Evalu8ter
Agreed, although I was talking about civvies. I wouldn't dare say Service SO2/1s are not trained for the job! Nevertheless, many "requirements" from MB have said "TBA" under "Quantity", but have come with an absolute max budget which stops the project dead in its tracks - with the procurer getting the blame. If they can't get simple concepts like that right, then Bernard Gray has either got to (a) revamp the entire system, or (b) revert to the mandated regulations that are known to work.
Experience tells me that if he adopted (a), then the result would be similar to (b). The difference is timescale.
Conversely, I look at projects delivered effortlessly to time, cost and performance (or better) and ask Why? The answer is ALWAYS that the ground work was done correctly. That is, completely ignore current practice and implement mandated regulations. Any experienced project manager will still retain his own copy of these regs (one set of instructions and one 2-part Def Stan) and just quietly implement them. Still got mine. They are the bible.
As you say, the same applies in programme elements, such as airworthiness. (Who does Programme Element Costings these days? It's the Requirement Manager's job, but I've never met one who has heard of the discipline). It isn't as if every project/aircraft is tainted. Look at the success stories and learn from them. There is no evidence whatsoever that Gray has taken this advice.