An Interview with New SMI Advisor Brian Moran
03/01/11
What is your background, and what led you to work in defense, technology, and policy? I started out as an analyst at the Defense Intelligence Agency and soon migrated into intelligence program management, which often meant acquiring cutting edge technologies. When I worked for the Headquarters of the U.S. European Command, my job was to coordinate the annual budget requests of our Army, Navy, and Air Force components, and also to work with the Pentagon, Intelligence Community and Congress to make sure those requests were met. I cultivated relationships in the Pentagon and Congress with those who could insert themselves into the budget and appropriations processes to make sure that the theater commander's war-fighting priorities were funded. My involvement with technology companies expanded greatly when I started working for Sen. Byron Dorgan a decade ago. I worked with him to establish the Red River Valley Research Corridor - a non-profit entity focused on promoting the growth of a high-technology sector in North Dakota and the upper Great Plains. I helped Sen. Dorgan secure hundreds of millions in federal funding to promote university and private sector technology projects. In total, I have more than three decades of planning, programming and budgeting experience in the Department of Defense, White House, and U.S. Senate. Therefore, when Senator Dorgan retired, I decided that I wanted to leverage my experience in the government and work with small- and medium-sized businesses to help them navigate the Federal bureaucracy and market their products to the Department of Defense and other government agencies. What drew you to working as an Advisor to SMI? I like SMI’s professionalism and the way SMI takes care of its clients. As a Senate staffer, I had a lot of dealings with consultants. I was particularly impressed at how well SMI’s representatives knew their clients and their clients’ needs. No one was better at suggesting innovative strategies for helping the Senator's constituents market their services to the Federal government. In many instances, SMI made my job a lot easier. Do you foresee any future challenges or opportunities in doing business with the Federal Government? Obviously the moratorium on earmarks is a challenge. That means private companies will place a greater focus on obtaining Federal department or agency R&D funding, despite the resource constraints that the government faces. And given these limited resources, the government is going to seek more value for each dollar. A senior DoD official recently told me that "from now on, we are going to be much more aggressive in our contract negotiations." That may sound intimidating, but it also means that small and medium companies that offer top-notch products and good value for money should find a receptive audience among government officials who need to carry out their missions with constrained resources. What advice would you give SMI clients hoping to conduct business with the Federal Government? It is a lot easier to sell the government what it already wants, rather than sell it what you think it needs. Those who want to market new technologies and innovative products to the government should consider the government’s requirements early in their research and development process. If the government has a documented requirement for your technology, then make sure your planned product fits the specifications. If it doesn't, then work with a program manager to get a requirement for your product validated. This is the kind of effort that SMI can assist with. Are there any policies or programs recently passed or currently under consideration favoring SMI's client base? Already there are indications that Congress is not going to completely forego its constitutional role in deciding federal spending, and that the authorization and appropriations committees will implement some kind of procedures to insert well-deserving projects into departmental and agency budgets. For example, the new "Rapid Innovation Program" that Congress established in the FY 2011 Defense Authorization Act could be of significant benefit to SMI's clients. It is aimed at accelerating the transition of innovative technologies to the warfighter. Because of the budget impasse, the program is still unfunded; the House has designated $500 million in its version of the FY11 spending bill, and SMI is lobbying for the Senate to match or increase that level. Unlike most earmarks, the projects proposed for this program will have to compete for funding and most awards will be limited to $3 million over two years. Another hopeful sign is that Sen. McCain - one of the loudest opponents of earmarks - has joined with Sen. Inhofe, a proponent of earmarks, in sponsoring legislation that would outlaw "unauthorized earmarks" but would allow "authorized" earmarks. Under the Inhofe-McCain proposal, the definition of earmarks would exempt projects specifically authorized by Senate committees that meet "funding eligibility criteria" established by the relevant committees or that are created through a competitive-bidding and formula-based process. Earmarks could also be enacted with a super-super majority of 75 senators. SMI proudly welcomes Brian Moran to our team of advisors. |
||