During one of the panel discussions at the Dual Hub Summit (the first dual innovation event in Chile, held last month in Concepción), I was asked about “the coordination gaps between universities and the defense industry” and what factors could make this relationship more complex. My first reaction was to acknowledge that many of these gaps are neither new nor exclusive to the defense world: they are practically the same ones that have been identified for years in attempts to link knowledge-generating institutions (universities and research centers) with civilian industry.
The first and most obvious is the lack of mutual understanding. Universities don’t know how industry works; industry doesn’t understand how universities operate. This ignorance breeds mistrust, which in contexts like ours (where mistrust is a cultural trait) deepens easily, and the lack of concrete data is replaced by prejudice, which widens the distance even further.
A second gap has to do with profoundly different organizational cultures. Universities and research centers have their own languages, rituals and internal logics, and one of their most important features is the need to share the knowledge they generate (summed up in the aphorism “publish or perish,” which governs much of academic life). In industry, on the other hand, information can provide an edge over the competition, so it is not shared freely, and even less so in the defense sector, where the compartmentalization of information, and even the necessary operational secrecy, are a structural part of how it works. The possibility of a fluid dialogue is thus hindered from the start.
Added to this is the growing complexity of value chains. Today, even in civilian industry, it is not easy for a university to identify where in the production process it can add value. This difficulty becomes even more pronounced in defense, where levels of opacity make it hard to understand how a purchasing decision is made or who the key players are to drive collaboration on a given development.
Another critical factor is standards. Many technologies emerging from academia are at early stages of development, with low technology readiness levels and no validation in real-world environments. In demanding, regulated industries such as defense, products must also comply with strict regulations and “military-grade” qualifications. This adds not only technical complexity but also barriers to entry that few scientific developments manage to overcome without sustained external support.
These five factors, among others, can be broken down, studied and elaborated on as much as one likes. But it may be more useful to recognize that there are also meeting points between these worlds, and that we can build a more fruitful collaboration from there. From an operational point of view, for example, both worlds plan decades ahead and are willing to live with the risk of such a long-term bet. This structural, long-range outlook is an important point of affinity, and one that is not common in other fields.
But the most relevant common ground is what I call, for lack of a better term, a “sense of mission”; that is, the deep motivation that drives people in both sectors to work and make whatever sacrifices are necessary to advance in their respective endeavors.
So while universities may pursue improvements in enrollment or rankings, and the defense industry seeks efficiency and competitiveness, these are instrumental goals. Deep down, those who work in these spaces are motivated by a greater purpose: contributing to the country’s development, protecting its sovereignty and, ultimately, protecting and improving the lives of its people. It is this deep driving force that can, and must, sustain coordination efforts.
Thus, while recognizing the gaps in collaboration is essential, it is even more important to identify the motivations we share. Therein lies the real possibility of building a strategic alliance between science, technology, industry and defense that not only drives innovation but also strengthens our collective capacity to respond to the challenges of the present and the future.
Read the original column at https://opinion.cooperativa.cl/opinion/ciencia-y-tecnologia/el-sentido-de-mision-base-para-la-colaboracion-entre-ciencia-e/2025-06-06/101235.html
