If you’ve opted to read this, I assume you’ve at least heard the term "POM," which stands for Program Objective Memorandum. At the very least, you’ve likely been part of discussions about becoming a program of record. After many questions and conversations on this topic, I wanted to clarify what this means and when it really matters to you.

First, it's worth noting that the POM is a defense-specific product. The Department of Defense budget planning process, known as the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process, is unique due to the cost and complexity of defense agency activities and acquisitions. Most other agencies prepare a simpler annual memorandum that covers 1-2 years of budget planning in the form of budget priorities, which is sent to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for congressional consideration and inclusion in the President’s Budget.

The memorandum from OSD covers a five-year spending plan (FYDP) for all services and is generally referred to as the POM. Because of its complexity and the number of layers that priorities need to be reevaluated, this budgeting process takes over a year, resulting in a 2-3 year gap from the time a request is made to the time it is funded, even if it’s incorporated. Planning for fiscal years 24-28, for example, was due in July 2022. The internal exercise likely started 6-8 months before that due date. This is often considered a leading cause of "valley of death" failure in the defense market. While I could argue either side of this statement, it's undeniable that it can be prohibitive for certain entrants, and a lack of understanding of the process and timelines can halt good work in its tracks.

As a colloquialism, government personnel often refer to this product as a verb and state that they are “POMing” in reference to making a budget request. What is actually in the POM is a prioritized list of requirements rolled up across all organizations and how the respective application of the funding cap for each fiscal year is applied to the execution of those programs. Essentially, it’s a high-level and highly complex prioritized program and spend plan.

So, how do you “get into the POM”? The detailed answer varies widely across services. Generally speaking, you bring in something so new, novel, or different that military leaders are willing to reprioritize their spending plans to incorporate your product and pose it as a new and highly prioritized requirement. This may mean adding additional requirements to an existing program but causing a large enough shift in budget and spending that it affects overall financial planning, or driving the establishment of a new program.

There is a common sentiment that going for a new program or POM activity is the answer because you are otherwise competing with an incumbent. We’ll discuss why that’s not always true shortly, but it’s also worth noting that you’re competing with an incumbent in some form, either way. Such an action will require giving something up elsewhere in the budget. While you may not be dealing with a direct competitor, this style of competition can be just as fierce and puts you in the position of arguing value and impact rather than comparing technical merit. If this is the right move for you, your business development or sales team or advisors should be pushing you to invest in lobbying and senior leadership engagement.

There are many circumstances in which an existing program has technical gaps or opportunities that don’t require you to compete with an incumbent. This is especially true of early programs with trade space for newly developing technology. While there is often a political game in the research and development sphere on developing options, the program integration and procurement fund for that capability or feature is often still up for grabs. Targeting young programs can be a great way to get in the game without POMing or engaging in a proverbial cage fight for consideration.

For capability portfolios, the level of specificity in the POM leaves a lot of discretion in the hands of the program manager. In these cases, their requirements often allow the introduction of new solutions, and they can move how money is expended within their portfolio. Even better news, research and development portfolios are even more flexible and designed to be exploratory, so there are likely buckets of development dollars available to you. Garnering advocacy in the program office that results in direction to the research and development teams to partner with you and inspires them to rearrange their program-level priorities is your goal. While this is often easier said than done, it’s several steps removed from moving all the levers required to “POM” for you.

It’s true for all programs that the program managers are responsible for deciding how they will meet a particular requirement. Assuming a reasonable requirement exists for your technology, the most influential decision-maker in your stakeholder chain becomes the person who can decide how to spend, which is generally a combination of a program manager and the Program Executive Officer for whom they work.

The bottom line: Most technologies can find their corner of the defense budget without making their way explicitly into the POM. Do your research, know your stakeholders, and understand your pathway before investing in such an endeavor. If the answer does land here, know that it’s time to roll up your sleeves and go “all in”!

Are you as jazzed as I am about the wonderful world of PPBE? The Air Force has kindly published a great reference manual, condensed into a short 105 pages here! For those who are less enthusiastic about this informative read, I’ll be breaking down some elements that are actually relevant to you in the coming weeks.

The popularity and complexity of this topic always result in a lively Q&A when discussed live. Have questions? Use our comment section below to share your experiences and ask additional questions on this topic! Auxo would love to dive in deeper with you!