Multi-project management as DefTech key competence

The German security and defense industry is experiencing a historic turning point. In many companies, the operational question is no longer “if,” but “how quickly and how reliably” capabilities can be scaled up. At the same time, it is becoming clear that the bottleneck is rarely just manufacturing. It lies in supply chains, governance, decision-making processes, interfaces, and the ability to robustly manage several large programs in parallel. viadoo Change Guides are in the DefTech business for 20 years now. When we meet with the DefTech community nowadays, we feel this tension immediately: a market in ramp-up, where time, compliance, public debate, and technological complexity are all pressing factors.

1. Upscaling is a control problem across many levels

The ramp-up affects not only production lines, but entire value-added networks: suppliers, testing and acceptance processes, export control, IT/OT interfaces, partner consortia, authorities and the internal organization that has to make it all “manageable.”

From current market observations – most recently from numerous discussions at Enforce Tac 2026 in Nuremberg – three patterns can be derived that we are currently seeing particularly frequently in DefTech:

• Dual use is becoming more of a focus: Civilian and military value streams are growing closer together and require a consistent go-to-market approach and coordinated portfolios.
• Structural complexity is increasing: More partners, stricter regulation, and larger programs are increasing the need for governance, interface management, and reliable decision-making/control structures.
• PMO requirements are becoming more differentiated: The classic “PMO as back office” is not seen everywhere as a growth driver. Added value is more often generated in program governance, DefTech multi-project management, capacity planning, and process design.

The core behind this: In many companies, a turning point means several development, procurement, and transformation strands at the same time, with dependencies and a high political/public fall height.

2. Bureaucracy, compliance and “communication fog”

DefTech is highly regulated. This is nothing new, but in the current dynamic, any ambiguity acts like sand in the gears. When companies enter the DefTech market for the first time or approach it from other markets, we often see that legal and compliance departments want to minimize risks – which is understandable.

At the same time, this often results in what can be called “inconsistent communication and convoluted disclaimers”: wording becomes cautious to contradictory, responsibilities remain vague, and decisions are postponed.

Right now, legal certainty requires clarity, not fog. Clear roles, clear decision-making processes, clear escalation, and a comprehensible narrative both internally and externally reduce risk and increase speed.

3. DefTech needs backbone and safe spaces

At this year’s DefTech flagship trade fair Enforce Tac in Nuremberg, the community was once again visible in all its diversity: established industry, scale-ups, start-ups, representatives of the German Armed Forces and law enforcement agencies, technical tinkerers, users. A real melting pot.

Our conversations with young people at Enforce Tac who are new to DefTech out of conviction and at the same time tell us that they are operating “in stealth mode” for fear of hostility. Protests around the trade fair made it clear what this means.

This is more than just “mood.” It is a real factor in recruiting, retention, and performance. Anyone who wants to scale DefTech must actively communicate meaning, ethics, mission, and boundaries.

4. FCAS: A failure and yet an industrial window

The German-French FCAS project is symbolic of the challenges facing major European programs: complex industrial architecture, national interests, IP issues, division of labor, time pressure.

At the same time, the possible failure of FCAS holds potential for industrial policy: a revitalized German military aviation industry could emerge after nonstop restructuring since 1989. This could be achieved by managing large-scale programs and expanding existing capabilities such as system integration, avionics, mission systems, sensor technology, unmanned composite components, and digital development and approval chains.

In other words, even if FCAS fails, the strategic task remains and with it the opportunity to regroup and professionalize German expertise in military aviation.

5. The blind spot of DefTech multi-project

Perhaps the most important addition to the current debate: many DefTech organizations are not working on “the one project,” but on dozens of them in parallel. Development programs, industrialization, toolchain migration, qualifications, approvals, supply chain, ramp-up.

This creates a very specific need that is repeatedly mentioned in discussions:

• Program governance (rules, roles, committee logic, reporting)
• Interface management (partners, authorities, internal domains, suppliers)
• DefTech Multi-project / portfolio management (prioritization, dependencies, roadmaps)
• Capacity planning including scenarios (critical skills, bottleneck roles, ramp-up)
• Process design (from the development process to the decision template)

And this is where it gets personal: when priorities collide, roles are unclear, and decisions get stuck “between the chairs,” friction increases and with it the risk that projects will work but programs will not deliver.

DefTech project & people management since 2004

Since 2004, viadoo has been supporting SMEs and DAX-listed companies in the security and defense industry in the planning and control of complex projects with project and people management. Our core strengths: dealing with human dynamics and mastering communication – especially when the situation comes under fire. This is complemented by operational know-how, operational experience, and relevant certifications (including EASA).