MoD centre has been unable to provide either DE&S or industry with sufficient certainty around requirements or timing to deliver equipment projects efficiently.
This lack of certainty manifests itself in a number of ways which together characterise the current system of acquisition:
• funding uncertainty (in-year / year-to-year management);
• timing shifts (e.g., multi-year programme delays); and
• mid-project requirements creep.
Funding uncertainty arises from EPP over-programming / overheat (fully described in Chapter 6), combined with inadequate "contingency" to cope with a short-term overspend in one project without adverse consequences for another. These effects result in short-term adjustments to plan (i.e., in-year, year-to-year) being required to ensure that Departmental control totals are met.
Timing shifts result from a wider change to the requirement for capability at a certain date, either due to a revised view of the threat which the capability is designed to address, or, more often, upcoming affordability constraints. Examples of projects / sectors impacted by affordability constraints include the deliberate delay introduced to the CVF (carrier) and FRES programmes.
Mid-project requirements creep itself derives from a number of factors. The primary reason is that the long lead times associated with delivery of capability (due to the technical complexity involved, see Section 7.8.3) means that better performing technologies become available before entry into service, which specifiers are tempted to try and incorporate in some way. The close linkages between the requirements community, industry and DE&S also "permit" ongoing changes to occur without appropriate consideration being given to cost.
Regardless of cause, neither DE&S nor industry are able to predict with certainty the MoD's ability to fund or desire to develop a specific capability in a certain timeframe. Optimisation to develop the capability at lowest possible cost is therefore impossible.