Houston, we have a problem! The pace of change required to adjust the trend in defense innovation is radical by comparison of incremental defense reform, as it has been attempted in the past. I will highly recommend to you the Defense Reformation at www.18Theses.com to understand this. I’m going to pick on one point from that article, just one of the 18, that the approach of the Government towards small business should be completely reversed.

The Not So Obvious Nature of the Problem

One interesting thing about the nature of the problem is how Congress deals with defense, as opposed to how small businesses engage in the open world of commerce, where competition drives the market. The control of the defense budget is very unique from all other markets. To deal with this reality, as pointed out in the book the Kill Chain by Christian Brose, defense industries have adapted and consolidated to give the power of collective voice when engaging with Congress about defense systems. This is not because they are bad, but because they needed to do it to survive. Small businesses, where innovators often live, and dare to dream about creating a company, lack that collective voice, even though many of them are saying exactly the same thing. 

The reality of the world as it exists is that a person is often in multiple networks. I’ll use myself as an example here, probably on the extreme end, but not too far off from my colleagues who are participating in multiple communities. I’m on the Board of Directors of the Vertical Lift Consortium (VLC) – that’s an hour or two each month and an all day meeting once a quarter, not a huge time commitment but a huge thought commitment because it’s always on my mind. In addition, there is the role on the Executive Committe for the Aviation and Missile Technology Consortium (AMTC), which is similarly an hour a month and a full day (at an event I would be at regardless) once a quarter. I’m on a couple of other advisory boards that have a slightly lower commitment of time but similar in importance and require my full attention when I am in those meetings for an hour here and there. I’m also chairman of the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) architecture committee. That’s an hour meeting once every other week with several emails going back-and-forth in the intervening times, so much larger time commitment, but still something that is an extra duty beyond my normal work as a consultant. I used to be more involved in the FACE Consortium and was there when the SOSA Consortium was kicked off, so I stay connected with those communities, though I’m less daily involved than I used to be, having transitioned my attention to the role of architecture and the time commitment focused on Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) and other necessary standards in the work of assembling systems of systems through Mission Engineering. However, because so many of the people in my network are connected to those other organizations, even with a lower time commitment I have a good idea of what’s happening there.

So how do we create a venue where we can have a collective voice because we’re all aiming at the broader topic of MOSA even though we are in these various fit – for – purpose communities? I’m particularly sensitive to this because I’m an architecture consultant, so it is not part of my “overhead” budget (which is just, well, me spending my own money) to participate in these things – it is something I choose to do because I’m passionate about it and willing to spend the extra time and capital. I know I’m not alone in this, because the story I reflect above would fit many of my colleagues if we just changed it around the puzzle pieces of which communities they attend. Pardon the acronym soup, you know who you are: the OMG UAF crew, the OMS folks, the VICTORY cadre, the IEEE DASC aficionados, the ARINC-661 acolytes, and on and on we could go. In our professional career we get exposure to many of these communities and through our collective network we touch all of them by 1 or 2 degrees of separation. In all of them, we are saying the same thing – the role of critical small businesses innovators has to change in Defense. I recently finished a book That Will Never Work by Marc Randolph – it dawned on me that Netflix, at the time of their IPO (with less than 300 people), would have been considered a Small Business in Defense parlance – let that sink in.

Getting Beyond Small Business as Welfare 

In the landscape of defense contracting, large prime contractors have long dominated the field, leaving small businesses to grapple with the complexities of entering a market often skewed toward legacy platforms and entrenched relationships. However, if you’ve read the references that I indicated above, you know this was not always the case. While groups like the VLC, the Object Management Group (OMG), and the Open Group (TOG) provide a level of advocacy, and each focused on their unique mission, the collective voice of small businesses engaged in MOSA development remains fragmented. This lack of unified representation limits the ability of innovative small firms to influence policy and secure meaningful opportunities.

The good news is, Congress has already given us a way to change this. We don’t need them to pass another law, we simply need them to enforce the law. They already passed by holding the Department of defense accountable for real change. With a collective voice, we can make that clear. MOSA is the antidote to platform thinking. The ball is now in our court. 

Drawing inspiration from industries where trade groups have effectively unified smaller entities to advocate for shared interests, small defense contractors can wield greater influence if they band together. A robust, collective voice has the potential to shape congressional budgets, push for increased adoption of other transaction agreements (OTAs), and ensure that the promise of MOSA is fully realized – not just in rhetoric, but in practice.

The Need for Advocacy in Defense Acquisition

The defense industry faces a structural challenge: while small businesses are often the source of groundbreaking innovations, the overwhelming majority of defense dollars flow to large primes. Startups and smaller firms are frequently relegated to subcontractor roles, their contributions aggregated and obscured behind the final designs of major platforms. This reduces the agility and competitiveness of the defense industrial base, limiting the DoD’s ability to field the most advanced technologies rapidly.

Programs like OTAs have emerged as a countermeasure, fostering faster and more flexible acquisition paths that emphasize nontraditional defense contractors. However, OTAs represent only a fraction of total defense spending. More significantly, while MOSA policies promote modularity and interoperability, the budgetary focus remains largely on platform-based procurement, reinforcing the dominance of large primes.

Lessons from Other Industries

The technology and telecommunications sectors offer prime examples of the power of collective advocacy. Trade associations like the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) and the National Small Business Association (NSBA) have successfully lobbied for favorable legislation, ensuring that smaller tech firms have access to federal contracts and grants. Similarly, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) has advocated for supplier diversity and small business inclusion in large-scale infrastructure projects.

Could we create that kind of voice with the MOSA Network?

By mirroring these strategies, small defense firms specializing in MOSA can shift the balance of power in defense contracting. This would include the existing communities, of course, because they represent specific aspects of achieving the total approach. Some consort of focus on interface standards, some focus on contracting efficiency, some focus on modeling languages. Each has a voice. The companies that participate in all of them Are saying the same thing. Together, that voice is stronger. A unified effort to amplify the voices of smaller players can lead to legislative initiatives that allocate funding for modular components directly, rather than solely relying on large platform acquisitions.

The Case for a Modular, Capability-Based Budget

A capability-based budget would focus on acquiring specific, modular components – such as sensors, communication nodes, or AI subsystems – rather than entire platforms. This shift aligns perfectly with MOSA principles, allowing the DoD to rapidly integrate the latest technology while preserving long-term adaptability. Better still, it can be issued with guidance and does not even require a change to legislation in the near term. Long-term, we would like to see capability based program elements (PE) in the defense budget; however, MOSA is already required with the budgets that exist, so near term change can come from simply an instruction on how to use the budget as it exists. 

Currently, small businesses often produce the most cutting-edge modular components, but their access to prime contracts is limited. In the near term, direct use of OTA structures that have requirements for modularity can make a massive change in the speed of innovation. Well, that doesn’t fully solve the problem, it heads in the right direction so that we can build the next bridge beyond the prototyping and integration so that we can get those things into fielding.  in the long-term, by advocating for dedicated capability-based budgets, small businesses could secure direct awards for the very modules that drive innovation. This would:

• Accelerate innovation by enabling direct pathways for small businesses to supply critical technology.
• Enhance competition by reducing reliance on single large integrators.
• Lower costs through competitive sourcing at the component level, breaking up monopolistic platform budgets.

Amplifying the Impact of OTAs and MOSA

While advocating for increased OTA funding is essential, it represents only part of the solution. Combining this push with a broader call for capability-based budgeting within MOSA frameworks would offer a more comprehensive path forward. We need the standards bodies to stay focused on interfaces- not to become contracting consortia, as those also already exist. The ecosystem is already there to achieve this and has been created partly because the separation of interest and focus need to be much as they are. We have already proven that this path forward works and demonstrated it for two years at the annual MOSA Summit. An individual small company must participate in multiple places limiting their ability and funding to participate im Congressional advocacy. We can bring that collective voice together here.  Congress already acknowledges the importance of OTAs in fostering innovation; the next step is ensuring that these innovations can be acquired as standalone capabilities, not just components within larger OEM-as-prime-managed projects. This has other benefits for OEM’s that I’ll discuss in a later article – this one os focused on the small business side.

Furthermore, existing MOSA legal requirements provide a foundation to argue for direct prime contracts to small businesses. By aligning modular acquisition strategies with OTA pathways and MOSA mandates, the defense community can accelerate the adoption of innovative technologies without disrupting platform-level procurement.

A Three-Pronged Advocacy Strategy

To drive real innovation into defense acquisition, small businesses should unify around the following key initiatives:

1. Expand OTA Funding and Accessibility: Advocate for larger OTA allocations and simplified processes that make it easier for small businesses to participate directly.
2. Champion Capability-Based Modular Budgets: Push for budget lines specifically dedicated to modular components, ensuring small businesses can compete directly for prime contracts without the intermediation of large primes.
3. Emphasize MOSA Compliance in Prime Contracting: Ensure that MOSA policies are enforced rigorously, requiring primes to incorporate third-party modules and opening pathways for small businesses to interface directly with the DoD.

Building the Coalition

Small businesses can leverage existing consortia, like VLC, to expand advocacy efforts. However, new alliances dedicated to promoting MOSA and modular acquisition should be established to ensure comprehensive representation across all sectors of the defense industry. Collaborations with larger advocacy groups, such as NDIA, can further amplify the message.

Additionally, engagement with congressional representatives and defense committees will be essential. Hosting events, roundtables, and demonstrations of modular innovations at key defense expos can provide tangible proof of the value small businesses bring to the table.

The defense industry stands at a crossroads, where the future of military innovation depends on unlocking the full potential of small businesses. A collective voice, grounded in the principles of MOSA, OTAs, and capability-based budgets, can reshape acquisition policies to favor agility, competition, and technological advancement. By advocating as one, small businesses can not only secure their place in the defense ecosystem but drive the innovation necessary to maintain U.S. military superiority.

The Path Forward

I started this MOSA Network initiative to get the conversation going. This is not an organization, this is John figuring out how to have a conversation with over a thousand people who I see all the time at these various events without having a thousand phone calls. I think the first step is to get us all into the same conversation about ADVOCACY while not distracting from the conversations we are having, in their existing and appropriate venues (standards, OTA, etc.). I also think, but do not know, that this is both a personal membership (we all change companies over time but keep our network so should not lose our voice) as well as corporate (companies build proudcts and win contracts). I do not want to pretend to have that figured out. I do think that the conversational aspects of this network (under the banner of membership) as well as the modular capabilies awareness (under the banner of Marketplace) are both necessary. We need a single hub for both of those things, while honoring the many-to-many relationships between the communities, systems, professionals, contracting structures, and standards that already exist. I offer myself as tribute. I am headed to DC at the end of January for a first push – what would you have me say?