On Exploring and Improving the Awkward Relationship Defence has with Startups / SMEs and COTS or Dual-Use Technologies

A Light-Hearted Cautionary Tale and More Serious Analysis and Recommendations

by Dr Tim Wilkinson, Babcock Mission Systems

In this insightful and engaging contribution, Tim Wilkinson offers a candid exploration of the persistent challenges Defence faces in engaging effectively with startups, SMEs, and commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technologies. Blending a fictional cautionary tale with serious analysis, Wilkinson exposes the structural and cultural barriers that hinder innovation and procurement agility. His reflections are timely, as Defence seeks to harness dual-use technologies and scale capability in response to evolving threats. With humour, clarity, and a wealth of experience from industry, this article invites policymakers, practitioners, and technologists to rethink incentives, embrace open standards, and create fertile ground for sovereign innovation. It is a compelling call for smarter collaboration across Defence and industry.

Introduction

I wrote this piece some time ago, originally for verbal delivery at a conference. The purpose then was to bring to life some rather dry points around the difficulties faced by startups or SMEs (Small to Medium Enterprises) in engaging with defence, particularly those with COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) or dual-use Technologies. The idea was to get the audience, wherever they sat in this space, to think more about how their policies, processes and behaviours negatively impacted this engagement and in turn how we could all develop what we have control over to make this work better.

Since then, with the changing nature of warfare requiring more rapid development and fielding of capability and greater re-use of COTS or dual-use technologies with the ability to scale, the critical role startups and SMEs play here has made solving this problem more important.

Recently, there have been some positive changes in government defence procurement to address this, publicised in statements of intent [1] and more recently policy detailed in the SDR (Strategic Defence Review) [2] but these have been clear on the why and specific on the what but light on the how.

Moreover, there is still an apparent naivety in defence as to why this isn’t working now. It’s not uncommon to see statements on LinkedIn etc. bemoaning the reluctance of finance to invest in defence startups suggesting this is somewhat ethically motivated. But in my experience the VC (Venture Capitalist) community are ruthlessly mercenary and driven only by wanting to see big returns fast and it is the lack of this obvious path that needs exploring further.

So, I thought it might be worthwhile dusting this off and sharing it with the community through publication in this journal, because there is still room for improvement and hopefully the freedom to implement this.

This contribution comes with two important disclaimers. First, the observations, interpretations and opinions expressed here are my own and don’t necessarily reflect those of my employer, nor do the company behaviours depicted reflect those of my company, at least not the bad ones! Second, I’ve been fortunate in my varied career to have seen this problem from several different perspectives, but I have never worked for the MoD or been in the forces, so I may well underrepresent the constraints that those parties are under in the scenario depicted, and if that is the case I apologise up front.

Link to full article.