What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here
close

Acquisitive Mind

By Matthew Weigelt

Blog archive

Officials don't want hands dirtied by acquisition reforms, senator says

Holding up a complicated chart, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said many of the top acquisition policy officials are too busy to find a way to make the federal buying process simpler and faster.

“They’re too busy to get their hands dirty to try to fix it,” he said Sept. 13, referring to the members of the Federal Acquisition Regulation Council members. The council is led by the administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Dan Gordon.

The overwhelming chart describes the acquisition process from the budgeting to planning a procurement to defining the appropriate requirements to meet its needs. The diagram was similar to this chart on the Integrated Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics Life Cycle Management System.

Inhofe, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was speaking at the confirmation hearing of Ashton Carter to be deputy defense secretary.

Carter, who currently is undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, said officials are learning their lessons on how to best contract work in contingency operations and during war. Officials have had to move quickly to get necessary supplies bought, and brought to the battlefield, while keeping an eye on prices and value. With those lessons, Defense Department officials want to apply the fast and agile techniques to acquisition overall and even the FAR, he said.

More broadly, Carter also said he wants training for the acquisition workforce regarding the fast-lane acquisition as well as the purchase of services and information on questioning whether a program’s requirements are defined appropriately early in the buying process.

Posted by Matthew Weigelt on Sep 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM


Reader Comments

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 Vern Edwards

I agree with KRL about wartime contracting. However, in broader terms, Inhofe made a good point. The contracting process is much more complex, resource intensive, and time-consuming than it needs to be, and the FAR is not the cause. The cause is a poorly educated and trained workforce that does not know how to do its job. There is no reason for a source selection to take a year or more from issuance of the RFP to contract award, and yet it does in many cases. People do not know how to do things within the law without needless complexity and work. Could/should we have fewer laws and regulations? Yes. But even with the laws and regulations that we have now, contracting could be faster, less resource intensive, and less time-consuming. And if you eliminated all the laws and regulations the workforce would do not better. The workforce as a whole simply is not competent. Their hearts are in the right place and they want to be better, but they are not up to it in terms of knowledge and skills. The failure is one of leadership.

Wed, Sep 14, 2011 KRL

Another Congressman who does not know or understand the FAR or the acquistion process. As a friend once told me (and he was on the DAR council) the FAR is not a war-time document. It was never intended to be a war-time document and never will be. Trying to follow it in times of war will only lead to problems for everyone. To support a war, you need supplies, equipment and services that are already developed and available from pre-screened, trusted contractors that have the capabiltiy and capacity to move large orders very quickly. You don't have time to do marketing research or multiple solicitations if only one bid is received. In these cases, protests should not be allowed because it is the troops that matter and not a contractor's hurt feelings. Who has time for a small business plan under the circumstaces. (the legit contractors already have relationships with small business so why do they need a new plan?) Additional research and development required to meet the enemy's capabilities needs to be done without months of delays due to a long, drawn out RFP process, months of fact finding and multiple Best and Final requests because all the CO wants to do is techical leveling so they can award based on lowest costs and avoid future critisism. This approach will always get you in trouble because the award is not necessarily going to the contractor with the best technology.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above
Nick Wakeman

Nick Wakeman's Business Beat

Washington Technology eNewsletters

Editorial Webcasts

  • Desktop Virtualization: Better Management with Smaller Budgets Register Now

    This webcast will explore the benefits of desktop virtualization, and how the innovative technology can help agencies lower the cost of their IT infrastructure, improve end-user performance, while enabling a mobile workforce. A government expert will share real-life case studies of leveraging desktop virtualization solutions to enable secure telework policies, organization-wide IT infrastructure standards and extend the life of current hardware assets - Register Now!! Read more