Presented by EY
Federal agencies are under growing pressure to modernize aging systems, introduce new capabilities faster and demonstrate that major investments are producing measurable mission results. In this episode of Modernizing Government: The EY Insight, host George Jackson examines the full modernization journey—from establishing operational requirements and securing funding to acquisition, deployment and long-term sustainment. Rear Adm. Mike Campbell, Director of Systems Integration and Chief Engineer for the U.S. Coast Guard, explains how the service is reorganizing around complete system life cycles while managing a historic investment in cutters, aircraft, technology and infrastructure. Bobby Hart, Partner at EY, then explores how leadership, governance, workforce engagement and reliable data can help agencies turn large-scale technology investments into lasting enterprise transformation.
Rear Adm. Mike Campbell, Director of Systems Integration and Chief Engineer for the U.S. Coast Guard, discusses how the service is transforming its approach to acquisition, modernization and sustainment during what he describes as an unprecedented period of investment.
The Coast Guard’s responsibilities span lifesaving operations, maritime border security, national defense, emergency response and the safe movement of commerce through American ports and waterways. Campbell explains that these missions are becoming increasingly important to the nation’s security and prosperity, making modernization a strategic necessity rather than simply a technology initiative.
One of the most significant changes is an organizational restructuring that brings acquisition and sustainment together. Historically, acquisition professionals purchased and introduced new systems before transferring them to separate operational and maintenance organizations. Campbell describes that model as effectively “throwing it over the fence,” because the organizations acquiring a capability were not always responsible for sustaining it throughout its operational life.
The Coast Guard has replaced its single program executive officer structure with five program executive officers responsible for different operational domains. Each leader now oversees systems from initial requirements and acquisition through fielding, operations, sustainment and eventual disposal. These officials have greater authority to make trade-offs between maintaining legacy assets and investing in new capabilities, along with greater accountability for system performance across the complete life cycle.
Campbell says successful modernization must begin with the mission. Program managers and system life-cycle leaders need to understand how a proposed capability will help Coast Guard personnel perform real-world operations. The service benefits from having military personnel in acquisition and program management roles who have previously worked in operational environments and understand the needs of the people who will ultimately use the systems.
Financial stewardship remains equally important. Campbell points to the Coast Guard’s MH-65 helicopter fleet as an example of how targeted modernization and service-life extension investments can preserve operational value. Aircraft originally purchased in the 1980s remain in service today because the Coast Guard repeatedly upgraded critical components rather than replacing the entire fleet at once.
The Coast Guard is now pursuing major shipbuilding and modernization programs, including Fast Response Cutters, Waterways Commerce Cutters, Offshore Patrol Cutters and multiple classes of icebreakers. It is also upgrading technology and sensor systems aboard existing National Security Cutters. Campbell notes that the capacity of the nation’s maritime industrial base will be an important factor in delivering these vessels at the required pace.
While acquisition leaders traditionally evaluate risk through cost, schedule and performance, Campbell argues that mission risk must receive greater consideration. Agencies must weigh the financial and programmatic risks of moving quickly against the operational consequences of failing to deliver needed capabilities. In some cases, accepting greater cost, schedule or performance risk may be justified when faster deployment significantly reduces risk to the mission.
Bobby Hart, Partner at EY, explains why major digital modernization efforts require much more than purchasing and implementing new technology. While information technology can enable transformation, Hart emphasizes that technology alone is not the solution. Lasting modernization depends on leadership, workforce participation, governance, business-process redesign and an organizational culture capable of sustaining change.
Hart builds on Rear Adm. Mike Campbell’s discussion of cost, schedule and performance, describing the challenge more broadly as balancing cost, time and quality. Organizations frequently expect modernization programs to deliver all three simultaneously, but leaders must make deliberate decisions about which factors matter most for the mission and what risks they are prepared to accept.
Those indicators cannot focus solely on whether a project meets scheduled milestones. Hart says agencies often become overly focused on timelines, implementation charts and technical deliverables while losing sight of the intended operational outcome. Effective key performance indicators should measure mission impact, organizational value and the capability being delivered—not simply whether a particular implementation step occurred on time.
Reliable data is essential to that measurement. Many government organizations continue to operate through fragmented systems and data silos, including platforms that have been in place for decades. Before leaders can make data-driven decisions, they must understand where critical information originates, how systems relate to one another and which data elements are necessary to evaluate mission results.
Hart recommends breaking enterprise transformations into manageable components rather than attempting to modernize every system and process simultaneously. Agencies should identify their most important mission data, connect information from different systems and use it to guide priorities and investment decisions. The familiar principle of “garbage in, garbage out” remains relevant: inaccurate or poorly governed data will produce unreliable conclusions regardless of the sophistication of the technology analyzing it.
Governance provides the structure needed to align the many stakeholders involved in modernization. Hart says governance bodies should include cross-functional leaders representing financial management, program operations, technology, acquisition and other key interests. This structure allows organizations to rank needs, establish accountability and ensure that the most important mission capabilities receive attention first.
Organizations also do not need every employee to become a technology or data expert. They do, however, need leaders who understand how the enterprise fits together, managers who can identify the people with the necessary expertise and employees who are encouraged to remain curious and continually develop their skills. Targeted training, continuous learning and cross-functional experience can build the technical fluency needed across the workforce.
Ultimately, Hart says agencies must replace organizational silos with integration. Modernization extends from mission-needs assessment through acquisition, implementation, operations, sustainment and disposal. Leaders need an enterprise-wide view, while teams throughout the organization need enough understanding of one another’s responsibilities to collaborate effectively. By combining technology with leadership, governance, data and workforce engagement, agencies can move beyond isolated procurements and create transformations that endure.