The purpose of this study is to present defense R&D governance model for governance analysis and decision making in defense R&D programs. In particular, by utilizing the MIT Sloan IT governance matrix and through Delphi surveys of a group of defense R&D experts, an efficient governance model of national R&D and weapon systems acquisition area is deducted and at the same time policy implications and directions of defense R&D and weapon systems decision making processes for technology-pursuing countries are presented. This study contributes to the decision making of R&D and weapon systems acquisition programs that utilize defense R&D governance, by allowing many corporations trying to enter emerging economies to understand those countries’ defense R&D governance models. This study emphasizes that the governance with the most optimal combination of the Decision types (R&D Principles, R&D Architecture, R&D Infrastructure, Business Application Needs, R&D Investment) and the Archetypes (National R&D Committee Monarchy, Defense Agency Monarchy, Federal, Defense Industries Monarchy) must be reflected on national defense R&D programs and weapons systems acquisition procedures, in accordance with the scale and budget of a given program. This can be applied through various means to benefit national defense R&D and weapons system-related projects in different countries.

Introduction

The defense industry, as an industry of regulations and procedures to execute R&D and weapon systems acquisition programs with planned defense budgets, has been continuously developing in detail according to each country’s policies (Davies and Hobday, 2005). In particular, the defense industry is large and diverse in terms of the program scale and budget size, and all programs must be executed within regulations and procedures, from the long-term requirements phase to program execution procedures and decision-making processes per each phase. Occasionally, due to the nature of the defense industry, the structure and program execution decision making processes may not be flexible, and flexibility or innovation is seen only in a restricted form, meaning a lot of reviews and time spent on many unforeseen aspects when various changes occur (Malik, 2018). In order to overcome this problem, it is important to execute R&D programs by deducting the best possible acquisition methods through a process of mixed consultation and agreement that crosses boundaries between other related agencies in the field of science and technology, including related defense agencies, through defense R&D governance from the program’s initial planning phase for related technology that is to be acquired (Cho et al., 2016; Henriksen and Ponte, 2018).