Effectiveness Over Speed in Pentagon Acquisition Reform

The Pentagon’s top acquisition official is pushing back against the widely held notion that speed is the primary imperative driving reforms in defense procurement, emphasizing that effectiveness, not haste, must remain the guiding principle. In a recent article titled “Speed Not A Mandate For Pentagon Acquisition Overhaul, Says Top Weapons Buyer,” published by Breaking Defense, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Bill LaPlante clarified his vision for modernizing the U.S. military’s acquisition system.

Speaking at a public event, LaPlante stressed that while accelerating delivery of capabilities to the warfighter remains important, it should not override the need to produce results that are operationally relevant and technically sound. His remarks come amid ongoing concerns in Congress and the defense community over the Department of Defense’s ability to adapt quickly to emerging threats posed by near-peer adversaries, particularly China.

LaPlante’s comments signal a pivot away from a singular focus on acquisition speed—a theme championed in recent years following frustrations over the time-consuming nature of traditional procurement cycles. Instead, he made the case for a more balanced approach, arguing that delivering capabilities that actually work and can scale effectively in real-world scenarios is what ultimately matters.

“We shouldn’t confuse activity with progress,” LaPlante said, according to the Breaking Defense report. He pointed out that simply speeding through development phases without a clear path to production and sustainment risks creating “science experiments”—impressive prototypes that never transition to the field and do little to support operational needs.

LaPlante emphasized that successful acquisition reform must prioritize the “valley of death” problem—referring to the persistent challenge of moving promising technologies from research labs into deployed military systems. He noted that numerous pilot programs and experimental platforms have failed to advance beyond the prototype stage, often due to a lack of long-term funding strategies, programmatic support, or coordination with the military services.

In highlighting these concerns, LaPlante reaffirmed his support for institutional mechanisms like the Rapid Defense Experimentation Reserve (RDER) and the Department’s budgeted pathways for rapid acquisition. However, he warned that without changes to how programs are structured, assessed, and scaled, these tools alone would not solve the core issues undermining effective modernization.

The Under Secretary’s remarks also touched on the need to reform outdated processes that hinder commercial technology integration. While welcoming innovation from the private sector, LaPlante argued that adopting Silicon Valley’s mantra of “move fast and break things” is ill-suited for defense acquisition, where safety, reliability, and integration with existing systems are non-negotiable.

As the Defense Department increasingly turns to emerging technologies such as autonomous systems, hypersonic weapons, and artificial intelligence, LaPlante’s comments suggest a cautious recalibration of expectations. For him, speed must be contextualized as a means to an end—not the end itself.

This nuanced perspective is likely to influence upcoming policy debates around acquisition reform and the fiscal 2026 defense budget. Lawmakers and Pentagon leaders are expected to grapple with tensions between urgency and due diligence as they seek to navigate the complexities of modernizing the force against the backdrop of constrained resources and evolving global threats.

LaPlante’s assertion that “progress is not just measured in speed, but in outcomes” challenges prevailing narratives and underscores the weight of responsibility borne by those tasked with equipping the U.S. military for the future. His remarks suggest that the road to acquisition excellence is not a sprint, but a strategically plotted course requiring patience, judgment, and above all, a relentless focus on delivering war-winning capabilities.