Having been on the supplier end of more than a few military led projects, the constant gripe is that every so often the customer changes as the old bod gets posted out and the new one posted in. This has led to numerous occasions where we have had to go back to the drawing board or overturn decisions because the new bod doesn't agree. End result - cost goes up, programme slips, supplier/contractor gets the blame for incompetence.
In the civvy world, if you were buying something from a supplier you would have a manager who understood the task or at least had an interest in making it happen. You would not shuffle your office staff around every two years just so they can claim to have been involved. It is a ludicrous situation, so why does the military not learn? Many of the august members of this forum have in their time slagged off major contractors for their inability to deliver on time / on budget / with the capability they want. How many of that same august body would be happy to take on the responsibility for any one of those programmes for the duration, or should that be left to people who don't have a career?