By Steve Kelman

Blog archive

Want program staff more involved in contracting? Make their jobs more interesting

In a recent conversation, Dan Gordon, administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, told me that one of his priorities is improving the role of the contracting officer’s technical representative in the procurement process.

The COTR is a program official who is supposed to know something about contracting and the program, and thus plays a crucial role in contract management. The problem is that this is often considered a very unattractive, bureaucratic job, rather than an exciting management opportunity that puts a person at the front lines of managing complex cross- and intra-organizational relationships -- just the kind of management that increasingly characterizes the twenty-first century.

One reason this job is seen as so unattractive is that an important part of it has been approving contractor payment vouchers – certifying that the work has been done and that, if the contractor is billing for labor hours, the contractor employees have been present and accounted for. This is boring, bureaucratic work, although of course it needs to be done.

I have a suggestion for reforming voucher processing that I would like to get out there for discussion within the contracting community. I am not wedded to it, and it may be a crazy idea, but I’ve tried it out on a few contracting and program officials attending an executive education class at Harvard, and they sort of liked it, so I’m willing to go public with it.

I suggest we eliminate the responsibility for COTR’s to approve contractor hours worked. Instead, the COTR’s responsibility would only be to certify that the work being billed was accomplished. Then, in addition, every time they filled in a voucher, they would be given, on the voucher, a really quick, one-sentence survey: “How satisfied were you with the quality of the contractor’s work?” They would tick either excellent, good, fair, or just marginally acceptable. (Presumably if the work were unacceptable, the contractor wouldn’t be paid.)

We still of course need controls to check hours worked. Contractors are already required by Defense Contract Management Agency and/or the Defense Contract Audit Agency (for contracts under the jurisdiction of these agencies) to have systems in place for accurate time and attendance. In other cases, we need to ask ourselves whether there are ways for somebody else besides the COTR to do what the COTR is now supposed to do (I say “supposed to” because I suspect for many, this approval activity is pro forma at best).

Could a random sample of invoices be closely reviewed for accuracy, by a designated lower-level government employee other than the COTR? Could there actually be an employee who walks around and checks on contractor personnel? I’m not sure of a solution here, and I suspect this could involve several options, rather than one-size-fits-all. However, I think it’s worth trying, for the sake of making these COTR jobs more appealing.

My proposal has another virtue – the simple customer satisfaction survey does three things. It gives the COTR more meaningful work. It sends a signal about ongoing attention to the quality of contractor performance. And it provides ongoing, real-time past performance feedback to contractors, that could actually be incorporated into past performance report cards, and make those more meaningful as well.


Posted by Steve Kelman on May 18, 2010 at 7:26 PM

Reader Comments

Thu, May 20, 2010 Steve Kelman

Thanks for these comments. Yes, this is just one idea that won't deal with all the issues regarding making COTR work meaningful. I wanted to get this idea out there to stimulate a discussion in our community. Thanks for posting!

Thu, May 20, 2010 Vern Edwards

If you want to make the COTR job more interesting, make them administrative contracting officers (ACOs). Why bother with the contracting officer "representative" business? The COTR usually works for the requiring activity. Suppose the requiring activity wants to modify the statement of work. They have to write up the change and then process it through the PCO, who has all kinds of other things to do. Why should the office closest to contract performance have to go through an office that is busy trying to award contracts and lacks the technical knowledge understand the work. Why not just have the COTR write up, negotiate, and sign the change? They could be trained to do that. It's not rocket science. It would eliminate much of the bureaucratic delay and friction that so often occurs between COTRs and PCOs. Make COTRs ACOs and hold them responsible for what they sign. You can think of all sorts of objections to this idea, but what it will mostly boil down to is contracting offices afraid of someone else getting into their ricebowl. Every objection can easily be dealt with and overcome.

Thu, May 20, 2010 Middle-aged crumudgeon

I like your suggestion for revising some of the COTR functions but I'm not certain this addresses the basic issue of making the job more interesting. I think more effort needs to be made to develop the COTR as the real go-between subject matter expert between the program office and contracting. It's managing that relationship and communication that should make the job fulfilling and interesting. Just changing the "bureaucratic" paperwork won't make the complete leap. And yes, as with the previous commenter, the COTR responsibility should be more than an "other duties as assigned" job.

Wed, May 19, 2010

I like the concept of the continuing performance evaluation however the conept of reviewing invoices only periodically or by lower level could lead down the path of overbilling, excessive burn rate, etc. The title of your article does not address the issue presented as the article is about getting over on the requirements of being a COTR instead of really making the job more interesting. In my opinion, the COTR is and should be a full time job with all the work that it entails not as a part time other assigned duty. The COTR is in some ways a true gate keeper and if they are not minding the gate then what?

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.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here


  • Dive into our Contract Award database

    In an exclusive for WT Insider members, we are collecting all of the contract awards we cover into a database that you can sort by contractor, agency, value and other parameters. You can also download it into a spreadsheet. Our databases track awards back to 2013. Read More

  • Navigating the trends and issues of 2016 Nick Wakeman

    In our latest WT Insider Report, we pull together our best advice, insights and reporting on the trends and issues that will shape the market in 2016 and beyond. Read More

contracts DB

Washington Technology Daily

Sign up for our newsletter.

Terms and Privacy Policy consent

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.