I think a close relationship with the defence department and its industrial base is critical for keeping the cost, schedule and performance in the right balance. Much of that has to happen early on, in the early phases of a program. When you're designing requirements, you need to feel comfortable and adequately utilize the insights that come from industry in telling you what is possible, perhaps helping you think about the weapons system in a way that you might not have, helping you know a little bit more about the requirement, and informing what technological capabilities could address the capability gap you're seeking.
I think that constant communication is critically important. A lot of our rules and processes preclude that, in some cases, to avoid issues or situations where—I'm trying to think of non-U.S. jargon—you could have competition issues that would incite protests by losing bidders in contracts. We have to strike a balance.
Those rules often make the workforce very risk-averse and hesitant to communicate at all. It takes leadership, people who are in senior positions, encouraging them and really covering and having their backs to do so, so that they feel comfortable engaging in the appropriate ways with industry to inform both the requirements and the program.