Anti-corruption Efforts in the Defense Agency of Technology and Quality – an Interview
Interview by You Han-Beom, Board Member, TI-Korea
On March 12, 2018, you were inaugurated as a president of the Defense Agency of Technology and Quality. Can you tell us a bit about the agency?
The Defense Agency of Technology and Quality was established in 1981. It is a specialized institute under the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, which conducts ‘defense technology planning,’ aimed at discovering Korea’s future defense core technologies and proposing new R&D directions, and ‘defense quality management,’ implemented to acquire quality munitions.
In summary, the agency actively participates in the national defense reform through ‘technology planning’ and contributes to military power maximization through ‘quality management.’
‘Defense Technology Planning’ proposes a blueprint for the development of technology roadmaps and defense core technologies necessary for the development of medium- and long-term advanced weapon systems, and ‘quality management’ supervises the product’s quality from development and mass production stage till field operations. From military support system (for example, combat ration and combat uniform) until hi-tech weapon system (for example. tanks, homing weapons, vessels, combat planes) – most of the munitions used by our military are deployed on-site due to the hard work of the Defense Agency of Technology and Quality’s researchers.
Situated near the munitions’ production sites, seven weapon systems centers around the country carry out the quality management activities. The locations are as follow: Forces Support System Center (Seoul), Missile Electronics Center (Daegu), Ammunition Center (Daejeon), Land System Center (Changwon), Naval Sea System Center (Busan), Reliability Test Center (Inje), and Aeronautical System Center (Jinju).
In addition, the Defense Agency of Technology and Quality operates eight regional defense venture centers in order to equip small- and medium-sized companies with technological competitiveness and to support the advancement of the defense industry.
Currently, there are approximately 900 researchers and staff members employed across the country.
Please introduce the aspects you take into consideration while managing an institution in terms of integrity
Yulgok, real name Yi I, set up his life’s resolution when he was 20 years old. In order to achieve his goal, Yulgok created his own concrete way. To motivate himself and show his resolution, he wrote Jagyeongmun (自警文 Written to Alert Myself). I always remind myself of this piece of writing. Among them, the forth statement says, “If thoughts that always caution and fear, and restrain themselves when alone are preserved in my chest, and if I am mindful and not negligent, naturally wicked thoughts will not arise.”
As a president, even when I am at a desolate place where nobody can see or hear me, I always try to maintain a mind and an attitude that does not go against what is right.
Can you please give us Jagyeongmun forth statement’s real-life example after your inauguration?
Given the nature and mission of our institution, and the need for frequent contact with different stakeholders, such as companies and research institutes, we need transparency to perform our duties.
First, we installed CCTV in the offices and conference room. The office space is a place where not only employees, but also many stakeholders come into contact with each other. Meetings with stakeholders often lead to misunderstandings and disputes about black market deals. In order to block these sources of discord in advance, CCTV was installed to record and monitor everything. In a situation where one’s every move is recorded, no stakeholder will be able to commit an illegal action. If this information spreads, everyone will realize that nobody can expect an illegal solicitation happening in our organization. It was not an easy decision to install CCTV in the president’s office. However, as a result, we expressed the strong commitment of the chief of the organization to resolve corruption, thereby enhancing the integrity of the organization and spreading the anti-corruption awareness among employees.
Second, we are strengthening communication with employees by directly writing and disclosing the contents of the duties of the head of the agency. I am personally updating our internal website’s board with information about the chief’s meetings and duties. By portraying chief of the organization as an example, we are showing our employees how to faithfully conduct their duties. In addition, we are creating a “working together” atmosphere and providing the basis for transparency.
What are your efforts to prevent corruption at the institutional level and in the defense industry companies?
Considering that employees have frequent contact with stakeholders, we are specifying the scope of contact with outsiders and behavioral know-how in the Code of Conduct for Employees. We have also strengthened the code of conduct for violators – they will be subjected to severe legal penalties, such as referral inquiries when necessary. For all employees, we are introducing a “job integrity contract” system, which serves as an opportunity for self-reflection to increase the will to fight against corruption.
Above all, I emphasize that, whenever the director initiates meetings with employees, decision-makers do not use this to neglect their duties (delinquency of duties) or do things they should not do (abuse of authority).
In addition, there are efforts to combat corruption in the companies. As of 2017, there are a total of 620 companies including 105 defense companies and 515 general companies. Among them, large corporations are strengthening their awareness and efforts on the anti-corruption law. However, small- and middle-sized companies are still very weak in these terms.
Since March, at the first launch meeting with munition-producing contractors, we committed ourselves to abide by the Anti-Corruption Act to increase understanding and compliance with laws and regulations, as well as to support anti-corruption education for small and medium-sized defense companies.
The prevention of corruption starts from the CEO’s integrity. Government agencies should take the initiative to spread a culture of integrity. We are promoting defense companies’, small- and medium-sized companies’ and regional venture companies’ CEO-centered communication model. So far, we have had meetings with thirty companies and will continue to follow this model in the future.
We are also building a defense information exchange system between defense-related stakeholders. Closed defense research and development can be linked to corruption; it can prevent fair competition and hinder the growth of the defense industry. We have recently discovered the excellent technology and capabilities possessed by small and medium-sized venture companies and utilized them in the National Defense Small and Medium Venture Techno Bank (tentative name). By establishing a forum for technical information sharing among industry, academia, and private sectors, we are expanding participation in defense R&D by small and medium-sized venture companies, and institutionalizing the transparent defense industry.
In order to enhance the quality management capability of the munitions companies and improve the quality of the munitions, we have issued the DQMS (Defense Quality Management System) certificate to the qualified companies through the certification examination. Certified companies are awarded benefits such as bonus points for munitions bidding and profit margins when calculating the cost of defense materials. On the other hand, companies that have caused social problems, such as bribery related to quality, use of counterfeit parts, etc., are subject to special examination and cancellation of certification. In the future, we will continue to improve the system to further raise awareness of quality responsibility and anti-corruption.
You are also part of Transparency International-Korea. In your opinion, what are the anti-corruption measures and institutional improvements that should be applied to the defense industry?
Firstly, we should deal with information asymmetry. In order to do this, it is necessary to revitalize the involvement of civilian specialized agencies and defense companies in the overall defense acquisition, such as the filing of requests and research. It is also necessary to establish a transparent and fair system for disseminating information about the defense industry. In addition, foreign professional organizations and experts need to participate in the policy formulations.
We also need strong sanctions against corruption. The public officials and researchers should be punished most severely to the extent permitted by law. In the case of companies, it is necessary to introduce a system that gives more penalty than the profit obtained through fraud or implement a “one strike model.”
We should also try to prevent corruption in advance. Thus, it is important to focus on improving accountability and efficiency for munitions producers and employees. We can consider the policy change that attracts the defense industry’s technology and management innovation based on the incentive, for example introducing the cost system where one can benefit from the company performance. The information system should also be upgraded to enable efficient accumulation and utilization of defense industry information. In addition, it is necessary to strengthen the political infrastructure for the development of the defense industry, such as the creation of special defense industry promotion agencies and defense industry mutual assistance associations.
We will also continue our efforts to improve the defense industry and prevent corruption through transparent and reasonable planning, and enhancing the procurement system abroad by improving the structural problems of our defense industry.
Yi Chang Hee
12.03.2018 – present – Director of Defense Agency of Technology and Quality
August 2017 – March 2018 – National Defense Reform Advisory Committee, Consultant
January 2015 – January 2016 – Defense Acquisition Program Administration, Manager of Business Analysis Department
July 2013 – November 2014 – Defense Acquisition Program Administration, Equipment Specifications Team Leader
January 2011 – August 2013 – Defense Acquisition Program Administration, Head of the Acquisition Policy Division
January 2009 – December 2010 – Defense Agency of Technology and Quality, Technology Planning Division
March 2004 – December 2005 – Office of the Prime Minister, Defense Acquisition System Improvement Team