The ‘Valley of Death’ or the ‘Yellow Brick Road’?
By drawing lessons from past examples and examining current government initiatives, the technology industry as well as government can devise innovative strategies to revitalize technology adoption in both public and commercial sectors.
The metaphorical “Valley of Death” in the technology industry has symbolized companies’ recent challenges when transitioning between the public and commercial sectors. However, history reveals valuable insights that can shed light on overcoming this perceived barrier. By exploring past examples and referencing current government efforts, we can devise strategies to revive innovation and drive successful technology adoption in both realms, creating a future where progress knows no boundaries.
Remember Y2K? We had an environment without the internet. It was in existence but not widely used yet. All transactions were done in person and on paper. Most technology budgets were made up of mainframes, mini computers and standalone personal computers, and they were large and expensive, with few suppliers. The acquisition process was very slow, with many barriers. But technology was changing, and we created FASA/FARA—Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act and the Federal Acquisition Reform Act. Those laws fundamentally changed how government made procurements—pushing it out to the user. Ultimately, Y2K was not the disaster most thought it would be. We became flexible in procurement and responded. In fact, it created a “Yellow Brick Road” to government, which many technology vendors successfully used to finance their growth.
On one side of history, the newer generation of vendors benefited greatly from the federal government. Ever heard of Fidelis, Palo Alto, ArcSight or Blue Coat? That is a partial list of startups focusing on government after Y2K. If you reviewed those companies’ sales for the first five-plus years of their existence, more than 50%—and probably closer to 90%—went to the federal government. Their products, features, staff and market position were all created by sales to the federal government with no special programs or funding avenues to take advantage of. The federal government was actually the “Yellow Brick Road,” not the Valley of Death.
However, before FASA/FARA, we encountered several companies that once stood as giants but eventually succumbed to the fast-changing industry. Novell, once a dominant force in networking operating systems, could not scale or adapt to meet the ever-changing market demands and lost its position to Microsoft. The browser pioneer Netscape faced a similar fate as it failed to transition effectively in fierce competition from Internet Explorer and Google. These examples teach us the importance of adaptability and the risks of stagnation in a rapidly evolving market. For both vendors as well as users, adaptability is key to survival. Maybe you have a policy that is 10 years old and unchanged. If so, you may want to look at it. This is one of the DNA factors for the government Valley of Death creation. They don’t like change; they like safety and security. Industry doesn’t want that. It does not make you money.
The federal government’s adoption of innovative technologies has frequently presented its unique set of challenges. Centralized procurement and decision-making processes have often resulted in long sales cycles, making it challenging for the government to respond quickly to emerging technology trends. While centralization offers economies of scale, it can hinder the timely implementation of cutting-edge solutions, particularly in the face of evolving threats and opportunities. When the industry started, we needed centralization. Multiple operating systems, office suites and hardware manufacturers caused many inefficiencies and problems. That environment no longer exists, but the policies do. Does your agency test all updates before they are pushed out to all users? The “blue screen of death” is ancient history, but the policies to prevent it are not.
Over the years, various government initiatives have demonstrated how innovation can thrive despite the current Valley of Death challenges. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), renowned for its role in developing breakthrough technologies like the internet and GPS, showcases how targeted investments and risk-taking can revolutionize the technology landscape. Moreover, the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program has nurtured numerous startups, fostering a culture of innovation within the government. But even those are large and slow programs.
A more decentralized approach is warranted to bridge the gap between public and commercial technology adoption. That is what FASA/FARA created. Empowering government personnel at the local level to engage in experimentation and pilot projects can lead to the identification of novel solutions while reducing the risks associated with large-scale deployments. This approach has much historical precedence, such as the successful rollout of the Internet Protocol (IP) by the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET), which laid the foundation for the modern internet. Every DoD department and major federal agency used to have specific test/evaluation centers, such as the Air Battle Lab in San Antonio for the Air Force. Those sites not only tested new capabilities for their department but would frequently cross agency lines to show other agencies a new solution that could help other federal users. Small, informal, funded, responsive.
Collaboration between the public and private sectors has historically driven technology advancements. Partnerships between government agencies and private companies, like the collaboration between NASA and SpaceX in space exploration, demonstrate how pooling resources and expertise can lead to groundbreaking innovations. By fostering an environment of cooperation, government entities can harness the diverse perspectives and talents of the private sector. But those are human interactions—people talking to other people. Not slow, formal, segmented processes. Many smart people working in government should be allowed to talk to industry and try something they think they need. That lowers the risk factor with smaller procurements, and solutions pushed upstream have real-world data to validate possible benefits—not data from a request for information. Agency-approved product lists—or authorities to connect—are possibly the single largest roadblock today. How can you evaluate a solution you think will help when it takes a year to get permission to try? And cyber ranges also have a backlog and waiting period—plus a cost. Users once were able to purchase and deploy a solution on a small scale, locally. Management, monitoring and segmentation are much better today than 10 years ago. Possibly an exemption process for test and evaluation would help bridge the valley and greatly expand the eyes and ears looking for valuable or game-changing solutions.
As we navigate the metaphorical Valley of Death in the technology industry, history serves as an invaluable guide. Embracing adaptability, empowering local experimentation and strengthening public-private collaborations can break down the barriers that now seem insurmountable. In this endeavor, we pave the way for a future that thrives on innovation and resilience, propelling our nation to the forefront of technological progress. The Valley of Death used to be the Yellow Brick Road. It is possible to change that map. We have already done it.
Robert Deitz II is a long-time veteran of the computer industry, focusing on government procurement reform for more than two decades. Deitz founded Government Technology Solutions in 1997 to bring new security and technology capabilities into the government market around cybersecurity. He now focuses on new strategies for space and satellite communications as the next frontier.
The opinions expressed in this article are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of AFCEA International.
