National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

DOD ENGAGEMENT WITH
ITS MANUFACTURING
INNOVATION INSTITUTES

Phase 2 Study Final Report

Committee on DoD Engagement with Its
Manufacturing USA MIIs Phase 2 Study

National Materials and Manufacturing Board

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

A Consensus Study Report of

images

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This study was supported by Contract W911NF-18-D-0002 with the U.S. Army. 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: 978-0-309-26319-1
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26319-0
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26329

Cover design: Wherever manufacturing takes place, it spurs innovation, which in turn creates new opportunities for manufacturing in a complex web of never-ending spirals. 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 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 2021 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. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26329.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

Image

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. John L. Anderson 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.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

Image

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.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

COMMITTEE ON DOD ENGAGEMENT WITH ITS MANUFACTURING USA MIIS PHASE 2 STUDY

THOMAS M. DONNELLAN, Applied Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University, Co-Chair

WILLIAM B. BONVILLIAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Co-Chair

MEGAN BREWSTER, Impinj, Inc.

GAIL L. (DOLAN) HAHN, Boeing

THERESA KOTANCHECK, Evolved Analytics, LLC

MICK MAHER, Maher & Associates, LLC

MICHAEL McGRATH, Independent Consultant

A. GALIP ULSOY, NAE,1 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

BEN WANG, Georgia Institute of Technology

Staff

ERIK SVEDBERG, Senior Program Officer, Study Director

NEERAJ P. GORKHALY, Associate Program Officer

AMISHA JINANDRA, Associate Program Officer

JOSEPH PALMER, Senior Project Assistant

MICHELLE SCHWALBE, Acting Director, National Materials and Manufacturing Board (as of May 2021)

JAMES LANCASTER, Director, National Materials and Manufacturing Board (until May 2021)

___________________

1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

NATIONAL MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING BOARD

THERESA KOTANCHEK, Evolved Analytics, LLC, Chair

JOHN KLIER, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Vice Chair

KEVIN ANDERSON, NAE, Brunswick Corporation

CRAIG ARNOLD, Princeton University

TERESA CLEMENT, Raytheon Technologies

THOMAS M. DONNELLAN, Applied Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University

STEPHEN FORREST, NAS1/NAE, University of Michigan

AMIT GOYAL, NAE, State University of New York at Buffalo

JULIA GREER, California Institute of Technology

MICK MAHER, Maher & Associates, LLC

GREGORY TASSEY, University of Washington

MATTHEW J. ZALUZEC, University of Florida

Staff

MICHELLE SCHWALBE, Acting Director, (as of May 2021)

JAMES LANCASTER, Director (until May 2021)

ERIK SVEDBERG, Senior Program Officer

NEERAJ P. GORKHALY, Associate Program Officer

AMISHA JINANDRA, Associate Program Officer

JOSEPH PALMER, Senior Project Assistant

___________________

1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

Preface

Since 2012, sixteen Manufacturing USA Institutes have been established by the federal government. Nine of these Manufacturing Innovation Institutes (MIIs) have been sponsored by the Department of Defense (DoD) under the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Defense Manufacturing Science and Technology (DMS&T) program. DoD MIIs are public–private partnerships (PPPs) that are focused on specific technology areas identified as critical for the future of DoD and for which manufacturing technology maturation is an important need for technology implementation. All of the MIIs were initially established under fixed-term, 5- to 7-year agreements. To date, three of the institutes have transitioned to second-phase agreements, and three more are approaching the transition point.

The study reported here is a follow-on activity to a 2019 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report titled Strategic Long-Term Participation by DoD in Its Manufacturing USA Institutes, which identified topics for additional work that the DoD sponsor asked the National Academies to explore. Specifically, the current study committee was tasked to provide strategic guidance on: protocols for conducting long term engagement assessments of the MIIs, including evaluation criteria (Task 1), best practices for MII education and workforce development (EWD) programs (Task 2), and the development of strategies for better connecting MIIs to the broader DoD community and to other federal agencies (Task 3). The sponsor of the work, DoD OSD Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) program, asked for an interim report focused on protocols for long-term engagement assessment of the MIIs, which has been provided and is included in this report as an appendix. The final report from this study provides additional insights into the MII

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

assessment topic but focuses on findings and recommendations relevant to EWD best practices and DoD and other federal agency engagement strategies.

We thank the committee members for their exceptional efforts in preparing this report. In executing its charge, the committee met 61 times from November 19, 2020, to June 30, 2021. The committee also heard from a broad spectrum of stakeholders from DoD, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, industry (small-, medium-, and large-sized), academia, the MMIs, and other agencies. In particular, the committee thanks the following individuals for their contributions to this study and participation in the committee’s public meetings: Ben Armstrong, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); Berardino Baratta, MxD; Jim Barrott, Chattanooga State TCAT program; Suzanne Berger, MIT; Dana Beyeler, Defense Engagement, Ellwood Group, Inc.; Barry Birdsong, the Missile Defense Agency; Michael Brit-Crane, OSD ManTech; Dave Chesebrough, National Defense Industrial Association; Ernie Chin, U.S. Army; Julie Christodoulou, U.S. Navy; Josh Cramer, America Makes (an MII); Emily DeRocco, OSD ManTech; Julie Diop, AIM Photonics Academy (an MII program); Jay Douglass, ARM; Eric Forsythe, OSD ManTech, NextFlex (an MII); John Foster, NOCTI; Nigel Francis, LIFT; James Frankovic, Consortium Management Group (CMG); Douglas Friedman, BioMade; Joanne Friedman, Connektedminds, Inc.; Tracy Frost, OSD ManTech; Michael Garamoni, BioFabUSA; Rob Gold, OSD ManTech; Mark Gordon, OSD ManTech; Neil Graf, U.S. Navy ManTech; Brad Halsey, Building Momentum; David Heckman, DoD Manufacturing Technology Program Office; Craig Herndon, U.S. Navy; Kristin Holzworth, U.S. Navy; Greg Hudas, ARM (an MII); Mark Johnson, Clemson University; Shalin Jyotishi, New America Foundation; Robert Kavetsky, Energetics Technology Center; Don Kinard, Lockheed Martin; David Koch, Defense Logistics Agency; Bruce Kramer, National Science Foundation; Jeannine Kunz, Tooling U-SME; Brad Larschan, Avadin, LLC; Mark Laviolette, Deloitte; Becky Lewis, AFFOA (an MII); Steve Luckowski, independent consultant; Stephen Lynch, Burning-Glass; Christina Maranto, Joint Defense Manufacturing Council, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering; Lisa Masciantini, ARM (an MII); Mark Maybury, Stanley Black & Decker; Craig McAtee, National Coalition of Advanced Technology Centers; Emily McGrath, NextFlex; Steve McKee, U.S. Navy; Taylor McLeod, MxD; Jacqui Mieksztyn, LIFT (an MII); Ben Morgan, Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre; James Murdoc, U.S. Army; Mary Ann Pacelli, National Institute of Standards and Technology Manufacturing Extension Partnership; Jeffrey Pacuska, U.S. Army DEVCOM Soldier Center; Brian Piedfort, Advanced Technology International; Kristy Pottol, DEKA Research; Alissa Roath, CMG; Aimee Rose, Boston, Activate; Joseph Roy, American Society for Engineering Education; Marty Ryan, National Advanced Mobility Consortia; Terri Sandu, Lorain County Community College; Jim Segelstrom, McNally

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

Industries; Arun Seraphin, Senate Armed Services Committee; The Honorable Al Shaffer, retired, DoD; Jeff Shubrooks, Raytheon Missiles and Defense; Joel Simon, Burning-Glass; Phillip Singerman, Montgomery County Economic Development Corporation (Maryland); Robert Smith, U.S. Navy; Lizabeth Stuck, MxD; Roy Swift, WorkCred; Malcolm Thompson, NextFlex; Maureen Toohey, ARMI; Nick Usechak, AIM Photonics (an MII); Charles Ward, Air Force Research Laboratory; John Wilczynski, America Makes; Jeff Wilcox, retired independent expert; and Kelly Zelesnik, Lorain County Community College. 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.

William B. Bonvillian and Thomas M. Donnellan,
Co-Chairs
Committee on DoD Engagement with Its
Manufacturing USA MIIs Phase 2 Study

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×

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 Anita K. Jones, NAE, University of Virginia, and Robert H. Latiff, R. Latiff Associates. They were 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.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26329.
×
Page R14
Next: Summary »
DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: Phase 2 Study Final Report Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $55.00 Buy Ebook | $44.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

To better support the need for timely, effective manufacturing technology development and transition, the Department of Defense (DoD) has established nine Manufacturing Innovation Institutes (MIIs) through its Defense-wide Manufacturing Science and Technology program element within the DoD Manufacturing Technology program. The institutes are considered by DoD to be important facilitators that bring together innovative ecosystems in key technology and market sectors in the United States. DoD MIIs are industry-led public private partnerships, with dual, public and private benefit, providing large commercial market potential while also meeting key U.S. defense industrial needs. The mission of the nine DoD-established institutes addresses both defense and commercial manufacturing needs within specific, defense-relevant technology areas.

DoD Engagement with Its Manufacturing Innovation Institutes Phase 2 Study provides strategic guidance on protocols for conducting long term engagement assessments of the MIIs including evaluation metrics; best practices for MII education and workforce development programs; and development of strategies for better connecting MIIs to the broader DoD community and to other federal agencies. An interim report focused on the MII assessment protocol topic was published in April 2021 and is also included in this report, in appendixes C and D. This final report provides findings and recommendations relevant to education and workforce development best practices and DoD and other federal agency engagement strategies.

  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. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

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

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

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

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    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!