Exrigger,
Due to my civil airline maintenance and operations experiences, I too was once employed to try and implement MIL Part M (at the time it was Def Stan 05-130 - MAOS Part M) to the Company I worked with and also to educate and advise the RAF contingent with my scope of work.
I have to say that I did make some large waves in changing company and some RAF attitudes to the MAOS regulations and their associated processes. However, there was also a great deal of resistance/retaliation from the customer against their own regulations. I managed to hold my job for four years before giving up in sheer frustration, with the customer attitudes, and going back to civvy street where I had a much less stressful time holding nine EASA Forms 4.
In that relatively short tenure, I found that the (quite hostile) EA had no clue as to how they should respond to reliability reports or any other findings from their contractors, to the point where the EA were forced to surrender there maintenance program duties (and the cost of a £6m contract) because their 'avoidance of airworthiness actions' were placed on a company Risk Register and displayed to their DH.
That EA had no method of recording or even researching defect trends within their single platform and displayed some 'alternate' priorities in their duties. In fact their own history documented the EA's lack of action and attention for the previous 20 years!