Public-private partnerships (PPP) that focus on innovation are excellent methods to improve the innovative capabilities of both partners, however, within the complex dynamics of this cooperation, literature and management would benefit from an analysis of barriers, success factors, and strategies employed within the PPP. This research can be used as a springboard for further research by analyzing a novel research setting: Defense Ministries and Defense Industries. This novelty was compounded by taking a qualitative, explorative approach. A focus on experimental development was taken to limit the large amount of innovative activity present in the sector. Focus was kept on the effects on individual projects, as opposed to innovation systems or networks. This leads to the following research question: What are the barriers and success factors in public-private partnerships that focus on experimental development, and how do the participants cope with the barriers, and utilize the success factors? From the literature a theoretical framework was set up based on four categories of factors influencing the innovation process. The categories are organizational, contextual, interaction-specific, and innovation-characteristic. Literature suggested that interaction-specific barriers were the main source of barriers. The main strategies in literature revolve around interaction-specific solutions to these interaction-specific barriers. A contextual model was set up. Dutch Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Dutch Defense industry provided a novel research setting with hard-to-define innovation goals. Individuals from both sides of the PPP with practical experience in PPPs that focus on experimental development were interviewed. Within the Dutch MoD these were innovation coordinators within sub-organizations and within the Defense Industry these were leaders of small to medium-sized companies. The data was gathered through 13 interviews, of which 11 were used as sources of data. The data was first deductively coded through the four categories and then inductively coded based using the terminology of the interviewees. This coding strategy led to three organizational factors: ‘process rules’, ‘culture, vision & implementation’ and ‘scale-up’, five contextual factors: ‘procurement: general’ ‘procurement: prior knowledge’, ‘procurement: perception’, ‘privacy’ and ‘technology-related’, one innovation-characteristic factor: ‘uncertainty’ and three interaction-specific factors: ‘contact with end-user’, ‘shared understanding’ and ‘expectation management’. The factors were described as ‘barrier’, ‘success factor’, ‘strategy’, and ‘not a barrier’. Organizational and contextual factors were the main factors influencing the success of the innovation process. ‘Process rules’ was named the most influencing factor for the innovation process. ‘Procurement law’ was the most prominent contextual factor. Innovation-characteristic factors were often considered to not be relevant to the cooperative innovation process. Lastly, the interaction-specific factors were occasionally cited as a barrier and often named as a success factor, specifically ‘contact with end-user’. Interaction was key to most strategies employed to overcome barriers. In conclusion, this study has provided a unique insight into a collaborative phenomenon in a scarcely researched setting. The findings can be used in comparison with other research on PPPs with innovative goals, especially those that have taken place in the Netherlands. Compared to literature, the appearance of interaction-specific strategies is not unique, but in their broad application to overcome a plethora of barriers is. Further research focusing on communication dynamics within PPPs is recommended to enhance collaborative efforts and drive impactful innovations in the Defense sector. In a practical sense, reviewing process and contextual rules and reviewing the accessibility of the PPP to newcomers in the sector would enhance innovation programs, fostering effective collaboration between public and private entities.