Navigating Major Programmes

DINA: We've kind of had a bit of a wake up call to we should be our biggest cheerleaders, we should be our biggest economic drivers. And this will show, I feel like the rest of the world that Canada can create can, uh, support itself, but still continue working with others. I feel like this is our chance to grow inward, but also to show the world that here's a Canadian company that can now sell globally.

RICCARDO: Welcome to Master Builders, a Navigating Major Programs exclusive. This ongoing series spotlights the remarkable stories of accomplished female leaders in our industry. I'm your host, Riccardo Cosentino, and alongside me is my co host, Shomila Chatterjee.

SHORMILA: We'll explore the complexity of major program management, from governance and risk to technology adoption. But through this series, we'll dive deep into the expertise of the women who have shaped the infrastructure landscape and set a new industry status. Hello and welcome to another episode of Master Builder. I am Shormila and I'm joined with my wonderful co host, Evgenia. How are you, Evgenia?

Evgenia: Hello, Shormila. I'm doing great. Nice to be here today.

SHORMILA: Yeah, so nice to have you. And we have a really special, uh, guest. I'm really excited for this one because it's actually something that I don't know a lot about and I'm very curious. So I'm going to be like the listener and ask maybe some rudimentary questions, but we have Dina Hawker here today. Hi, Dina, how are you?

DINA: Great. How are you guys doing?

SHORMILA: We're doing well. Thanks so much for joining us. Uh, before we kind of jump into everything, if you could give us maybe a little introduction of who you are and then we'll kind of dive right in.

DINA: Sure. My name is Dena Hawker. As we said, I run Ontario's newest regional innovation centre, which is the Sandbox Centre in Barrie. I have had many jobs over the course of my life because I have moved many, many times. So I've had the privilege of working in post secondary, um, finance, manufacturing, sales, municipal support, and now innovation. Which brings us to why we're meeting today.

SHORMILA: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And would love to hear a little bit about how you fell into this because we had talked a little before we started recording of how you fell into innovation. Like tell us kind of how did you get here?

DINA: Yeah, so, um, I am a bit of a, I call it my, uh, ADHD superpower of always being curious, always meeting people, always moving through spaces. So in one of my last roles, I was again working for a publicly traded company, very much in the Building of manufacturing support, so you know, sewer cleaners and whatnot. And that wasn't really my, my calling in life and my, my goal. So uh, when I started to kind of look at that outreach and worked within uh, municipal supports, I was actually contacted about this job. While it was a privately funded entity, looked into it, was able to meet with the founder at the time, went through the interview process and was able to um, step into the role as managing director. Now this was before we were a regional innovation center. So we were privately funded innovation center supporting the Berry community. And then we were presented with an opportunity to do an RFP for a regional innovation center. So there hadn't been one erected since 2010. So it was very new. We were the only one to be added in. So again it was um, our trajectory for our area was looking to double the population. It was a lot of lift to kind of transition from what we were to what we are. So again it was very fortunate that I was in that role. And I love to be challenged and I love to kind of push everyone to their limits of uh, you know, how can we support larger groups and innovation and you know, really bettering our economy. And so we won that RFP obviously. And now it's been just over two years that we've been operating as a regional innovation center. And yeah, it's been a great journey, but something that through connections and a very fortunate uh, situation I was able to do this. And that kind of also, I don't know if we want to talk about too how it's also stepped into the defense side as well. So while I was leading that group, my personal mentor, who is a commercialization expert actually, um, introduced me to some of the partners that I've met along the way that were in dual use and defense innovation. So while I was leaving Sandbox center in that traditional RIC, as we call it center that we were growing out, that I was, you know, outside of work, learning about the intricacies of defense and dual use innovation and scaling companies within that. Because I could start to see that this was going to be something that Canada could really lean into, that this was something that I felt would really benefit our economy. So um, for the last two years I've been able to learn from experts across the world and connect with them. And again, as a person who was never in the military, you know, didn't have previous existing knowledge, I was so fortunate that I was led into those rooms that I was able to see how to bridge that gap in defense and innovation to Procurement, understand the processes and the intricacies of it all. While, you know, it wasn't really something that had a spotlight here yet. So I was really pushing forward ahead of the announcements. I was thrilled when the announcements came through, um, because it really is, I feel like one of the largest opportunities we've had in quite some time. And uh, again, um, it's what my mentor had told me. You have to see where the puck's going and not where it's been. And I feel like that was that situation of learning it a few years ahead of this, being able to see how it integrates with innovation. So in my current role, what I was doing outside of work, bringing us all into kind of this moment that we're faced with today.

SHORMILA: Yeah, it's so interesting. I was thinking about before we started talking, like, had we had this conversation two years ago, it would have been a, uh, completely different sort of macro and microeconomic context, obviously to the conversation having it now. I'd love to get your sense of like, just for again, our listeners, a uh, lot of them are much more on the built infrastructure side. Like, does dual use, what does it mean to you? Is it mostly on the tech and kind of widgets? Is it like, what. What do you think of when you think of.

Evgenia: I'm thinking the same way. What is the innovation in this context?

DINA: And it falls into many categories and I am the person that actually always falls on the side of manufacturing, supply chain and infrastructure is where I truly feel like this is our moment for it. But, uh, I'll, I'll kind of rewind back to what does this mean from an innovation perspective? There are things that define dual use technologies, and generally that's products, systems, capabilities that have application in both civil and military fashion. Right. So that's the opportunity within that. So where that comes into play though is if there is a need for that. And that's where that innovation gap can exist is just because you have technology that could be so AI, quantum, advanced comms, uh, or just even things like we're seeing now, drone systems and these applications. Right. That's all within innovation technology. Because you're also taking something and we're. And you know, you're bringing it forward in this application where dual use becomes a little bit convoluted in that is that often people think, I have this technology, I could sell to both, therefore I am. And that's not always accurate. So I can get into that in a little bit as well. But where I go into what a company could be or where the infrastructure is, is we have a large opportunity. But what we're missing right now within the dual use companies is that we need to build and sell this technology or house this equipment or you know, create infrastructure to support these initiatives. And that's I call it the less sexy side of defense. It's very exciting to talk about how you could take a company and really go deep rooted in quantum and scale it. And it's great for the headlines and it looks great for that founder because it's something that almost could be like a smaller company really being able to make their way up that chain. What we need though is from the infrastructure side are buildings that can house for manufacturing. It's understanding do we have testing sites that need to be operating on independent energy supplies and cybersecurity infrastructure and how does this look as well for who's going to produce it if you need several systems in place that supply chain. So my focus has actually been on the manufacturing supply chain and infrastructure supports of this because it's all well and good to have a 5% goal of what we're going to do for our NATO spend but if we don't have places to house it, roads to drive it on, testing sites to deliver the capabilities on and the supply chain connectivity to actually create it at the rate that we require it, then that technology remains as is an independent single prototype that has nowhere to go. So one cannot happen without the other. And I call it the uh. I'm a bit of that. I'm the party pooper of defense tech. I like to bring about the realities of where these bottlenecks will be and for me infrastructure, construction, talent within the trades, these are all critical pieces that we are not I find putting at the forefront of this because it's much more exciting to talk about innovative technology because it's something that we've always supported. You know in Ontario is tech advancing tech. It's, it's a wonderful thing and we absolutely need it. But this cannot grow without the other piece actually holding it up.

SHORMILA: It's interesting because I think that that bifurcation also exists within you know, Department of Defense for example. I've, I've had instances where there material team which is the kit has one different budget, a completely different timeline and then the thing that houses the kit usually has the, you know, pennies when it's proportional to the, the mat side. And so it even you know the, I would assume the, the primary client on the public side which is dnd they also look at it sort of In a disparate way. And so to your point of like, how do we bring this all together? And like how do you feel that are people kind of getting it now? Like has is the conversation shifting of the need to invest in the. Like you said, sort of the unsexy side of it.

Evgenia: Not just the technology, but everything to support the innovation and the idea and the tech. Uh, right.

DINA: I think we all know what needs to happen on one side or the other, but I don't think we're having these open conversations. So I will have conversations with those who are building on the other side and basically asking like, what is the demand? What do you have? How long will it take? You know, if we're attracting the companies to build here, what's the reality that these can be built in two years? If we're expanding ship ports, what's the reality that this can be done? What's the talent requirement? And you do hear it when you're in the room with many people working in defense. Where I don't hear it is in the support of the companies wanting to enter the space. So I see it as a, we hear the opportunity and people are rising to the occasion of the opportunity. I like to be that one that also presents the level setting of, you know, you'll require these clearance levels or you'll have to get these compliance levels in place. To do that you often need to know who's already in the space because you sometimes need sponsorship or whatnot. And it's also understanding selling to the caf with their budgets and how they function versus the D and D and the budget, which has generally three different ministers traditionally involved in these different departments who set these amounts. And it can be quite a process. And there's, you know, many reasons for the process. Um, and on the other side there's reasons why they've maintained status quo because of the amount of funding we've been getting. We're on, you know that, that precipice of change here. But I still think that there are conversations happening in two different rooms. I've seen it sometimes where it comes together, but that's generally for people who are a little bit farther down the line at the introductory phases. I think it's still being presented as here's the opportunity, here's where your company could fit in and we, we believe you should do it. So they almost just attach, you know, people are self identifying as dual use. And I love to ask the question of, okay, so what is it? Why do you want to sell to Defense? Is that one question I love to ask and I've had other people tell me, they ask them like, why? And people will look at me like, what do you mean shouldn't? I am like, I'm not saying you shouldn't. I am a huge proponent of this book. But why do you want to sell? And often it's like, because someone told me that I'm a dual use company and that is often that wrong way to enter it. I believe that entering with the knowledge, the information and still having the desire to do it, that is the company that understands the process they're about to enter and you know, what, what they're going to have to do to find success. And that's where I feel like we lead with a bit of the detriment of the flash and the opportunity of how exciting it is. You know, a company said, great, so I work in AI, so I could be a dual use company. Great, I'm dual use. And I've heard on the other side people will say you should be defense first and then private later. It should be defense and then commercial. So you're telling a company that they'll have to get their compliance measures, make it through, hopefully be aligned with what the defense, you know, procurement looks like, front load, the costs be in a long term procurement without having the supply chain connectivity, the manufacturing connectivity, you know, where are they with their funding? It just is a, you know, and we're directing them. I feel like sometimes without giving them that information. If you may have dual use technology, you may have the capabilities, your company has the potential. But to me dual use becomes a defense strategy. You are a company that has the tech or the capabilities to, you know, support your um, product can be applicable to military use or within the defense sector. So now you're building a strategy for how you enter that sector, you know, and that could be through, through whatever steps you have to take, but it's not doing two things at once because that would be like me telling you open up this company that has this specific client set, ah. And this revenue cycle and now open up this company B over here that has different cost structures, different procurement cycles and a different clientele entirely and make them both succeed at the same time.

Evgenia: So I'm curious, as you're describing, this kind of a few things come up for me. Um, you talk about the opportunity, so the opportunity in itself of the dual use, uh, technology company to potentially sell to either defense or the government or staying in the private sector, who maybe in your view, and then this whole opportunity to innovate. Right. Sometimes maybe the public side or the government side, they think they have an idea, that they need an innovative idea and technology, but they're not sure what that technology may look like. So how do those things come together from, you know, from. From the people that you work with or technologies or that you see, like maybe who should own the opportunity or who should own the innovation and maybe walk us through the process, how that happens in reality today.

DINA: So I think from the opportunity, we're really seeing our government take a lot of those steps to begin to try to own some of the funding mechanisms to support the opportunities. Challenges we're seeing through Ideas Borealis with the actual designated sites. We're seeing, you know, different tranches of funding like the RDII and different opportunities coming forward to support. So I think it's always good when you see your government investing in the very companies because that's what gives them growth and exporting abilities. I think when it comes from, you know, the opportunity is presented to us by policymakers and political figures, I think it's very wise when they then try to put in the mechanisms like the DIA now with the ITB credits, there are things they are starting, you know, to put forward. So I think that's great. Now I think where it comes into the innovation side to work alongside that is that we need to make sure that the entities that are entering the space have credibility, information and kind of that right mindset. And I believe that comes from a collaborative mindset. I believe that anyone who wants to do this alone, you know, you're kind of siloing yourself from opportunities of getting different levels of expertise and experience in there. And what I've seen in different, different areas, even within North America and Europe, is creating these on ramps where you're creating this multifaceted approach, maybe through a few different, whether it be accelerators, incubators, um, support systems in place. That's how I feel you can truly help a company because there's going to be a diversification of structures, of who needs help, when they need help, how you can help them. And so for me, it's really creating, I believe the on ramps are the way to success here, because I don't think any of us have been funded for that long to have full capabilities to support. So I'll give you just a brief example before I delve in deeper, is that I take many calls from people all over Canada. We have these supports we can provide. You know, in Ontario right now we're speaking with commercialization entities and people who have supported defense, others who have done the funding side, others who have the demoing side. Like how do we all come together? And I call it creating this corridor of support where a company can enter and based on their specific requirements and need, find the help that they require and the support they require. So we can really help bridge that gap in the valley of death from innovation to procurement. Right. And I feel like this is going to be a collective effort. If the government is giving us the platform and beginning to put in funding and put in these goals and be so public about it, I can only believe that they will further support as much as they can. Now when it comes down to our side from the innovation side, um, I'm firm in the fact that I don't believe one entity can do it on their own. I feel like it will take. It's truly that village mentality and I am a person who leads with that. I don't need the glory of anything. I want to see those companies thrive because in turn Canada thrives. So that is where I don't believe that one person should or can own this process. Given the fact that it's going to be evolving and changing and that I feel like, uh, there's a company that is working in quantums is going to have inherently different needs than the manufacturer who can now support aerospace and then the other company who maybe has EV capabilities to be able to put back to um, supports or an end product in hard tech. These are all such different pieces. I would be very surprised if one entity could truly support everybody at the full capacity to bring them into that level of success. So I feel like it is going to take many of us to kind of put together these supports so that, you know, from the side of who's owning it, I feel like it's the government who owns the initiatives. They're setting the goals, the percentages, the funding and then it comes down to the structures that can support these companies all the way through. And that to me is going to be a collective model. Um, because I do believe that if we all put ourselves second and put the companies first, uh, we will see a whole different level of collaboration across our province with what success we can bring forward.

SHORMILA: And maybe speaking of collaboration, like, let's talk about what you've done. Like you've recently had a bit of a day, kind of a conference of people coming together. Like, how did that come about? What was that like? Would love to hear more about it.

DINA: Yeah. So when the whole announcement came forward and I kept Seeing a lot of excitement around it. But I was going to, I started attending a lot of events and what I was sitting in on was a panel discussion here of people in the space, a panel discussion over there of people who have supported, let's say aerospace, Arctic defense. So it was great because I was hearing from people in the space. But what I wasn't hearing was what is that doorway to get into defense? Because now we're encouraging new companies. I think it's over a thousand SMEs are a goal so we can actually hit our spend right. So I wasn't hearing anyone give that advice of how do I go from what I am doing when I know I have these defense adjacent capabilities, how do I get through this doorway to understand what I need to do and what does the actual process look like. So I started tapping on some shoulders of some people that I had, you know, that I've worked with in defense, that I know in defense and started putting together this concept of creating this defense 100, uh, one day we invested a lot of money into it. It was a free event because I didn't want to kind of gatekeep from anybody. So we invested, we had amazing partners from our municipality, so the, the city of Barri, we had some funding from the county of Simcoe come up. So we were able to, you know, our region came together to work with us on this because to me the opportunity mattered more than gatekeeping the information. So what we put together was a day where we had, you know, we had veterans, we had former advisors within, you know, the government, we had current accelerator leaders, we had um, a few of the primes bring in some, some people to kind of show what that side was like. And we created a day of how do you enter it? What is the procurement like? What is the ITB credit side like? People in the space, the accelerators in the space, the supports that are there. And we had a full day. So it was actually pretty uh, phenomenal because we had a hundred. We, we didn't. And we did an application process because we didn't want anyone who was trying to sell, we didn't want someone to sit there and basically sit beside someone, say I can get you in it and take almost that opportunity. So we did an application process for people who had current businesses, who had the capabilities, who could enter the space to attend. So we approved 191 companies and 165 attended for a free event. That's pretty insane because generally you get about a 50% attrition to a free event. We had people fly in from B.C. from Calgary, we had people fly in from the U.S. we had partners flying from Singapore and different parts of the world to attend that day to be able to support. That was that kind of mindset of we are all here to support. And you know, a few companies pulled me aside and said I flew here because this no one has been willing to share. How do you enter the space and what is the reality of it? And I just want to lead with as much integrity and support as I can and I want to. The doors were open for me and I was a non military person looking to learn and those people let me in those rooms. So my goal is to continue to open up, I keep saying windows, doors, you know, side entrances as much as I can to get them into that, that room so they can understand what they're getting into. And it's not to kill the dream, it's to reality set and to give them that information because this really is one of the biggest opportunities we have. And I just didn't want to be the one to say come to me because I know how to get you there. It was more so this is bigger than myself. This is, this is for Canada, you know and that was the way we led it. And from that the feedback was so great that you know we've built huh out different partnerships from that we've had, you know, we've had different partners from BC connect with us, from Nova Scotia, from New Brunswick, from you know, we still have within Europe, within. So it's kind of great because building out this network is truly how can we support what can we do for you? And it has nothing to do with you know, a bottom line of what we make back. It's really just a give, it's a pure give and how can we help these companies? So from that day we've been converting some of the lessons we've been teaching into an online webinar series and that's launching in I guess a couple of weeks now for here, you know, for those who couldn't attend. Here are some more information down the road too. It's a, you know, larger, more specific scope of modules into accelerators into to demo days and it's been really exciting to see what's going to come. But I'm very much a person who's setting out that pathway of start here and then let's get you here because it's, it's jumping the gun to from I believe I have it. So I'm going to Go straight to the DND's door. I mean, possibly there will be a percentage who will have exactly what they need at that moment when they put the calls out. But you need to also have certain clearance levels and compliances in place to get there. So it's just information. If you know what you need, you can, you can do it. It will be a tough road, but you can do it. And I think anything worthwhile has a little bit of grit and, you know, just energy you need to put into it. So that's been my motto. And so it's been amazing because, um, a lot of our regional innovation partners, you know, they feel the same way of collaborating together. And I feel like we're each going to be able to bring something forward that is individual to our entities. Well, knowing that, you know, we get, we give referrals to each other, I'm happily meeting with a lot of clients, just giving them my initial feedback on what I see. I'm referring them out to our more expert partners because I am not an expert. I just have a really deep, deep love of learning. And I'm, um, happy to give the information when I have it, but I will do anything I can to get these companies to the next step. And everyone we're working with has that same passionate mindset of, you know, seeing this success happen for Canadian companies.

Evgenia: So amazing. I do have a question around. So it sounds like you're building truly an innovative ecosystem to help innovation, you know, flourish and grow. You're also describing, you know, sharing the lessons learned, uh, in certain processes based on what you've done so far and kind of the trajectory of what you see in terms of future. What do you think are the biggest barriers that might come up down the road for these companies or maybe already happened, that you see kind of repeat themselves. And I'm specifically kind of want to touch on, because where we sit with the major programs and like the formal infrastructure project and RFPs, you know, there's the commercial risk, there is the contractual, how we structure these contracts. Do you see any of those kind of similarities in your space as well?

DINA: Yeah, so one of the biggest kind of roadblocks we're going to see is obviously within talent and, and how that's actually going to grow for companies with their deliverables. So outside of compliance, outside of the cost, that's kind of the obvious, you know, roadblocks that we see. So if someone makes a pass there, historically, throughout Defense two, some of the companies that have been the most at risk or the tier three or four suppliers within that actual supply supply chain of manufacturing that is even more so in defense than it would be in, in that regulated manufacturing environment. So you know, you're not working with massive margins. You know, you're going to, you're signing contracts with each supplier so there's going to be a prime who signs their, you know, tier 1, 2, 3, 4. So you're signing based on whoever will work with you. And often those tier three and fours are farther down the list where they have much smaller margins, they don't have the buying power, perhaps they're contracted to make a part or a segment of it. But should anything change, you know, we've seen it with impact of tariffs or with, you know, I've dealt with it before too, where a cost was not estimated to be what it is. And these procurement cycles can be quite long. So it could be three, four, five years until you're actually fully manufacturing. What this bid was, this contract was that you won and prices could have dramatically changed. But you've agreed to this cost so often, and there's a few publications about this too, that the tier three and four suppliers are the most at risk. But that is the major point of entry for most companies looking to enter the defense manufacturing supply chain. So it's, you know, it's a risk and that is the one that will remain at that highest risk. I feel like when they're entering simply because they don't have that power in it, you know, they're not the larger, they're not the contracted entity, they're not carrying a lot of the, the risk. They are, you know, part of it. It's gotten them into the, the defense chain but they're a smaller player with not a huge voice and a higher risk. And um, and you know, it's not that they don't matter, it's just strictly how it works when you have multiple supports. And we see that often in manufacturing. So that's one. I feel like we'll still continue to have some struggles. Um, and on the other side of it it's the procurement timelines. Can you commit to be in a contract for that long considering sometimes it is front loaded costs? You know, we, we know that staffing isn't always easy to keep, you know, manufacturing facilities, can you have them uh, for that long? Are you going to be able to fulfill this contract if you do sign on to it? So I feel like it's not looking at what the opportunity is right now. You really have to look at is there sustainability in what you can do for this contract long term and then continue to still operate with your other, you know, obligations with like, business as usual, you know, can, can you do this? Is it profitable for you and is it worthwhile? So looking beyond what the flash is right now, if this is truly your strategy, then you will take that risk. But it is still a risk, you know, entering any of these contracts for a long term.

SHORMILA: And I remember, I think, a post you had a couple of, maybe a couple of weeks ago on LinkedIn, Dina, about the life cycle of a procurement of 16 years. I think it was around with defense. And that was sobering to me because I've been a, uh, part of a couple of projects that have been very long on the defense side. And this is maybe an existential question, but do you feel like the ambition that we have currently will match the practicalities of just how, the inertia of how things have always been done, or do you really feel like this is a turning point that. Okay, you know, a lot of the announcements are very positive. They are, I'll say, relatively innovative procurement mechanisms that are coming out, which is great. Like, like, as an individual, do you really feel hopeful that we can answer the call on the, on the government side?

DINA: So I feel like there's going to be two categories of this. There's going to be those innovation wins we're going to see because we're now looking to go Canada first. So even on from the Ontario by first policy, and that leads into Canadian made. There are some products I believe we've most likely been able to get from sources that maybe had locations in Canada, but maybe they weren't Canadian made. I feel like there will be an opportunity from that side. Um, on the other side, I still feel like we're going to see very long procurement cycles. I always give the example of, you know, to, to work in the Arctic, you have to build the apartment to house your staff before you can start your project. And you know that, that is that requirement, right? You can't just drive into the Arctic and drive back and there's nowhere to stay. So you're almost building a town to, you know, to house the employees you need to find, to do the work there. So that could take a couple years to build the structure to house the very employees to start the project. So, you know, the costs are big, the connections you need. Um, I feel like that's some of those sobering things that people hear. They're like, oh, right, because like, where are you going to keep your staff? Are they going to work up there for that many years, you know, can you do this? So I feel like we're going to see a few of those reality checks. But I, I feel like with what we have seen from some of the vulnerability we've experienced from the way we've done business in the past, I don't think we have a choice but to make this succeed. Because when you invest in your own, you know, sovereignty of, you know, your defense capabilities, when you make this your own, you know, I say like business revenue line in a way like if we actually build this up for our gdp, we almost make, I call it a bit of a recession proof or a, you know, external entity impacted like proofed business that basically we're supporting for ourselves. So if the government continues to support this and invest in it, companies are creating and we're buying from each other and we're you know, giving the well deserved upgrades to our military men and women who have done so much for us. And you know, in some cases we've said like, you know, some bases didn't have full WI FI capabilities and I've heard someone else say the sleeping bags weren't quite there. So that's the basics, right? So we're, and they deserve those upgrades but also like if we can get ahead on these capabilities and produce them in our country for our country and create these additional businesses, jobs, manufacturing supports, we're relying on ourselves and I feel like that level of independence we've kind of had a bit of a wake up call to. We should be our biggest cheerleaders, we should be our biggest economic drivers. And this will show, I feel like the rest of the world, world that Canada can create, can uh, support itself but still continue working with others. I feel like you know, this is our chance to, to grow inward but also to show the world that here's a Canadian company that can now sell globally. So I feel like there's going to be two sides of that but it won't be without its trials, it won't be without its setbacks. I know, and this is again me as a non expert in this saying it but I know we have the goal of five years. I see we really see a difference in 10 to 15 years. But that doesn't mean that the investment to you know, isn't happening and that we won't see change. But I feel like, you know, 10 years from now I feel like we'll really see the fruits of this labor and this, you know, positioning um, start because we'll probably worked our way through a lot of those bottlenecks and issues and we'll have greater, you know, economic development attraction and business attraction. And I feel like our relationships will continue to grow outside of it. So I have a lot of hope. But I'm also a realist. I think we're going to have a lot of struggles a lot along the way. But I love this focus. I feel like this is going to be a massive turning point for our country and it has nothing to do with in opposition of someone, but rather looking at creating this potential in our own country to strengthen our country's GDP and to strengthen what we should be doing. I feel like for our cap and for our forces, and I feel like that will be. I just feel like it's going to be a great impact to our whole nation.

Evgenia: I'm curious, I want to go back a little bit, uh, to what you said earlier about infrastructure needs to support the technology that's being developed. So the big part of the companies that you're dealing with are essentially private companies, right? They developed solution, they developed technologies, and they're looking to sell it. But the infrastructure is usually the public infrastructure side of it, right? Because it feeds into the power grid of the province or the municipality. It could be utilities or wi fi or the actual facilities. Do you see, uh, private sector playing more role in maybe building those infrastructures to support the technology? Or do you see this being, uh, more the public's government's responsibility to support the innovation?

DINA: So I feel like we might see it from both ends. I think for anyone who potentially has property, maybe supports this focus, wants to attract more companies, might look into putting in, you know, whether it be independent power supplies and, you know, investing up themselves to attract those very companies. So I feel like we're going to see the private side really see the opportunity to attract. I think we're going to. Again, in our region, we had our municipality step forward with, you know, funding mechanisms to support companies coming to, to help with some of those costs. Because it also, they, uh, they were in alignment that this is an opportunity, opportunity to support the economic development of a region. So I think we're going to see both. I, um, don't think we can rely on the government to do everything for us. We know that there's priorities outside of just defense. And that's what I think some people feel that they have to choose. I don't feel like that's the fact. I feel like they're going to give some support, they're going to support some initiatives. But I feel like the lift is going to have to be from both sides to see true success. Otherwise the wait times will be very, very long. We've seen that with public sector. Like I never want one project to take funding away from another. Right. So if this is truly an investment and we are looking to take advantage of that opportunity, I feel like then from the private side, I do think we're going to see, you know, potentially some independent switching over, looking to invest, looking to partner, to kind of fortify some of these areas to be defense ready. So I feel like we're going to see it from, from both ends. And again it's the same thing I say with creating that on ramp in the innovation sector, I think the same thing has to happen from the infrastructure support. I think we need to see some of the private side with what they want to do to support. And we all know that the government is really backing, um, this defense strategy. So I feel like from that end too, I feel like it would be met with a lot of support from them in whatever capacity they can because I can never speak to what the projects they have in mind are going to be. But I feel like this needs to be on all sides in order to see that success.

SHORMILA: And it's like you were saying too, even just having the forums where they're all in the same room, like I don't think we're in the same rooms enough. Like, you know, a lot of this was, was our personal curiosity to get to know what you do and this the innovation side that you're on. And then my wheels are spinning. I'm sure of Kenya's, yours are too of like, how do we bring this more as a, as a joint effort between kind of the more traditional built infrastructure and the defense kind of tech piece and like really give a kind of full tip to tail offering back to government institutions. Like uh, you know, it all being dual use. Like I think we just need to bring, bring all of those sort of pieces of the life cycle together more often.

Evgenia: Yeah, there's this general resistancy to the word innovation, uh, at a lot of different pockets of government and public sector and private sector. I think there's just this human nature to, I don't know what that is. I don't know how to deal with it. We're just going to park it here and hope that, you know, good things will come out one day. But what I'm hearing more and more by participating in various roundtables across different, you know, people working in a public sector and us trying to mix in with the private sector. And usually these conversations are very productive when it's a smaller group and they feel kind of a little bit of trust. You truly see that they're not talking to each other. Even the different levels of governments are not talking to each other. So when we mix in this piece of innovation and something new and a new player coming in trying to, you know, disrupt what's been done before, it's just, I can see how it may seem just so complicated but to both of your points about coming together more like we talk about collaboration but we're yet we're not really collaborating beyond, beyond the immediate problem or need. Like, you know, there's, there's a broader picture here. So do you see this? Do you want to take this? You know, you've had first successful event. This was just one of what's your plan for, you know, is this more of a structured program or reoccurring? What's the frequency? What are your, what are your next uh, kind of ideas on this?

DINA: It's like, it's like you prompted this. But I, that's part of what I like have struggled is that I think historically what's given innovation a bit of a bad name is that we're often just the ones that put you in a program and support you in an accelerator. And it kind, it stays in almost like this insular area where we're supporting you to grow, maybe find capital investment. And these things are all very critical to that company, but it doesn't always speak to the other side. So one of the examples of something I'll be launching very soon was actually called a hackathon, but not quite the traditional one. So it was actually going to bring industry with some post secondary, with innovation companies all together to problem solve. Basically I created this concept of uh, it's actually based on something that exists near us, of converting area into a defense industrial park. So what would you need to do to accomplish that? And some of the positioning was if it was aerospace there, and I basically broke down what that looks like. If they needed independent infrastructure, what would their cybersecurity needs be? And this is merging together students with innovation companies with industry experts to start to actually hash out these ideas of if this were to actually be developed, you know, what would we need? What are you seeing from the innovation side, from potentially the post secondary side within the computer science, AI, whatever, you know, their areas, the R and D side of it, and then from the actual experts in the infrastructure area. What does it look like from the regulations with what you know, are, uh, required, the cost, the timelines. Because again, if we're only going from one side, I have no idea what happens on these. I'd be like, yeah, we can build it in a year. This is amazing. And then the other person could be like, you're 10 years out. And like, I had no idea we needed that level of support in cybersecurity. So I feel like. So that was one thing that I built. And I've been just going to market now to bring in more partners because I feel like that needs to happen. It can't stay siloed in one industry. It has to be that. It's uh, I say give the problem or give the opportunity and then let's actually go into the specifics. So there's five different tracks that live within it that will be problem solving this segment with how we can bring this forward. And I hope that encourages those types of rooms to come together with people so that we can give all of our experiences and levels of expertise to each other to actually, you know, create those on ramps, as I say, to figure out, uh, what we have to do to collectively move companies forward and actually find success in this. So, yeah, that was one of my next ones. The other programs too are still webinar series events. Um, I want to do interactive demo day. So all those pieces and then still working with our other innovation partners and private partners. But this one for me that I built as that version of a hackathon is a big mix of, I feel like many different areas that weren't together solving this one defense focused issue of how do we build this, how do we build it properly and how do we attract. And that needs various opinions and levels of expertise in one room to do that.

SHORMILA: And it's funny because I know at the, when we started this, you, you said, you know, I'm not an expert, I'm not a technical person, but your ability for like systems thinking and connecting the dots is like, I'm, um, just witnessing it now. It's remarkable, Dina, the way that you're able to, to not let the existing ecosystems stop you and you're, well, this. We don't have to, like, how is there, like now I'm going to go even more existential. Where do you think that comes from? Like, have you always had that ability to be like sort of kind of Rain man your way through, uh, an issue? Like, it's, it's really amazing somewhat.

DINA: I, um, so again, I've been able to work in a lot of different industries. So I feel like my brain, like I worked in law for a while so it's like, great, I'm a divorce expert, perfect. But it's like again, this ability to, to walk into a room as a non expert and listen to people and hear these different sides and because I've moved a fair amount to be able to be in different locations, meet different people, be in different industries and never assume that I knew more than the people that I walked into a room with really gave me an opportunity to learn, absorb. And I feel like that's some of that reflective piece. I like to be as rational as possible with, you know, what parts of this can I control versus what I need to know? And I feel like that's been one of my drivers. Another part is I've been, I've been so privileged to have the mentors that I've had. You know, my one mentor, he always tells me it's, it's you don't go where the pucks, you go where the puck's going, not where the puck's been. So if we're always looking back to this is what I know I do, this is how I do it. And we're not looking at what needs to happen next to actually get that win. That's where we get stuck. So it's also looking at the anticipating factors of what else could happen after I support them, what else would they need? And to actually solve a problem, I think we can't be that egocentric to think that we could solve it all. So I really like to look at what does this full picture look like to help someone. Uh, and it's not always the traditional way. It's been done because the times have changed. Our problems are we have new problems, uh, we've solved some old problems. And you know, we have to think that something is worth reaching out for and worth collaborating on. And that's part of how I've always been. But again, it's feel like industry experience to exposure. Um, and I don't feel like we've always had that. I think a lot of people have worked in the same industry potentially it was what they went to school for, worked in it, they know it well, so they can touch one part. I think for those of us who have had different experiences in different areas, we've learned the pain points of each of those areas. So then when you're brought into this, you know, I'm going to understand what a procurement cycle is like and bringing in different suppliers because I Used to have to do that. I know what a price change looked like on our bottom line and how I would have to explain that to leadership when that happened on the tender, you know. And then from the innovation side, I know how hard it is for a founder to make their way through, you know, the different phases of growth. Growth and what they're looking at now with some of the new implications and difficulties they experience. So having all of these different levels of experiences and different kind of levels of impact I feel like I've had in different segments. Kind of my brain is always kind of going at, like, this part makes sense here, but what about what's going to happen over here? Because I would hate to tell a company I could help them, and all I could do is help them in what I know how to do. Cause I don't think that's going to move the needle at all for them.

Evgenia: Yeah, what you're describing is just beyond. I know we talked a lot about technology and the innovation of the solutions, but what you're describing is just innovative thinking of figuring out how to launch something, how to deliver something in a different way, because we need that. Because I think where innovation stalls most of the time is because we've created systems that make it almost impossible to deliver. Uh, so we need to kind of just break that down or even not look at them for a while and try to adopt kind of best from both worlds or kind of test and try things. And I think that's where your true maybe power comes in, is that you're not dedicated to just one way of doing things to your point of not having maybe the depth of one vertical. You're able to tap into these different areas, which makes it. It's so phenomenal.

SHORMILA: Uh, it's so inspiring. And we call this kind of miniseries Master Builder. So it's people who have really made a mark in sort of what they do. And we have a bit of a trick question, but do you feel like a master builder? Do you have time to reflect and say kind of where you are from, where all your different other careers and really, you're making an impact on the Canadian economy. Economy. And thank you from two people who are also trying to move the needle in any little way we can. But do you feel like, okay, we're really, like, you're really helping institutions, governments, and also individual ventures. Kind of like all spectrums. Do you feel that you're making a mark?

DINA: How do you feel as Dina So it's actually funny. My husband laughs at this because I Uh, I feel like I've done a lot of this because I've worked in spite of people, because they told me it couldn't be done. And it's what they always say, right? Tell an ADHD or they can't do something, and they're gonna, like, put their entire existence into making it happen. So I. I feel like what happened was in the beginning, I, you know, was very open with. I have experience in this. I have connections. I would love to support it. And people were kind of like, okay, sure, you can. And I was like, okay, let me show you what I can do then. And so it became this driving force of, I'm going to show as many people I can what you can do when you put your mind forward with collaboration, support, and knowledge. And so it was almost like, let me show you what I can do, and let me show you what impact I can make. So what started off as my, uh, you know, I call it my revenge strategy of, like, I will show you that I can accomplish this has now turned into. It's working. Um, you know, I'm on calls all day long with companies, to potential partners, to industry executives, and it's all now coming together where they're believing in this, you know, overarching message of let's get them to the finish line. Let's work together. And. And so in that way, I don't see myself as a master builder, but as a. A, uh, builder who wants to see success. So I'm. I'm that positive builder in that way. I want to see it. I think there's so much still for me to learn on every side. But. But it's. It's a. It's just. For me, it's so important to show people that because it didn't work before doesn't mean it can't work now. Traditional ways don't define our success. And if we actually put our egos aside and work together and, you know, don't go for the glory ourselves, that is when we're actually going to succeed. Because it's not about the me, it's about the we. And everything I do like it is all of us together building this together. Because I can't build a house on my own, but I can hire my husband and all of his friends to do it for me. And that collective can get it done. So, again, it's that, you know, a group that you can identify has strengths that you don't mix with your strengths. And, you know, with that one goal in mind, I think there is no ceiling that we will hit in the success that we can, we can find as a group here. Wow. Wow. Wow.

Evgenia: Beautifully said.

SHORMILA: Yes. That was beautiful. And I said it was a trick question because we anoint you as a master builder when you come onto this podcast. So, um, that was incredible. I think we're unfortunately close to time, but I would love to kind of see how things are going, maybe have a follow up episode, uh, in a couple of months. I think a lot of our listeners, this is new for them too. So as much as we can kind of, we can try to help bring those worlds together in our little way too, we would love to kind of support the cause because it's really exciting and we're just at the start. So thank you so much, Dina. This was so much fun. And thank you as always, Evgenia, as our co host. Uh, this was great. And, uh, thanks to our listeners and hope, uh, that you join another episode. Thank you.

DINA: Perfect. I would love to. Thanks, guys.

Evgenia: Thank you so much. Thanks, Dina.

SHORMILA: That's it for this episode of Navigating Major Programs. If you enjoyed the conversation, please follow the show and consider leaving a review. To continue elevating the conversation, join us on the navigating major program's LinkedIn page. I'm Shormila Chatterjee alongside Riccardo Cosentino and Evgenia Jelena. Thank you for listening.