charitable trust. that and more coming up tonight on cspan2. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. funded by these television compies and more iding cox. is extremely rare. but friends don't have to be. when you are connected you are not alone.k5 link these other television providers. giving you a front row seat to5 democracy. >> tech policy experts testify on software's role the evolution of defense department system for house armed services subcommittee. they address efforts to change defense department culture to enhance modernization and track talents. this is just under an

doctor subcommittee will come to order at ask unanimous consent the chair could declare recess in a timer that objections order. good morning everyone thank you for we are here today to discuss one of the most with the u.s. arsenal. that is software. it is crucial to our ability very in the air, the sea come , onlinein space anderspace. aircraft carriers will be able

to leave our pier they can deliver a payload over its target we expect the system and code we rely on work when■j needed. despite this was seo dartmenterg and prioritizing software. congress do know when something is wrong and something is right or in something is working or w. we read the studies repeatedly noting the department struggles with software findings that are remarkably consistent the 1980s untilin today. it's fundamentally amiss. my hope is for the witnesses to not only describe the problem but contextualize where possible what is being done to date with the largest barriers have been to address these issues in a ma. i cannot think of a better set of witnesses in front of us today to help with thatm task r

undersecretary for defensive acquisition and sustainment. doctor richard murray professor of controlling and systems and bioengineering at caltech, and cochair of the 2019 defense innovation boards of software acquisition and senior fellow at the hudson institute. today.you all for been with us i will not recognize the ranking member for his remarks. >> thank you mr. chair thank you shalanda young excellent witnesses. looking forward to hearing from you. the department of defense and u.s. government has been critical in the development of software and technology in this country. representative of silicon valley i remember is our mission to the moon to the acquisition of semi conductors. we had not had the u.s. government by semi conductors in the skill they did he would never seen the development of silicon valley and the technology.

now the innovation is happening in my district and in the private sector. to strengthen the collaboration betwee our department and defense and private sector in pr recognizing the dynamic nature of software and how softly it chgee need that innovation to keep us the strongest military country in the world. i am looking forward to your comments and your suggestions. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. i'll start the witnesses miss lord you are recognize her five minutes for opening >> thank youyo very much congressman for chairing this hearing and thank you for members of the subcommittee to in socko's on my former colleagues and now current colleagues. in ann era of strategic competition among technologically advanced powers

software were shape the nation of deterrence and define a national security advantage. the urgency to empower our defense and national security both the best existing andain emerging technology is critical not only to preserve our freedom but also those of our partners and allies. our nation has developed and operationalized technology solutions that have transformed our commercial sector. an intern, our everyday lives. now we must harness and apply bolster superiority in theion to digital age. given current geopolitical the stakes cannot be implementation in support a child of the moment to fall short now would not be just a

bureaucratic come but a source of imminent risk to our ability to deter fight and win. the ability to quickly develop and deliver close the gap between information discovery and mission response is a defining differentiator in the global competition defense and intelligence agencies must develop, acquire, execute and maintain software to meet current mission needs while also having the agility to quickly respond to future threat environments the statutory regulatory and budgetary framework for these agencies are ripe for streamlining to build and maintain the nation software advantage. the department of defense procurement process is one of the greatest challenges and opportunities to software acquisition. often software is purchased

using the same approach that is traditionally employed for major hardware systems purchases. typically this entails setting rigid requirements conducting a lengthy solicitation and ultimately years later facing costly sustainment contract to adapt software that is often obsolete upon delivery. although alternative acquisition pathways exist there only as effective as an acquisition professionals ability to implement them. funding professional training and development for acquisitiony have key skills for implementing the full spectrum of acquisition approaches will enable the best and most innovative software and technology to be quickly provided for our national security workforce. policies andmo procedures modern

software development and delivery practices software development lifecycle, software as a service delivery, human centered design, and modern technology. training the acquisition workforce is necessary but not sufficient to modernize software development and deployment. resourcing must be available to, rapid and continuousde authority to operate and leadership must demand all relevant authorities procedures and processes are employed. my submitted testimony goes into more details on these items. i would like to close by acknowledging three efforts producg ommendations that might be useful to the gosubcommittee.

one is the commission on planning programming budgeting and just last week produce our final report. chairman rogers ranking member smith held a hearing in which we talked about recommendations that would help our software initiative. two, the software defense coalition that is led by jane lee is producing actionableul recommendations for the subcommittee. and finally the atlantic council commission on software defined a warfare of which i serve is ctionable recommendation. i urge the committee to follow up on these. thank you. >> thank you, doctor murray you are recognize her five minutes. undistinguished numbers in the subcommittee. thank you for inviting me too speak with you this morning on software development and t. from 2016 to 22 known as a member of the board and

cochaired along with michael that study on software acquisition processes. this was established in the 2018 and daa and our report was titled software is never done released in may 2019. the key findings of our report is congress and sabin talk about the importance of software struggling how to make better use of software support the national security for decades. in many ways the report of 2019 was a rephrasing of the 1987 defense science board task force on military software with 32 years earlier. which identified itself over 30 previous studies in the same topic. we described in our report chapter three we need to do we just need to figure how to actually do it to get to it. in our 2019 report we identify three thater important points to make. the first is speed and cycle time of the most important metrics for software. being able to develop and deploy faster than adversaries means we can provide more advanced capabilities, respond to your adversaries be more responsive

to end-users. reduces risk reduces in reliability gives us a tactical advantage on the battlefield by allowing operation response inside our adversaries to observe. second, software is made by people and for people so digital talent matters for dod resource policies a not conducive to attracting and retaining and promoting digital talent. talented software developers and acquisition personnel software experience are often put in job which does not allow them to make use of those towns particular in the military working job may not recognize software develop an experiee dof the necessary skills exists and scenting advantage we put them in an environment wheret's difficult to be effective. third not all software is the same. statutes regulations that govern the developed procurement develt sustainment of different

systems.. software development is hardwar. software should be developed deployed contested continues to improve using much different cycle time support infrastructure and maintenance strategies. stop was never done must be managed as enduring capability y that treated differently. inso preparing the recent repors on the implementation of some of the recommendations from the study about which we partnered with us see they've made substantial progress in implementing many of our recommendations including establishing acquisition pathways for software, exploit appropriation categories allow software to be funded as a single budget item. these important steps and should be in addition to these actions on the process dod implemented actions on other primary and secondary recommendations from

and continuous ato which dideli. as of april 2023 it appears the guidance foror containers is not yet been published. i would encourage dod to do so if it hasf÷ already. another area of high importance is recruiting digital talent. dod progress mind personnel for specialized teams and career track for software developer something we recommend. a correct service members allow dod to train retain the skilled workforce necessary to design build and test modn software systems. finally an error that's completely different todaycl thn it was five years ago is the role of artificial intelligence and military system. the implication will be profound across all areas of society in the field is changing so rapidly it's impossible to predict how a i will predict over the next three years.

moderate l■) models are writing code based on descriptions of the desired function and are being used in industry to speed development. in the future integral to testing deployment production of software as well. and for adversaries. software for systems is too critical to fail we must find ways to harness those tools that fihe increased levels required in safety and mission-criticalal systems dod mustang top of the developments and of current u.s. leadership being developed in the commercial sector. congressmen with dod plays in the central moving forward thank you for your attention and i look forward to our discussion bro. >> thank you doctor murray doctor pratt your recognize her >> thank you for inviting me here to speak.

on such an important topic. re an individual capacity by serve diverse roles offering the perspective on cutting edge of national security technology and threats. rod techno- economic shifts which are reshaping the globall order in the vibrant commercial tech ecosystem. as you all know itus powerful is for economic productivity for government effective dues- eric of our time strategic competition people's republic of china. it is this. competition advantage ultimately depends on the ability of one side to adapt mo by year mitigating weaknesses and building advantage. the kinds of questions we end up with in the military dimension

of competition or things lik are our weapons systemsmi relevt against a relentless pace of new threats can commanders accessri. can we invent new ways of fighting but the prc on back foot and dissuade aggression. these are the issues the department of defense must tackle if it wants to compete in every one of these issues now s. even changing military unit tactics depends on a software update. not your state whiteboard planni session. we need look no further than the battlefields of ukraine for evidence units which are able to change the software more quickly see better outcomes. so we face a choice. we can be victims of software cursing its bugs, delays and overruns are we can harness it for competitive advantage

leveraging american ingenuity arose talent base, and leading technology. that is our question can we create a defense system built for evolution and adaptation? system built to compete my central message is this it will echo those of my fellow witnesses here. the process of gettinge from ama programmer into an operatiol system is critical. this is what is so different about software. we blur the line between development and what his what is operations using that same thing. making this quick andoc robust s a necessary condition for competition. there are a handful of fort leading trailblazers in the department during this well today. but they remain in the minority they face daily struggles against organizations and processes built for another era. i call your attention to two actionable items for oversight. first enad1blingapid software deployment and updates through the ato process. again it refers to the process

of how the departm if software is safe to deploy and use. the second item, talentsy@ qualified technical expertise to guide software development and procurement. the first topic i will introduce an ways making software it resembles a potter molding wet clay. forming into some finished pieces. when works with source codes it acts like wet wt clay aiken quickly adjusted, may fix it. once the code has compiled, but, shipped and becomes fixed and brittle. the executable code only works in one particular type of process as we fix assumptions ab operating. it has so many dependencies need to f t the engineering team you need a cycle. and the process often makes is quite difficult.

this is addressed in greater detail my written statement. on the second topic, technical talent software is a complex ma. details matter. the bits of matter we hear these headline sometimes like one simple trip can call software or get to the cloud went software it rules them all or higher silicon valley. those are great tools. those are useful things. but navigating the complexity requires judgment and organic technical talent on the part of the department. the dod needs technical leaders driven by mission. it is not meet■ armst can attrat if given the right tools using things like term appointments and giving these peoplee autonomy. thank you. >> thank you doctor patsy. we will move into questioning. i will open operate you will hit

on that. i hate to say it seems -- mike you guys should not leave i'm going to talk to you guys if you want to hang out. yes, totally cool sit back down. the authority operates it seems like it's improper medium fore. software innovation into the departments. software is updated every half second of every minutef hour of every day. it moves so fluidly. for the past 40 years the authority operates seem to be in down. i'll start with you ladies first. what's the i do know and to report we don't never read. what is the actual fix for the pr■oblem? this is the forward lean in front of our adversaries. the system is failing its self. >> the challenge is the need for

speed. and i believe there are two things that wele need to do. one, moved to continuous ato. aa lot discussed. but continuous ato's are not yet implemented. i would suggest drawing posture hearings will be a very good thing to ask dod leadership about two. secondly, we are repeatedly across event programs, military services, agencies, not allowing reciprocal rights for ato's. the samee is being reauthorized again and again. those of the two key things i think we should push on picnics break down the silosfy between multiple partners? >> absolutely. not looking at discrete repetitive approvals. right now there's only a requirement to approve 12 systems aso year which given the fact most of our systems run on hardware, software, andrf

frightening. >> i completely agree. you think about continuous ato what do we need toe able to do? we need to be able to say the software needs to be updated. he's be updated now the longer we wait the more risk we put more risk. how to get to the point where industry? my cell phone there will be at update in the next day or two they've already figured out how to put an update out there that's not going to break all and satisfy their own security we need to do that was in the dod we need to find that that is. i think he should be asking on every program what is a cycle time this going into the software? how much of the cycle time is the ato process? if the ato process is more than a day there is a problem because iteeds to be a continuous ato needs to be something we automatically checked does it satisfy the security requirements? this is important cody got to be careful thatut what needs to get

out there quickly are putting our workers at risk. >> pat? lex i agree very much with those comments. the ato is about the risk of using the software. about deploying the software but gets aligned with mission risk. th p lost. buying a body armor and you can separate these decisions of dented by the body armor doesn't meet the is it safe to use this on a mission doesn't help support the mission? with software these lines get blurred. i will say one of the places where you see progress in the department is where they tried to put these risks together. if you look at in the navy rpm w150 their program officers and program managers with both own the risk oftr the use of these soft on the operational network and the development of the software. you move those things together you tend to get more mission focused outcomes. these are the organizations

which have been successfully able to use continuous ato's. we expect some of his forte as doctor murray said we often focus on ato like the old fashion software model wein fort the rk■t of n updating the software. of not deploying new features which will make us more successful in our mission. we become to focus on compliance checking the boxes did we meet the boxes we said we would diminish if the software do we a mission here. the most important thing is the cycle time to keep coming back to y. updating and mitigating problems. >> if i may have one quick follow-up on that? i think we need to differentiate within the department between risk management and risk elimination. we are never going to elimina

all risk. these trade-offs are what take human judgment and what doctor pat is talking about. he also called out is very important for congress to recognize those individuals in the department who are leaning forward and demonstrating, embracing authorities, policies procedures. and i would say■.■- i think shes moving along peo iws comments on the admirably thank you. >> thank you. for all the young men and women sitting behind the witnesses, they are talking to you. you are the next generation that would keep this country ahead of nefarious act across then; glob. highly recommend you play the state back because we are counting on you, do youu. understand? outstanding producer connie recognized five minutes.

>> in my district we have a software challenge at apple or google they don't just go out software. in fact as the last thing they do. they have a mission and they figure things out. i have heard from people who consult the dod a worked at the dodst they buy new software to check off the box they have complied. this is innovating on the way the private sector does. would you comment on how we ch culture? other than getting to run these things? >> it comes down to investing in the human individuals are not trained to be smart buyers we cannot attract contemporary coders and so forth we will not change that culture. right now we have a huge issue this is mentioned in our final

report with the modernizing a lot of our business systems. were pretty good at talking to we typically do not talk about innovative systems. we need to digitize those systems and attract individuals who won't work right now we ha f software specialist in the department because we are work on 10, 20, 30-year-old software. and frankly there is not the knowledge as to what can be done.i suggest work with d8 you, charting the acquisitiont professionals on what a digital environment really is. thank you. >> i completely agree with you inbut we cannot say this softwae is not doing what it's supposed to do so let's go specify them put a bunch of requirements in

are that's going to do that i go by that somehow in five years later the sink comes along. we see in silicon valley and other places we say we need a platform in that platform is an enduring capability but were going to search for ever delivering apps to cell phones forever. we're going be tracking and tras in space forever there's an enduring capability there there software is going to do that we need to think about that platform is something that's going to be updated, new and other things we are not going to say it let's write down their requirements for that by it and it's done and it's in a sit there for 10 or 20 years was something we need to say every are going to invest a certain amount of money and that software they develop team is going to do that. we need to create a system we capability we get into the mindset it's absolutely possible we've seen in the commercial sector is part of the reason the u.s. commercial sector so far ahead as we are able to jump on all those things. we have to do that within the dod i think their spots doing that we need to again amplify those we need to recognize those we need to do that more.

one other thing i will say as i think we cease and that starting in the software acquisition but they appeardo soft. the sittinged on top of hardware in the hardware mindset dominates. we've got to break out of that. it's that software also needs to be updated if■ you're looking at 22 there software on that but some should say that for a decade or more but much of that i things that should be updated on a >> one more question i'll give you the chance to answer it. if there is a company in their awarded a second phase■f and grt is lot of the startups do their waiting for a year or year end a half to get sbir three. is the n silicon valley and a lot of startups. psis there a way to authorize a contracting officer to give a letter of that they are going to get the grant? so many of the started to don't make it. >> yes.

this a question on acquisition policy is there are a variety of tools the government can use theirs also limits for example a frequent limit that comes up i worked in antideficiency thing. often you have to wait for funding to become available from a futurear year. the government cannot indicate advance notice. some t report, its recommendation could create a directional flexibilities can be delegated down which could allow flexibility. allow the same year flexing of our priorities of maybe move some money that's not being used to good purpose to advancing an spr phase three award. >> following up on that a little bit as important to note right now the national academies is running a study on recertification for just this very reason. and as danan mentioned we did nt

have discrete budget line elements but had more capability elements we could allow peo's agility. especially in the air of execution to move money towards emerging technology and these smaller companies. right now unfortunately in my opinion the process as an afterthought for most peo's and pms. there's not a lot of education on it and it is a little bit trickier to use it. so again educating the workforce is critical. >> thank you. mr. gates you are recognized for. >> march 7 of this year aviation times.com reported the tr three dod to combat code f3 five.the i do not know what it means to combat code something it sounds dangerous.

so maybe you could explain what that is whether it's a good idea? >> i am not sure until i like coding on the go. i will cite f35 is a perfect example of a program that looked where it's critical for national security. but frankly, to a large degree has excluded the small companies fo that is where the coding capability is. and i think having lived through the tr three drama if you will we need to decompose this and make sure when we are awarding the large contracts we are reaching out to the companies d. and again manage a risk don't eliminate risk and find a way to bring them in big.aw >> here's a challengehese compae dying to get the contract they

do all sorts of things to get these big old contracts to get wondered 80 million-dollar copy of 35. and then he went to protect the source code and not allow other innovators to access it to springboard and innovate off of it. as the f351 of these hardware dominated paradigm systems where the upgrthe upgrades needed forr fighter are now being executed through this combat coding system? don't over the combat coding systems being is there but certainly the case it is a large hardware program that's used from what i can tell a very traditional process. >> you mean thats a critique. >> yes as a critique i agree. the software components again some software components embedded flight control code is not something you should be■l changing every day. others are doing logistics are things that we want to be agile about and want to take advantage of. how do we end those programs not that we should break the rules because now there's a crisis

were going to do differently. but rather we have a well-defined way of putting software in there, checking ato's. part of the processes we net with the frequency of which were going to update theis software. >> what they say to a student updated frequently. and we need to be sole-source and of course we cannot sure source chord with anyone else to the might be able to participate in that update. soow do i break through that? >> is a great question. i'll let dance a little bit e about it. you have to think about where the pieces of software going to come from but they all have to come necessary from when the manufacturer per. >> will have to wake him up was smelling salts not every update has to come through them. so first let me add some operational context to this. sometimes i think it is taught hard to understand how important let's just look at ukraine one of things you see ukrainian radios last three weeks before a counter comes along and they have to re- program or

change the way. drop from 70% effectiveness to 6%6% effectiveness over a matter of a few months. expect our majn system program to use the processes and spent years planning a tackle refresh how do vendor lock.e to adapt the other some get a continuous ato to lock themselves in because it's so expensive. you can spend a million dollars getting third ato process.

but there are a set of principles these are known as congress put these in9i place. miss lord oversaw a number of efforts these are poorly used. manager is in charge of the acquisition, shall define modules and interfaces and make thoseors. to the government.ol■÷ it works in that context. putin in law poorly adopted. i greatly appreciate that itho further on ai and hypersonic's. i'll be submit and those for the record thank you. quick to reckon it's a five

minutes. >> thanks are being your thoughts at the pentagonou for seven in the five -ish years i have been here we have done a ton of hearings that look at this issue from one way problem of speeding up decision-making particularly as it relates to tech. to the point we are admiring the ma they need to spin up and speed up that string concept to feeling the technology of any kind software being some of the most complicated. it has led me too believe as even as someone who cares deeply about the pentagon international security it is not o any one ofy it's truly culture.

culture across administration. culture across leaders. and i am not aimed burn it down kind of person saying the system doesn't work so we need to destroy it and start from zero. but it is separating yourself from the tech. if you clding for the day on one cultural change what would that be? aware of the fact that pentagon has a lot of rules and restrictions and they useley ane does not have to adhere too. it's different than a small startt up. it's never going to be the same thing comparing the two is apples to speaking from culture what is

the one thing you would change? >> i would ask a leadership to demonstrate smart risk smart risk-management benefits the war fighter in our nation. there many more rewards they can be given to those individuals whether civilians were in smart risks.ed forward and t they manage risk and they do not try to eliminate it. and they move at the speed of need here. and i believe that leadership needs to speak up and make rewardindividuals who are doinge right thing and recognize that people will falter not to blame them if you will when everybody's looking for perfect

being of good enough. >> a certain light now and silicon valley one o to visit it's like people wear their mistakes as a badge of honor. i started a company it did not succeed but i learn these important lessons and now i'm on my third company look at this amazing stuff it was so strange as a pentagon official to visit pentagon and hear people talk about their feelings because of the pentagon you never talk about your failures precooked with all due respect i think congress has a piece of this. >> for short. sir you got o line here. >> it's a great question i think you are right changing that culture if you look what happened in silicon valley or other places you seat turn of oureople are not there for 10, 20, 30 years doing this they come in for two years they start another company. how do we take advantage of the commer■cial sector bring them to government, put them in a position that skipping a couple

levels and other things because they are super tales of the know what to do to get them in there. i think they will h culture beck why question require we doing it this move are reading it this way? i think that's what i would do if change the culture were not going toin change the culture by just taking people for their insane change i think we do that by bringing people and who looked different and think about things differently and that's >> very quickly in my reclaiming time. >> fostering a culture of doers is really the key here. that is encouraging the accountabilityown to an individual program manager for the outcomes they achieve. when you are a decades long development and you only serve in a position for a few years it is very h sense of accountability, responsibility or pride in the outcomes that get delivered. but the great thing about software as you cans these delivery timelines and suddenly you can start to celebrate this. combined with the suggestion doctor murray just made him bringing in people for shortomml industrymp you can get a vibrany

and dynamism and the perspective and talent to drive results per. >> thank you very much i yield back. >> mr. mccormick you are recognized for five minutes. >> think it mr. chair and thank you to the witnesses for being here today. it's fastening a hell of a variety of questions that has been all over the map you guys are such a great subject matter experts. i'm going to go a little off the chart things i was supposed to ask a day because i'm fascinated by this topic. we have a couple doctors and technological field i'm a doctor of medicine and it is inst to watchut take it this very similar to where the print business fastening for kids up there and how ai has developed in different parts of your brain affecting different parts of your body specifically designed for this part of your brain this year arm, her leg, this part of urr decision-making this is your personality. within thehe same thing in ai since we can no longer rely to

shrink the size of these structf thinness and per layer which is fascinating to me we can designed software tont hardwaree to do specific functions just like we do in our brain. as is fascinating. after all the technology and all the science were getting back to the way god designed the brain it is fascinating. my question is, this is a right to technologyxp do this and areg software to maximize the hardware we are going forward in that process how does that affect cyber security and are our enemy's ability to combat us question how do we design the software goinges forward? >> i will give it a starch. as i said earlier i think it is hard for us to predict the impact that ai is going to have it. it's clear it's going to be huge

and we have to figure how to manage that. our adversaries are going tp.o take advantage of that if we are not on the front end of that we are in trouble. i think one of the things we have to do is start saying we need to be using ai to design soo test the software will use it to try attack software code would take advantage of that technologyr the goes quickly. it is fascinating because ai is one those areas i heard talk about and said ai developers of the technology were legitimately surprised by what it could do. they did not know it would be able to code they did not know would be able to do these things. it is amazing. it did what they designed it to do. ai is something that really is nothing faster than we thought it w move i think it's going to be huge and the dod needs tos take advantage of that.

and use of large language. >> before you get started one of things i also want to consider we have 250,000 students from india here in the united states studying. we got a ton of kids from china studying. in the production in taiwan. we have production overseas weh. how do we protect this from being used against us when we are training those people and producing the chipsrseas inin a nation we said were going to take over i am concerned about the security measure that. >> an important question the complexity of our software and hardware in the codesign is absolute exploding. i will say that you can use this complexity as a tool for exampe one of the things you can do you

can create a chips and produce the hardware you can set features of it later you can defer some ofa that. you can build in forms offense. but at the same time i don't think it's possible to prevent all vulnerabilities beforea ha. this is one of the reasons why 6ç■mgoing back the tech problemd write up is so important we begin to see this now for example some of the navy operational networks automated anomaly detection there able to push a patch before any use or see a problem. so tools likeure have to use this exploding complexity that we see to the advantage of the u.s. is how we stay ahead. i want to push that questionle back on you again talk about securing our software. felt developing software we do not create our own hardware with ai how do we protect our

technologies and the bad guys? >> what we have to do is look from a defense of an offense of point of view. and it's absolutely critical that we■5ave standards that are held to when we look at the system level. that we alsoys understand the providence of a half to an software that we include right now we don't always understand the beneficial ownership of some of the companies in our supply chain and ai has done an incredible job and illuminating supply chain scraping publicly available information to really understand where items began. the department of defense has ut contracts in place to use that technology needs cybersecurity standards are already to some degree in the acquisition policies but that needs to be followed up on. >> thank you i yield.

mr. ryan five minutes per. >> thank you mr. chair thank yo. and i really appreciate your input and also your service and the various hats of the country. despite m desire to■n ask about tiktok i am not going to do that this morning. i'm sure many in our audience but curious myself included. something specifically you said, you started to say congress has a role in this discussion about culture and changing the risk appetite if you will end tolerance. could you talk a little you hav? >> absolutely. i think often it is easy to look at what has gone wrong bod. and pound on that if you will. i think perhaps learn from this? how did it happen how do we do things differently in the

future? that line of discussion would be very useful. also i think asking questions about what is holding you back from taking more risk. i think there is an incredible fear of failure. if you could engage seniorg relative to discussions about that and ask them how to motivate and reward them to act more like the commercial sector were we do things quickly fit we pull the patches in a day or so. i think that will be really, really useful. lex and setting up others to answer and somewhat leading couldn't ever makein sense for there to be some more public or broad assessment of which are lh individuals are accepting risk holding them up in a more formal

way per. >> absolutely. for years when i was in the building we talked about holding hearings to showcase these types of individuals. this types of things like tiktok to work about. there is so much y c with recognition talking to that media, inviting people up to your office for an hour■ñ or sot does not cost much would go a long way and cost a very long shadow. >> thank you. congre does shaping the culture of the dod and that's the way you ask questions if you do something white and cheap meet these requirements you're forcing us into a system which were lurking and checking all the boxes that might not be the right answer but look at speed and cycle time :< metrics y can you get something out in the field that is fantastic and get a leaderboard going this program

that got their time down weeks e doing better? we get people in a friendly these different software dominated programs can get things out into the field >> was most remarkable technologicalme achievements is how safe civil air travel is. it is remarkable how few the reason it became so safe and so successful is there is a strong culture around and blame free which is if you step forward and talk about the problem than it is about learning is not about failure. this is the same principle we need to apply here as we figure out collectively how to do software rights. to collect two specificç+o" exas many ofd you have heard of the air force a project called

capitol rock. many of you h h airports the advance battle management system that's run by peo c3 bm in the air force. both of those efforts are efforts there early efforts and they said w need to pivot. early choices we made around architecture and how to approach this or how we think about managing this effort are not right and we need to those are the kinds of people, the kind of decision and the blame free culture the focus on work. >> i appreciate that. i with a 20 seconds i have left i think recognizing that has to start from the very, very top. and it has to be a principle of all the senior leadership. that something we can hopefully all agree so thank you mr. chair >> thank you mr. ryan. >> i want to thank the excellene

your time. shedding light in applying information again we've talked about it we learn more from our failures them ever will our to your point sir we never spoke about how well the operation went. we talked about how horribly small things in order to capitalize on the next. i've been sitting back here i think i have a not going to saye and the house of representatives. i'll keep that to myself since i'm on tv rightht my colleagues and i will definitely discuss that. again thank you. with five business days to submit your questio f adjourned.

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]k!■s [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] we are counting on you to do it. here on out before do great in [laughter][inaudible conversati]

[inaudible conversations] fulton countyuperior court judge has dismissed six counts gives formerresident trump his codefendant in the georgia 2020 election interrence case two ofhe charges dismissed have to do with the phone call to secretary state during which the former president allegedly asked georgia officials to find him additional votes. while the court has moved to dismiss six of the crges the majority of the indictments against former president trump remain.

on thursday head o the u. administration joinsth emergency management oicials to tti on wildfire threats d response efforts. watch a life before the senate homeland security govnmtal affairs committee at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three comments snt now are free mobile video app or online at c-span.org. all the democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this. americans conceived democracy at work truly informed our republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word from the nation's capitol to where ever you are because the opinion that matters most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span is powered by cable.