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
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
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: 978-0-309-49138-9
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-49138-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. Back cover: Start doing, stop doing, and continue doing are key ingredients of this effort. Simple and important actions, but with complex outcomes. Compare with Conway’s Game of Life, where cells are started, stopped, or continued according to four simple rules but yet attain a complexity that is astonishing. 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 report 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.
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.
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.
COMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC LONG-TERM PARTICIPATION BY DOD IN ITS MANUFACTURING INNOVATION INSTITUTES
THERESA KOTANCHEK, Evolved Analytics, LLC, Co-Chair
EDWARD MORRIS, Consequence Consulting, LLC, Co-Chair
WILLIAM B. BONVILLIAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
THOMAS M. DONNELLAN, Applied Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University
SUSAN HELPER, Case Western Reserve University
MICK MAHER, Maher & Associates, LLC
MICHAEL McGRATH, Independent Consultant
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.
NATIONAL MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING BOARD
BEN WANG, Georgia Institute of Technology, Chair
THERESA KOTANCHEK, Evolved Analytics, LLC, Vice Chair
RODNEY C. ADKINS, NAE,1 IBM Corporate Strategy (retired)
CRAIG ARNOLD, Princeton University
JIM C.I. CHANG, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan
THOMAS M. DONNELLAN, Applied Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University
STEPHEN FORREST, NAS2/NAE, University of Michigan
ERICA FUCHS, Carnegie Mellon University
DAVID C. LARBALESTIER, NAE, Florida State University
MICK MAHER, Maher & Associates, LLC
ROBERT MILLER, NAE, IBM Almaden Research Center
EDWARD MORRIS, Consequence Consulting, LLC
NICHOLAS A. PEPPAS, NAE/NAM,3 University of Texas, Austin
GREGORY TASSEY, University of Washington
TRESA M. POLLOCK, NAE, University of California, Santa Barbara
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
AMISHA JINANDRA, Research Associate
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
3 Member, National Academy of Medicine.
Preface
Over the past 6 years, 14 Manufacturing USA institutes have been established—8 by the Department of Defense (DoD), 5 by the Department of Energy (DOE), and 1 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 nonfederal 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 therefore 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 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 prepublication version of this report be delivered within 7 months of the 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 Manu-
facturing USA institutes and best ongoing roles for the federal government to ensure optimal benefit to U.S. competitiveness. This report presents options that the study committee developed, based on a 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,1 followed by four specific recommendations. Topics recommended by the committee for a follow-on study are described in Chapter 6. The Afterword (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-size, 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:
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 Innovation Institutes
___________________
1 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.
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:
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
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.
Contents
1 DOD MANUFACTURING USA INSTITUTES: BACKGROUND AND STUDY DESIGN
Business Models Used to Stand Up and Operate the DoD Institutes
DoD Manufacturing USA Strategy
2 LESSONS LEARNED AND OPERATING CHANGES TO CONSIDER
Value Proposition by Stakeholder Group
Stakeholder Perspectives on Current Operations
Stakeholder Perspectives on Improvements
3 ALTERNATE PUBLIC–PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP OPTIONS
4 DOD LONG-TERM MANUFACTURING INSTITUTES’ STRATEGY: 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 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
7 AFTERWORD—RATIONALE FOR CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT WITH THE INSTITUTES
B Institutes’ Offerings Value Proposition Rankings by Stakeholder
C Summary of Potential Improvements to the DoD Institutes’ Offerings
D Summary of Potential Improvements Related to the DoD Institutes’ Strategy Goals