Matching the pace required in defence infrastructure through improved delivery

Enabling faster, more effective defence programmes

New UK prime minister Andy Burnham has committed to fully funding the Defence Investment Plan, but funding is only part of the challenge ahead. Mott MacDonald defence and security director Paul Harrison believes lessons from other infrastructure sectors on defining requirements and procurement are key to turning this investment into resilient operational capability and improved readiness quickly and efficiently.

Last summer the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) set out the vision for UK security and this summer the Defence Investment Plan (DIP) outlined the funding needed to deliver on that ambition. What was clear from both announcements was that taking the same approaches to planning, procuring, designing and delivering defence infrastructure as before is not going to match the pace at which operational capability and readiness must now be strengthened.

Based on my experience of working in the military, the public sector and now the private sector, I can see there are some clear lessons that the defence sector can take on board now. Taking these opportunities into account as the UK works to deliver on the SDR and implement the DIP will position the country to accelerate capability, strengthen operational readiness and maximise the benefits of this investment.

In this article, I will examine how we can improve the definition of requirements and procurement practices before exploring opportunities across design and delivery in a second article.

Managing uncertainty without delaying progress

Defining requirements remains essential, but complex defence programmes cannot wait for every future need, threat and technology to become certain before work begins. The better question is whether programmes are structured to manage uncertainty while protecting the operational capability and readiness that the infrastructure must ultimately support.

For more repeatable assets, established requirements and standardised solutions can provide an efficient starting point, adapted where necessary for the site, wider capability and operational context. First-of-a-kind facilities and complex systems require another approach because technologies, standards and threats may change considerably during planning, construction and operation.

Mott MacDonald’s experience in the sector has shown that operational knowledge is particularly valuable when assumptions are being identified and credible future scenarios developed. Bringing that knowledge into the programme early and integrating it with the expertise of clients, delivery partners and the supply chain allows teams to test requirements against real use cases, understand their consequences and retain flexibility where it matters most.

This does not mean accepting unlimited change or beginning work without sufficient control, because neither would provide the confidence needed for critical defence investment. It means progressively assuring the most important decisions, understanding where risk is being carried and avoiding unnecessary delay while every secondary requirement is matured.

The opportunity is to replace sequential processes with a more integrated, partnership-based approach

Procuring around outcomes

Once that approach to requirements is established, procurement must reinforce it, enabling deeper partnerships between the client, designers and supply chain. Too often, established routes are repeated because they are familiar, even when the project’s complexity, risk profile or market conditions demand something different.

The starting point should be the operational effect and capability required, followed by an informed assessment of the integrated delivery model, supplier market and organisational readiness needed to achieve it. Experience from health, water, transport and other infrastructure sectors shows how structured decision-making can help clients select procurement strategies around project-specific outcomes.

Earlier engagement and sustained partnership with consultants, contractors and suppliers is an important part of that process because it aids the identification of delivery constraints, opportunities and emerging solutions before major decisions become fixed. It also gives clients a clearer understanding of market capacity and helps potential delivery partners understand the outcomes, risks and behaviours expected from them.

Procurement should also make it easier to bring specialist capability into programmes, including through appropriately sized packages that give smaller organisations meaningful opportunities to contribute. However, creating a broader supplier community will only improve outcomes if commercial arrangements encourage knowledge sharing, transparency and deeper, enduring collaboration around the shared purpose of delivering operational capability.

This is where defence can learn from collaborative infrastructure models elsewhere, while adapting and integrating those lessons into its own security, assurance and operational requirements. The objective is not to import another sector’s model unchanged, but to understand which proven approaches can remove friction without weakening essential controls.

Why getting this right matters

Getting requirements and procurement right will not, by itself, guarantee that the Defence Investment Plan delivers the infrastructure needed to accelerate operational capability and readiness at the pace now expected. It will, however, create the conditions in which informed decisions can be made earlier, risks can be managed collectively and appropriate capability can be delivered sooner.

The opportunity is to replace sequential processes with a more integrated, partnership-based approach in which requirements evolve responsibly, procurement reflects the operational capability required and expertise from clients, industry and the wider defence enterprise informs decisions from the outset. That requires trust, clarity, shared accountability and a willingness to learn from sectors that have already addressed similar challenges across complex, long-term infrastructure programmes.

The next test is what happens once those programmes move into design and delivery, where early decisions must become buildable, adaptable and sustainable assets that contribute to wider defence capability and readiness. In the second article, I will examine how deeper partnerships, collaborative design, systems thinking and more integrated delivery can convert investment and intent into resilient operational capability at pace.