The Department of Defense (DoD) doesn't need a "wake-up call" about AI's importance; it needs to "get out of bed." The critical failure is not a lack of awareness but deep-seated institutional inertia that prevents the urgent action and implementation required to build capability.
The critical national security risk for the U.S. isn't failing to invent frontier AI, but failing to integrate it. Like the French who invented the tank but lost to Germany's superior "Blitzkrieg" doctrine, the U.S. could lose its lead through slow operational adoption by its military and intelligence agencies.
The belief that a future Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) will solve all problems acts as a rationalization for inaction. This "messiah" view is dangerous because the AI revolution is continuous and happening now. Deferring action sacrifices the opportunity to build crucial, immediate capabilities and expertise.
Companies that experiment endlessly with AI but fail to operationalize it face the biggest risk of falling behind. The danger lies not in ignoring AI, but in lacking the change management and workflow redesign needed to move from small-scale tests to full integration.
AI is a 'hands-on revolution,' not a technological shift like the cloud that can be delegated to an IT department. To lead effectively, executives (including non-technical ones) must personally use AI tools. This direct experience is essential for understanding AI's potential and guiding teams through transformation.
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) creates an "AI Futures Steering Committee" co-chaired by top defense officials. Its explicit purpose is to formulate policy for evaluating, adopting, and mitigating risks of AGI, and to forecast adversary AGI capabilities.
The military lacks the "creative destruction" of the private sector and is constrained by rigid institutional boundaries. Real technological change, like AI adoption, can only happen when intense civilian leaders pair with open-minded military counterparts to form a powerful coalition for change.
Despite the power of new AI agents, the primary barrier to adoption is human resistance to changing established workflows. People are comfortable with existing processes, even inefficient ones, making it incredibly difficult for even technologically superior systems to gain traction.
Bureaucracies, like AI models, have pre-programmed "weights" that shape decisions. The DoD is weighted toward its established branches (Army, Navy, etc.). Without a dedicated Cyber Force, cybersecurity is consistently de-prioritized in budgets, promotions, and strategic focus, a vulnerability that AI will amplify.
Rather than pursuing a ground-up, AI-native overhaul, the federal government's approach to AI is pragmatic. The strategy is to apply existing tools like ChatGPT to mundane tasks, such as summarizing public comments, to achieve modest but immediate 3-10% efficiency gains and build momentum for modernization.
Companies fail to generate AI ROI not because the technology is inadequate, but because they neglect the human element. Resistance, fear, and lack of buy-in must be addressed through empathetic change management and education.