We applaud Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ recent announcement of his proposed initiative to cut costs, as we also applaud the Office of Management and Budget’s move to halt IT modernization efforts that have consistently cost more and delivered less than promised. We see a paradigm shift in how government is working – instead of just talking about doing more with less, I believe government leaders are trying to actually do more by being more efficient, focused, and specific in what they need delivered. This is good news for smart government contractors as well as for the taxpayers and the government organizations themselves.
My organization, Advice Unlimited LLC, provides strategic planning and communications outreach consulting services to the government. We offer our services surgically – in modules that clearly define the project that will be delivered, how long it takes and what it costs. The customer only pays for what they actually need at that time; they can then purchase additional modules when they’re ready, both financially and operationally, to implement that next project. We consistently deliver outstanding results, and part of our success is because realistic expectations are established up front, and everyone is clear about the scope of the project. There is minimal ‘scope creep’ because the project is short and focused.
I believe this surgical approach to delivering services to the government is the wave of the future – it delivers the services needed in a timely, cost-effective, agile manner, so that if something isn’t working, adjustments can be made and the process can be back on track very quickly, with minimal cost or time expended. We don’t place full time employees at customer sites; we provide experienced consultants to work with the customer – and the problem – for only the amount of time necessary to deliver the results the customer needs in support of their mission. We’re not doing more with less, we’re doing more with less fat and more focus. It saves time and money, and delivers better results. What approach do you prefer?