The Four Turnings: Strategic Planning for Federal Acquisition in the Next Era

How often have you heard me say that the cool thing about getting older is that you’ve lived long enough to recognize certain longer-term patterns? That’s the advantage of age and experience—that you have a larger quantity of data, so you start to recognize recurring structures. Some patterns, I haven’t lived long enough yet to experience first-hand, but I can learn from others and apply those lessons to different sectors of my life, including Acquisition.

In recent years, we’ve faced unprecedented challenges that have tested the resilience of our society, economy, and government institutions. And I’m not even counting the last month! From global health crises to technological disruptions and geopolitical tensions, these events have collectively defined what many refer to as a period of “Crisis.” Crises are nothing new: if you’re a student of history, you’re familiar with the aftermath of plagues, famine, wars, and the events that gave rise to wars. As we navigate these turbulent times, understanding the cyclical nature of societal change can equip us with the foresight needed to prepare for the future.

One of my new tools is the Four Turnings framework, a theory presented by historians William Strauss and Neil Howe. This model suggests that society moves through a recurring cycle of four stages every 80–100 years, influencing generational attitudes and institutional behaviors. Recognizing where we stand within this cycle allows Federal Acquisition professionals to anticipate changing priorities, adapt to evolving technological landscapes, and effectively manage risk in procurement strategies.

Let’s focus on how the transition from the current Crisis phase to the upcoming High phase impacts Federal Acquisition. We could explore it in other career fields as well, and after you read this exploration, you may want to look at how it applies to other aspects of your life or even current events. I’ll dig into strategic planning approaches that Government agencies and industry partners can adopt to meet future technological and infrastructural needs effectively.

Overview of the Four Turnings Framework

The Four Turnings framework outlines a recurring cycle comprising four distinct phases:

1. High: The First Turning. A period marked by strong institutions, collective optimism, and societal unity. This phase usually follows a crisis. People want to belong and have a sense of optimism.

2. Awakening: The Second Turning. An era of questioning of traditional religious beliefs or a rise in new social movements where established systems are challenged in pursuit of individual authenticity. Existing values are questions. People want to defy, but also to focus on their inner spiritual yearnings.

3. Unraveling: The Third Turning. A time characterized by weakened institutions and heightened individualism, leading to societal fragmentation. The focus is on individual liberties and freedoms.

4. Crisis: The Fourth Turning. A decisive period of upheaval and transformation, often involving significant threats that require urgent action, such as economic collapse, large-scale war, or natural disasters. This phase often leads to war or revolution, giving birth to a new order. People gather together after a societal change.

Each turning lasts approximately 20–25 years, collectively completing a full cycle every 80–100 years; however, these phases can be shorter or longer, and there is no hard and fast rule on exact dates. Understanding these phases helps us anticipate societal needs and adapt our strategies accordingly. The turnings can vary in length and can start earlier or later than predicted; however, the sequence remains consistent across the span of the nation’s existence.

---

Historical Impact on Federal Acquisition

Historically, transitions between these phases have profoundly influenced Federal Acquisition. These shifts highlight the importance of aligning procurement strategies with the prevailing societal mood and priorities, ensuring that government initiatives effectively address current and future needs.

For example, the Post-World War II Shift: following the Crisis phase of World War II, the subsequent High phase saw the establishment of long-term defense contracts and significant investments in infrastructure like the Interstate Highway System.

Let’s look closely at how this framework has manifested from 1929 to the present. Because I want to look at the last century of patterns, I’ll start with the last of the Four Turnings, so you can see that where we start this review is similar to where we are now. Pay particular attention to where your own Acquisition career and interactions fit into this framework as well as the history lessons you remember from school. For me, I find it fascinating that my Acquisition career has spanned two of these turnings.

The Great Depression and World War II (Crisis: 1929 – 1946)

• Economic Collapse and Government Intervention: The Great Depression required massive Federal intervention, leading to large-scale public works programs, such as the New Deal projects like the Tennessee Valley Authority and Hoover Dam.
• War Mobilization and Industrial Surge: Federal Acquisition shifted from economic relief to military preparedness. During World War II, the Government rapidly expanded defense contracting, funding wartime industries. For example, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and General Motors pivoted to war production.
• Key Procurement Changes: The Government implemented cost-plus contracts to incentivize rapid production and established the Armed Services Procurement Act (1947) to formalize military contracting rules.
• Previous Crisis Phase Comparisons:
  • The American Revolution and Founding (Crisis: 1773 – 1794) – Key themes were wartime mobilization, decentralized contracting, reliance on foreign aid. Key challenges were rampant fraud, corruption, and supply shortages that led to inefficiencies in equipping the Continental Army.
  • The Civil War and Industrial Surge (Crisis: 1860 – 1868) – Key themes were massive war spending, rapid industrialization, early corruption scandals. Key challenges were lack of oversight, widespread fraud and profiteering, logistical failures in military supply chains, mismanagement of post-war reconstruction efforts, and cost overruns in large infrastructure projects like the Transcontinental Railroad.

NOTE: As we move through this framework, keep these three important eras in mind as they revolve around war. These eras share common themes of wartime mobilization, rapid government expansion, and procurement inefficiencies, with each era marked by massive Federal spending, urgent military contracting, reliance on new or untested procurement systems, and widespread fraud or corruption due to the urgency of crisis-driven Acquisition; all three periods ultimately led to major post-crisis reforms that shaped future Federal procurement practices. While the American Revolution shares some characteristics, the Civil War and World War II eras provide stronger parallels for understanding the dynamics of large-scale Federal procurement during times of national crisis.

The Post-War Boom (High: 1946 – 1960)

• Peacetime Procurement and Infrastructure Expansion: Federal spending shifted toward national development projects, including the Interstate Highway System (1956), funded through long-term contracts.
• Cold War Military Build-Up: Though the war ended, the Government maintained defense spending due to Soviet tensions, leading to large-scale acquisitions for the Korean War and early Cold War deterrence.
• Procurement Trends: The era was marked by long-term stability in Acquisition, with predictable budgets and a focus on standardized procurement methods.
• Previous High Phase Comparisons:
  • The Federalist Era and Early Expansion (High: 1794 – 1822) – Key themes were nation-building, military investment, and infrastructure projects, with the War Department establishing procurement regulations. Key challenges were limited industrial capacity requiring foreign imports, logistical difficulties in large-scale infrastructure projects, and inefficiencies in contract management as the Government navigated long-term procurement for the first time.
  • The Gilded Age and Industrial Expansion (High: 1868 – 1886) – Key themes were stability, standardization, railroad dominance. Key challenges were the growing influence of powerful railroad monopolies in Federal contracting, limited oversight of large infrastructure projects leading to cost overruns and corruption, and the need to refine standardized procurement methods to ensure efficiency and fairness in government-industry partnerships.

The Social and Technological Awakening (Awakening: 1964 to 1984)

• Vietnam War and Controversial Spending: The Vietnam War strained Federal procurement, leading to debates over military spending and transparency.
• Emergence of Cost Concerns: Public scrutiny over cost overruns (Pentagon Papers, military-industrial complex concerns) led to procurement reforms.
• Technology Procurement Boom: The Federal Government played a key role in funding innovations like NASA’s Apollo Program, DARPA’s early internet research (ARPANET), and the foundation of Silicon Valley through military tech contracts.
• Procurement Reform Efforts: The Competition in Contracting Act (1984) aimed to curb waste and encourage competition. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in 1984 is the culmination of that phase.
• Previous Awakening Phase Comparisons:
  • The Jacksonian Era and Market Awakening (Awakening: 1822 – 1844) – Key themes were anti-centralization, contractor fraud, rise of industrial suppliers. Key challenges were the weakening of centralized procurement, which led to inconsistent state-run military contracts, widespread corruption and cronyism as politically connected firms secured government deals, and weak oversight of private industry suppliers, resulting in inefficiencies and fraud. The Mexican-American War further exposed flaws in military procurement, prompting early reforms such as the creation of the Inspector General (IG) system to improve contract oversight.
  • The Progressive Era and Global Influence (Awakening: 1887 – 1908) – Key themes were anti-monopoly reforms and military modernization. Key challenges were monopolies dominating government contracts, and inefficiencies in military procurement exposed by the Spanish-American War, prompting initial efforts to improve efficiency and oversight. The need for more comprehensive reforms in military procurement became increasingly apparent.

The Era of Deregulation and Privatization (Unraveling Phase: 1984 – 2008)

• Defense Budget Cuts: After the Cold War ended, Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Acts downsized military spending, leading to reduced Federal Acquisition.
• Privatization of Government Services: The rise of contracting out Federal services such as military logistics, IT, and security to private firms such as Halliburton and Blackwater.
• Procurement Trends: The government moved toward performance-based contracts, emphasizing efficiency and cost savings. The FAR combined ASPR and other rules into a standardized regulation.
• War on Terror Shift: After 9/11, Federal Acquisition surged again for homeland security, defense contracting (Iraq & Afghanistan Wars), and intelligence.
• Previous Unraveling Phase Comparisons:
  • The Pre-Civil War Tensions (Unraveling: 1844 – 1860) – Key themes were weakened Federal authority, rising political and economic instability, and growing inefficiencies in government procurement, particularly in military supply chains. Key challenges were procurement failures during the Mexican-American War, increased fraud and profiteering in government contracts, lack of standardized oversight in major infrastructure projects, and escalating political conflicts that destabilized Federal spending priorities.
  • The Roaring Twenties and Growing Inequality (Unraveling: 1908 – 1929) – Key themes were economic boom, social and cultural changes, rising inequality, and speculative financial practices. Key challenges were Laissez-faire economic policies leading to market instability, increased corruption in government contracting, lack of regulation in emerging industries, and growing social divisions that undermined national unity. In a procurement context, post-WWI demobilization led to a decline in government contracts, but the focus shifted to infrastructure and public works projects. However, oversight remained weak, contributing to inefficiencies and potential corruption.

NOTE: This phase was the first portion of my own Acquisition career, so this turning feels intimate. Acquisition reform and Acquisition streamlining were the buzzword of the 1990’s at the same time that BRAC was combining and eliminating workforce, and under President Clinton, employees were laid off over the course of several years. This was the rise of Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS), aka manpower support contractors, that replaced Federal employees. This replacement was touted as decreasing the pool of money that paid for Federal employees but in reality moved many of those jobs to a different pool of money paid to industry via contracts.

---

The Current Crisis and Future High (Crisis: 2008 to 2028)

Yes, we’ve come full circle! From the American Revolution to the Civil War to World War II to now.

• 2008 Financial Crisis and Budget Constraints: Federal procurement tightened post-recession, with sequestration cutting defense budgets.
• COVID-19 and Emergency Procurement: The pandemic accelerated the need for rapid contracting mechanisms, including Defense Production Act orders for PPE, vaccines, and medical supplies.
• Cybersecurity and AI Boom: Rising cybersecurity threats have led to major Federal investments in zero-trust architecture, cloud computing, and AI-driven national security.
• Supply Chain Reshoring: Recent policies push for onshoring critical manufacturing, such as the CHIPS Act for semiconductor production.

Future Shift to High (Projected to begin 2028 – 2033):

The next turning is likely to focus on infrastructure modernization, standardized procurement models, and a stronger emphasis on long-term, stable Acquisition strategies. Understanding these cycles can help Federal Acquisition leaders prepare for the next shift toward a High by planning for long-term stability, standardized procurement, and modernized Acquisition processes.

But first, let’s look at where we are now and how the current Crisis phase impacts Federal Acquisition.

The Current Crisis Turning and Its Impact on Federal Acquisition

As we find ourselves in the current Fourth Turning Crisis phase, it’s essential to examine how this period has influenced Federal Acquisition practices. This phase, which began around 2008 with the global financial crisis, has been characterized by a series of significant challenges that have necessitated rapid adaptation and response from government agencies.

Characteristics of the Current Crisis (2008 to Present)

1. Economic Instability

The 2008 global financial crisis marked the beginning of a prolonged period of economic uncertainty. Governments worldwide grappled with recessionary pressures, high unemployment rates, and volatile markets. In the United States, Federal budgets faced constraints as revenues declined and expenditures increased to stimulate the economy and support social safety nets. Inability to pass a budget on time as well as government shutdowns or multiple threatened shutdowns each fiscal year took a heavy toll. This fiscal strain directly impacted Federal Acquisition, compelling agencies to prioritize urgent needs and make difficult decisions regarding resource allocation. Procurement strategies had to become more flexible to address immediate demands while operating under tighter budgetary limitations.

2. Technological Disruption

Simultaneously, rapid technological advancements transformed the landscape of both the private and public sectors. The emergence of artificial intelligence, machine learning, cloud computing, and cybersecurity technologies introduced new capabilities and vulnerabilities. Government agencies faced the dual challenge of integrating these technologies to enhance operations and protecting themselves against associated risks, such as cyber threats. The pace of technological change required procurement processes to become more agile, enabling quicker adoption of innovative solutions while ensuring compliance with regulations and standards.

3. Global Challenges

The current Crisis has also been defined by global challenges that transcend national borders. The COVID-19 pandemic exemplified how health crises could disrupt economies, overwhelm healthcare systems, and necessitate swift government action. Climate change has led to more frequent and severe natural disasters, requiring robust emergency response capabilities. Additionally, geopolitical tensions and the rise of sophisticated cyberattacks have underscored the need for enhanced national security measures. These multifaceted challenges have placed unprecedented demands on Federal Acquisition to deliver timely and effective solutions.

Recent Trends in Federal Acquisition

In response to these challenges, Federal Acquisition has exhibited several notable trends:

1. Emergency Procurement

The urgency of addressing immediate threats has led to an increased reliance on emergency procurement mechanisms. Agencies have utilized expedited contracting procedures, such as statutory authority and special authorities granted during national emergencies, to acquire critical supplies and services swiftly. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, agencies procured vast quantities of PPE, ventilators, and testing kits under compressed timelines. While these measures enabled rapid response, they also highlighted the need for balancing speed with due diligence to prevent issues like supply chain fraud or quality control problems.

2. Adoption of Emerging Technologies

To meet evolving mission requirements, agencies have accelerated the adoption of emerging technologies. The shift to remote work necessitated investments in secure communication platforms, virtual collaboration tools, and IT infrastructure upgrades. In many cases, remote work had not previously been feasible because contract-writing software did not function reliably outside the office setting. Cybersecurity has become a top priority, with agencies enhancing their defenses against increasingly sophisticated cyber threats targeting government networks and critical infrastructure. Additionally, there’s been a push toward leveraging data analytics, AI, and machine learning to improve decision-making, service delivery, and operational efficiency.

Challenges Faced

Despite efforts to adapt, several challenges have impeded the effectiveness of Federal Acquisition during the current Crisis phase:

1. Supply Chain Vulnerabilities

The pandemic exposed significant vulnerabilities in global supply chains. Dependence on foreign suppliers, particularly for essential items like medical supplies and technology components, led to shortages and delays when international trade was disrupted. These challenges underscored the risks associated with a lack of domestic manufacturing capacity and the need for more resilient supply chains. Agencies had to navigate complexities in sourcing materials, ensuring quality, and maintaining continuity of operations under strained conditions.

2. Regulatory Hurdles

Complex procurement regulations and compliance requirements have sometimes hindered the government’s ability to respond swiftly to urgent needs. The FAR provides a comprehensive framework designed to ensure transparency, fairness, and accountability. However, the intricacies of these regulations can slow down the procurement process, especially when rapid action is required. Agencies have had to find a balance between expediting Acquisitions and adhering to necessary oversight, which has prompted discussions about the potential for regulatory reforms to enhance flexibility without compromising integrity. For example, the Middle Tier of Acquisition (MTA) pathway was meant to keep documentation and oversight to a minimum with the ability to “tailor in” additional documentation and oversight, but within a year or so, MTA lost its initial desirability as the comfort of old documentation and oversight were added back.

Anticipating the Transition to the High Turning Phase

Keep in mind that we are not yet out of the Crisis phase and that the estimated shift will come in 3 to 5 years from now (2028 to 2030) but maybe as late as 2033.

Recognizing the signs of an impending shift from the current Crisis phase to the next High phase allows Federal Acquisition professionals to adjust strategies proactively. Anticipation of societal priorities and government objectives that characterize the High can guide the development of procurement practices that align with future needs.

1. Emphasis on Stability and Unity

After enduring prolonged uncertainty and upheaval, society typically seeks a return to stability and a reaffirmation of shared values. The High phase is marked by a collective desire to strengthen institutions, rebuild trust in government, and foster national cohesion. There’s an inclination toward policies and initiatives that promote social harmony, economic growth, and a sense of common purpose.

2. Focus on Rebuilding and Modernization

The transition from the Fourth Turning to the First Turning of the next cycle often involves ambitious programs aimed at revitalizing infrastructure and modernizing systems. This includes significant investments in:

– Physical Infrastructure: Repairing and upgrading transportation networks, utilities, and public facilities to support economic activity and improve quality of life.

– Digital Infrastructure: Expanding broadband access, enhancing cybersecurity, and implementing advanced technologies to facilitate connectivity and innovation.

– Public Health Systems: Strengthening healthcare delivery, emergency preparedness, and medical research capabilities to improve public health outcomes.

These efforts reflect a forward-looking approach that prioritizes long-term benefits and resilience against future challenges.

Implications for Federal Acquisition

Understanding these characteristics provides insights into how Federal Acquisition must evolve:

1. Shift in Procurement Strategies

Agencies will likely pivot from short-term, reactive procurement approaches to strategic, long-term planning. This involves developing procurement strategies that support multi-year projects and foster sustained partnerships with industry. Emphasis will be placed on acquiring solutions that not only meet immediate needs but also contribute to overarching national goals. Contracts may become larger in scope and duration, requiring careful management and oversight to ensure successful outcomes.

2. Standardization and Efficiency

To enhance efficiency and effectiveness, there will be a push toward standardizing procurement processes across agencies. Simplifying procedures, reducing redundancies, and leveraging shared services can lead to cost savings and improved performance. Adoption of best practices and consistent application of regulations can facilitate smoother interactions with industry partners and reduce the administrative burden on both sides.

3. Innovation with Caution

While innovation remains essential, there may be a more measured approach to adopting new technologies. Agencies might prioritize solutions that have demonstrated reliability and scalability, reducing the risks associated with untested innovations. This doesn’t preclude the exploration of cutting-edge technologies but encourages a balanced approach that weighs potential benefits against practical considerations.

NOTE: I’m personally very fond of what this shift could mean as it fits how I’ve tried for the last decade to create portfolios of tools and contracting vehicles that could be used for quick turns and maximum responsiveness. By thinking ahead and setting up the framework to work within, I could more easily and efficiently react to both emergencies and non-emergencies. I’m also highly excited about agencies talking to each other and standardizing best or leading practices. These are all things I’ve been preaching for years, and by watching patterns, I tend to be a little ahead of the cycles. I do think that both Millennials and Gen Z will play a big role in this next phase as well as the use of AI, and that we’ll see proposals, evaluations, and source selection decisions assisted by AI tools in ways we can barely imagine now.

Summary

As Federal Acquisition navigates the current Crisis phase and its conclusion, understanding historical cycles can help professionals anticipate the upcoming shift to a more stable, structured procurement environment. By recognizing recurring patterns and preparing for long-term modernization, standardization, and efficiency, Acquisition leaders can position their agencies to respond effectively to future challenges and opportunities in the next High phase.