Like most government agencies I assume most of the work is done by some form of defence contractor.
That being said, I'd like to hear stories from anyone who has worked there as well.
That being said, I'd like to hear stories from anyone who has worked there as well.
They have a nice model. The program managers (those who set research directions) are fixed-term IIRC, so they have very little incentive to politic, and instead can focus on seeing their pet program through to completion in the given time / funding.
One of their main "jobs" (aside from above), is to be an advocate for emerging tech among the military and civilian industrial partners to make sure it actually "becomes something".
To work at DARPA in this capacity usually requires a lot of successful R&D program management experience and some sense of grand vision. To work in a lesser, administrative capacity, including interacting with research partners, requires just a tad less, but on the average they've been exceptional, intelligent, and responsive partners for all the work we've done for them.
I don’t know about the admin vs director types split you’re talking about (at least in the PM ranks). Office directors generally provided top cover and some very sweeping research directions, but as a PM it was your job to come up with research programs that were roughly compatible, convince the office director it was, and then manage the technical execution with the performers and doing dog and pony shows when the pentagon called.
This guy was in grifting senate/etc for 48!!!!! YEARS...
https://www.ranker.com/list/facts-about-strom-thurmond/micha... (I do not know if these are true - but its not the first time hearing about some of these allegations)