Peter G. Tuttle

Jaime hits the nail on the head. Let me add a couple of additional thoughts to his articulation.
The “real” problem is not the regulations that form a framework for the Federal purchasing process, but how they are, or are not, interpreted and implemented by some of our Federal friends. There is plenty of flexibility allowed (look at FAR1.102-4…[Read more]

Hi Geri. Speed of change is not always a vendor’s “system” or “software” issue. Many agencies have pretty deliberate change management processes for some very valid reasons. Depending on the system you are using and the agency you are employed with, you may be experiencing the worst of both worlds. Hopefully, all the “buzz” lately about agile…[Read more]

Raising the micropurchase threshold to $10K is a great idea. We now have the technology to oversee and report on purchasing transactions in either real or near-real time. You no longer have to depend on hard-to-generate reports using stale forensic data. Will there still be abuse; sure? Today, depending on which software solutions you use, you…[Read more]

Happy Wednesday, gang!
1) What do you think of this idea? Great for large businesses; lousy for small businesses. It would also translate into phony inflated metrics.- you’d be measuring if a contractor could afford to give up some profit. Some can; some can’t.
2) What are some of the potential drawbacks? It’ll become yet another bullying…[Read more]

What a great subject, Jamie. One complication comes in when the government adds in requirements beyond the agreed-to scope of work and the contractor’s program and corporate management decide not to push-back or charge for the out-of-scope work for fear that playing hard ball would damage the “relationship.” I have heard this ad nausem. Bad…[Read more]

Indubitably!!

This is the part I like: “To dissuade companies from raising prices or reducing the quality of service, the town awarded contracts to a couple of losing bidders for every winner it hired. The contracts do not come with any pay or any work — unless the winning bidder that prevailed fails to deliver.” It sends a pretty clear message that there is…[Read more]

The FAR is actually a pretty good document when it’s interpreted correctly, used correctly, and placed in context of the overall Federal acquisition process (e.g. more than just the actual procurement phase). There is flexibility built into the FAR where acquisition practitioners are encouraged to use their business savvy (FAR 1.102-4 Role of…[Read more]

GovLoop is a great place to conduct a necessary ongoing dialog about our acquisition profession and how we execute our respective missions. We can discuss issues and share best practices using a “safe” venue. The challenges that we all face in the acquisition world can be pretty daunting at times and GovLoop can be a place to reach out, pulse…[Read more]

Let me approach this from a different perspective. With the recent conference fiasco at GSA PBS, we are now seeing knee-jerk reactions on the parts of both Agencies and Congress to avoid future travel/conference problems. That’s fine, except for the historical fact that some conferences or events (hosted by such as professional associations like…[Read more]

Hi Robert. I agree that it extremely difficult to conduct longer term planning in a fluid political and fiscal climate. On the other hand, executives should have a very good idea of what skills must be retained (either organically or outsourced) in order for their organizations to remain viable. The task of distinguishing the “must haves” from…[Read more]

It’s pretty easy to remove individual’s who are contractor employees. I’ve seen them disappear in less than 24 hours with no cost penalty to the government for the change . Poor performance and “fit” issues seem to be the biggies, as well as security clearance issues. Now, the ease of removing of contractor firms for cause is another story.…[Read more]

Corey: Yes, it happens. Let’s cut to the chase here. Inadequate long-term human capital planning has also added to this situation. Here we go again.

Great discussion. At the risk of oversimplifying the issue, this appears to be part of the larger ongoing discussion of knowing what you want in the first place (requirements generation) and determining if you got what you paid for (oversight, performance measurement, etc.). Scope management also comes to mind. I absolutely agree that customers…[Read more]

Hi Josh: Lousy communications…hmm, where do I start? Here are a few danger signs:
1. Use of half-truths or lies in discussions, requests, etc.
2. Lack of timliness in responding
3. Smoke-blowing instead of meaningful dialog
4. Reliance on email exclusively, instead of all manners of commo
5. Overly complex messaging

Here are a few of my favorites:
1. Lousy communications
2. Lack of collaboration
3. Unrealistic expectations
4. No support from leadership (beyond lip service)
5. Lack of project alignment with the organization’s “true” mission or goals

Hi Mary. Enjoy the conference! At this point in the game, collaboration is so critical to the continuing effective use of resources and cost savings that it should be considered as a past performance evaluation factor on those procurements that can benefit from it. I see it as something especially complex weapons systems, services and IT…[Read more]

Hi Jaime. Great timing. Last week I was talking with a very senior Federal acquisition official and he had the best suggestion I’ve heard of yet – Make the agency/department small business goals applicable to a number of corporate-level executives, not simply those executives in the procurement rganization.
If the “tone” from the top is that…[Read more]

Hi Steve. Let me add a twist to your question: What are the hurdles that need to be faced and overcome for Agency procurement organizations to actually perform their mission using the cloud? Rationale for question: Agencies are scrambling to reduce the cost of governing, in part, by reducing their physical footprint. Given the state of 21st…[Read more]