In many areas of the federal landscape, we are seeing that the “Do More with Less” well has run dry. There is no more that can be squeezed out of the "less." Years of efficiency efforts, process improvements, and budget optimization have helped agencies stretch resources further than many thought possible. Yet, for some organizations, there is little flexibility left to absorb additional reductions without affecting priorities, capacity, or outcomes.
This can be a scary reality for many organizations that are not equipped to navigate it, especially across the national security community and other federal agencies, where mission owners have become exceptionally skilled at finding efficiencies under pressure. As agencies face budget pressures, workforce constraints, and shifting priorities, leaders may need to become more deliberate about what gets done, what gets delayed, and what no longer aligns with mission objectives.
In other words, the “Doing Less with Less” era is upon us, and Markon has the tools to help make this comfortable.
Across the federal community, we have all become accustomed to the concept and practice of "doing more with less." As budgets have tightened across many mission areas, Markon has worked alongside government leaders to drive efficiencies and maximize the value of every dollar spent.
This reality was a driving force behind many of Markon's business operations engagements dating back to the early 2010s. Through client engagements, we implemented Lean Six Sigma, Business Process Reengineering, Zero-Based Budgeting, Earned Value Management, and other proven methodologies to help organizations continue advancing mission outcomes despite increasingly constrained resources.
We helped agencies understand and communicate the operational impact of budget reductions, but in many cases, particularly when supporting national security missions, the work simply could not stop.
Eventually, however, organizations reach a point where additional efficiencies become increasingly difficult to find. Some have already reached that point. Others are approaching it quickly. At that stage, leaders may no longer be able to sustain all activities with the available resources. They will be forced to become familiar with a word many organizations have spent years avoiding: "no."
That is where the era of "Doing Less with Less" begins.
Saying "no" is often difficult because it can trigger concerns about conflict, missed opportunities, or being perceived as unhelpful. In professional environments, leaders and teams frequently equate responsiveness with value, making prioritization decisions especially challenging. Employees may worry that declining a request will make them appear less committed, less collaborative, or less willing to support the broader team. Leaders may fear disappointing stakeholders or creating friction among competing priorities.
Yet, organizations operating in an environment of constrained resources cannot afford to avoid these conversations. In the era of doing less with less, success may depend on the ability to make difficult decisions about what receives attention and what does not.
The first step is shifting organizational mindsets to become more comfortable operating in the "no" space. Some individuals are naturally comfortable establishing boundaries and priorities, but many are not. Organizations must address these barriers before meaningful strategic progress can occur.
Once this shift begins, agencies and organizations can take a more deliberate look at their priorities, operations, and resource allocation to determine where effort and mission objectives are no longer aligned.
Fortunately, federal agencies already have proven frameworks, governance processes, and decision-making tools to help leaders prioritize resources and focus efforts where they deliver the greatest mission impact.
You might also enjoy: Supercharging Acquisition Programs with AI-Enabled Mission Insight
At the federal level, Agency Priority Goals offer a structured way to cut through the noise. Agencies designate a small set of ambitious, near-term targets, typically on two-year cycles, that receive elevated leadership attention and quarterly progress reviews.
APGs force organizations to ask a simple but critical question: What actually matters most right now?
Rather than treating every initiative equally, they create a visible hierarchy of effort. Leadership can then make informed decisions about which activities receive funding, resources, and executive attention, and which do not.
Managing a portfolio of government investments is not optional. It is a fundamental responsibility. Three mechanisms often serve as the foundation:
Two approaches have become increasingly important for performance-focused organizations:
Balanced Scorecard
Adapted for public sector use, the Balanced Scorecard evaluates performance across four dimensions:
This approach provides leaders with a more complete view of organizational performance and helps identify where limited resources can create the greatest impact.
Evidence-Based Prioritization
The Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 encourages agencies to use real program evaluation data rather than intuition alone when making investment and prioritization decisions.
When resources become scarce, data-driven decision-making becomes even more important.
No agency operates in a vacuum. Three external factors frequently influence internal priorities:
Understanding these dynamics helps leaders make informed decisions about where limited resources should be concentrated.
At the operational level, two practical prioritization tools can help leaders focus resources on the work that matters most:
MoSCoW Method
Common in Agile environments, the MoSCoW framework classifies work into four categories:
This structure helps organizations make intentional decisions about what gets completed and what can wait.
Capacity-Adjusted Workload Modeling
Workforce planning tools compare available staffing against projected workloads, helping leaders identify emerging backlogs, resource constraints, and opportunities to proactively shift resources before problems become crises.
As we embark on this “Doing Less with Less” era, difficult choices will become unavoidable. The challenge is no longer simply finding additional efficiencies. It is determining which activities contribute most directly to mission success and which can be deferred, reduced, or stopped altogether.
The most effective agencies will find power in saying “n but this likely won’t be accomplished by any single method. They will combine mandate-driven requirements, portfolio management disciplines, performance data, and stakeholder awareness to focus limited resources where they matter most.
Success in this environment is not about doing everything. It is about maintaining mission effectiveness by making deliberate, informed choices about what matters most.
Organizations that learn to prioritize with discipline, communicate decisions clearly, and align resources to their highest-value activities will be best positioned to continue advancing their missions, even when resources become increasingly constrained.
Ready to prioritize what matters most? Connect with our team to explore how Markon helps agencies align resources, investments, and mission outcomes.