Labels and Tags

Accountability (71) Adequate documentation (7) ADR in procurement (4) Allocation of risks (6) Best interest of government (11) Best practices (19) Best value (15) Bidder prejudice (11) Blanket purchase agreement (1) Bridge contract (2) Bundling (6) Cancellation and rejection (2) Centralized procurement structure (12) Changes during bid process (14) Clarifications vs Discussions (1) Competence (9) Competition vs Efficiency (29) Competitive position (3) Compliance (35) Conflict of interest (32) Contract administration (26) Contract disputes (4) Contract extension or modification (9) Contract formation (1) Contract interpretation (1) Contract terms (3) Contract types (6) Contract vs solicitation dispute (2) Contractor responsibility (20) Conviction (4) Cooperative purchasing (3) Corrective action (1) Cost and pricing (13) Debarment (4) Determinations (8) Determining responsibility (37) Disclosure requirements (7) Discussions during solicitation (10) Disposal of surplus property (3) Effective enforcement requirement (35) Effective procurement management (5) Effective specifications (36) Emergency procurement (14) eProcurement (5) Equitable tolling (2) Evaluation of submissions (22) Fair and equitable treatment (14) Fair and reasonable value (23) Fiscal effect of procurement (14) Frivolous protest (1) Good governance (12) Governmental functions (27) Guam (14) Guam procurement law (12) Improper influence (11) Incumbency (13) Integrity of system (31) Interested party (7) Jurisdiction (1) Justification (1) Life-cycle cost (1) Limits of government contracting (5) Lore vs Law (4) market research (7) Materiality (3) Methods of source selection (33) Mistakes (4) Models of Procurement (1) Needs assessment (11) No harm no foul? (8) Offer & acceptance (1) Other procurement links (14) Outsourcing (34) Past performance (12) Planning policy (34) Politics of procurement (52) PPPs (6) Prequalification (1) Principle of competition (95) Principles of procurement (25) Private vs public contract (17) Procurement authority (5) Procurement controversies series (79) Procurement ethics (19) Procurement fraud (31) Procurement lifecycle (9) Procurement philosophy (17) Procurement procedures (30) Procurement reform (63) Procurement theory (11) Procurement workforce (2) Procurment philosophy (6) Professionalism (17) Protest - formality (2) Protest - timing (12) Protests - general (37) Purposes and policies of procurement (11) Recusal (1) Remedies (17) Requirement for new procurement (4) Resolution of protests (4) Responsiveness (14) Restrictive specifications (5) Review procedures (13) RFQ vs RFP (1) Scope of contract (16) Settlement (2) Social preference provisions (60) Sole source (48) Sovereign immunity (3) Staffing (8) Standard commercial products (3) Standards of review (2) Standing (6) Stays and injunctions (6) Structure of procurement (1) Substantiation (9) Surety (1) Suspension (6) The procurement record (1) The role of price (10) The subject matter of procurement (23) Trade agreements vs procurement (1) Training (33) Transparency (63) Uniformity (6) Unsolicited proposals (3)

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

First, acquire the skills and the skulls

DoD needs robust acquisition work force
The Pentagon's new contracting rules call for more competition, increased emphasis on defining requirements, setting firm prices, implementing smarter incentives for cutting costs and avoiding overruns, and better scrutiny of procurements.

There potentially is a big payoff to Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter's reform, outlined in a Sept. 14 memo, of how the Defense Department goes about spending $400 billion a year in goods and services.

The most important next step for Carter is to ensure the department's acquisition work force has the skills, numbers and understanding of the new rules to implement the reforms.

The reforms will add a bigger and more complex workload upon contracting staffs. They will need to: coordinate more with program managers early on to better define requirements; increase competition among vendors; award more contracts to small businesses; do more market research to set pricing targets; and negotiate contracts that use incentives more effectively to minimize risk and control costs.

This requires robust training and development, clear guidance for the acquisition work force and far more acquisition professionals to meet the increased workload.

staff training must be updated and adequate resources must be directed toward developing a work force that fosters competition and demands cost efficiencies. Nothing is more critical as the department aims to trim and redirect billions of dollars in overhead costs.

it will be vital to provide guidance to the work force on how to execute the new rules while allowing flexibility to make decisions that best promote competition, innovation and efficiencies.

Carter's plan could truly reform Defense Department procurement. But getting these next steps right, and close monitoring of how these reforms are playing out, will be critical to success.

No comments: