacturing USA innovation institutes. Chapter 5 contains key study committee findings regarding the five goals in the current DoD Manufacturing USA Strategy,4 followed by four specific recommendations. Topics recommended by the committee for a follow-on study are described in Chapter 6. The Afterword in Chapter 7 provides the committee’s rationale for DoD’s continued engagement with manufacturing innovation institutes. This report represents the consensus of the committee on the optimal long-term role of DoD with its Manufacturing USA institutes and its recommendations for follow-on topics to be addressed in a second study. We thank the committee members for their exceptional efforts in preparing this report. In executing its charge, the committee met 14 times from November 8, 2018, to February 1, 2019. The committee also heard from a broad spectrum of stakeholders from DoD, DOC, DOE, industry (small, medium and large), academia, the manufacturing innovation institutes and other agencies. The committee thanks the following guest speakers and panelists at its meetings, who added to the members’ understanding of successful public–private partnerships: 4 U.S. Department of Defense, 2017, Department of Defense Manufacturing USA Strategy, Version Date: September 8, Director DoD Manufacturing Technology Program, OUSD(R&E) Strategic Technology Protection and Exploitation. PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION vii

Kristen Baldwin, Department of Defense Research and Engineering Enterprise, Jeffrey Wilcox, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Marty Ryan, Advanced Technology International, Phillip Singerman, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Bruce Kramer, National Science Foundation, Thomas Donnellan, Pennsylvania State University, Michael Gregory, Cambridge University, Scott Kennedy, Center for Strategic and International Studies, and James Mulvenon, SOS International. We and the committee thank the director of the National Materials and Manufacturing Board, James Lancaster, the study director, Erik Svedberg, and their entire staff for their help and guidance in performing this fast-track project. Theresa Kotanchek and Ed Morris, Co-Chairs Committee on Strategic Long-Term Participation of DoD in Its Manufacturing Institutes PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION viii

Acknowledgment of Reviewers This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, 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 thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Erica R.H. Fuchs, Carnegie Mellon University, David M. Hart, George Mason University, Mark Johnson, Clemson University, Jyotirmoy Mazumder, NAE,1 University of Michigan, J. Michael McQuade, Carnegie Mellon University, Chris Peters, The Lucrum Group, Martin A. Schmidt, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and David A. Weitz, Harvard University. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Maxine L. Savitz, NAE, Honeywell Inc. (retired). She was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies. 1 Member, National Academy of Engineering. PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION ix

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY S-1 1 DOD MANUFACTURING USA INSTITUTES BACKGROUND AND STUDY DESIGN 1-1 Business Models Used to Stand-Up and Operate the DoD Institutes DoD Manufacturing USA Strategy DoD Manufacturing USA Institutes Study Design 2 LESSONS-LEARNED AND OPERATING CHANGES TO CONSIDER 2-1 Value Proposition by Stakeholder Group Stakeholder Perspectives on Current Operations Stakeholder Perspectives on Improvements 3 ALTERNATE PUBLIC–PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP OPTIONS 3-1 4 DOD LONG-TERM MANUFACTURING INSTITUTES STRATEGY: 4-1 BUSINESS MODEL OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Option A: Current Model with Planned Reduction in DoD Support for Core Activities Option B: Current Model with Improvements to Processes, Offerings, and Value-Based Core Funding Option C: Transition to DoD Customer Model Option D: Transfer Core Responsibilities to the National Program Office at NIST Option E: No Core Funding of Institutes Beyond Initial Investment 5 COMMITTEE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5-1 Findings Recommendations 6 FOLLOW-ON CONSENSUS STUDY 6-1 Potential Topics Proposed Method and Timeline 7 AFTERWORD—RATIONALE FOR CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT 7-1 WITH THE INSTITUTES APPENDIXES A Statement of Task A-1 B Institutes’ Offerings Value Proposition Rankings by Stakeholder B-1 C Summary of Potential Improvements to the DoD Institutes’ Offerings C-1 D Summary of Potential Improvements Related to the DoD Institutes Strategy Goals D-1 E Committee and Staff Biographical Information E-1 F Acronyms F-1 G Other Resource Documents G-1 H Workshop Agenda and Participants List H-1 PREPUBLICATION COPY – SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION x

Next: Executive Summary »
Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $45.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

To effectively mature and transition DoD manufacturing science and technology advances into production, DoD must have access to a robust and responsive U.S. industrial base which is often driven by advanced manufacturing technologies. The Manufacturing USA institutes are considered crucial and game-changing catalysts that are bringing together innovative ecosystems in various technology and market sectors critical to DoD and the nation.

Since 2012, DoD has invested $600 million directly in its Manufacturing USA institutes with the understanding that the initial federal investment included (1) core funding and (2) one-time, start-up funding to establish the institutes within a period of 5 to 7 years. As the institutes now begin to reach year five, DoD is evaluating the effectiveness of the institutes in fulfilling their goals and the best on-going roles for the federal government, including on-going funding options, to ensure optimal benefit to U.S. competitiveness. This report reviews the role of DoD’s investment to date in establishing its eight institutes as public–private partnerships and its engagement with each institute after it has matured beyond the start-up period.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!