Acquisition managers: We're overwhelmed with oversight
Senior procurement officials have a message for investigators: Please leave us alone.
They feel berated by lawmakers and inspectors general who don't always understand how contracting works, according to survey results released Thursday by the Professional Services Council, an Arlington, Va.-based industry group, and Grant Thornton, a global consultancy.
"They feel completely under fire," said Stan Soloway, president of PSC.
The survey, which entailed in-person interviews with 37 federal acquisition managers, found that "pressure from oversight organizations [is] creating a palpable tension and frustration among even the most seasoned procurement professionals." Managers complained that lawmakers take audit reports from the Government Accountability Office and inspectors general "as gospel," when in reality the auditors often have little experience with the contracting field. They might portray an innovative practice as suspicious, when it is well within federal regulations, for example.
PSC performs the survey every two years; the frustration with oversight reflected in the latest results is markedly heightened from that expressed in previous surveys. Part of the reason seems to be increased oversight, especially surrounding contracts in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, and Iraq reconstruction contracts.
As of July 2006, the 109th Congress had held more than twice as many hearings on acquisition as the 108th had, the report stated. Moreover, those hearings tended to be increasingly contentious, contributing to a growing chasm between acquisition officials and overseers.
Soloway said procurement officials do the majority of their work correctly, but one mistake, or even a failure beyond their control, can lead to a congressional hearing. Such heightened oversight lowers morale and hinders recruitment, the report stated.
It also means procurement officials will use less innovative methods, said Soloway. "If I see a colleague pulled before Congress, I'll bury my head a little more deeply," he said.
The survey also suggested that procurement officials feel stretched by the various procurement initiatives being pushed throughout the federal government. For instance, the Office of Management and Budget's competitive sourcing effort to allow contractors to bid on some federal work, and its lines of business initiative to consolidate back-end systems in areas such as financial management, can conflict with one another. And strategic sourcing can be at odds with performance-based contracting initiatives, Soloway said.
Procurement officials also feel detached from agency leaders and are spending less time on strategic thinking and more time on mundane activities, according to the report.
COMMENTS
- I was thinking of taking an entry level contracting specialist job, but after reading all this I have cold feet. Not enough pay to put my neck on the chopping block. Ex-1102 Candidate GovExec.com reader Posted December 11, 2006 3:23 PM
- I am reminded of another time when people were under so much scrutiny. The amount of oversight is most definitely taking its toll. The empowerment movement? Right. All that is happening is that we are becoming automatons to the puppet masters. Life is way to stressful in the federal workplace. How much was that overhead cost in Iraq? What does CFC say about the administrative cost for charities? You would never contribute to a charity that had a 55 percent administrative cost. I certainly hope I'm not the only one that sees these things, and I sure wish there was someway to make it right. But alas, I am just a … Civil Slave Posted November 2, 2006 6:15 PM
- In my opinion, the results of the survey don't necessarily reflect the opinions and attitudes of the federal acquisition workforce as a whole. It appears that the survey interviewees were almost exclusively inside the Beltway and somewhat removed from the crushing effects of manpower reductions, excessive oversight and an increase in laws and regulations. From the trenches, much of the oversight and statutory/regulatory changes have a noble intent, but the authors are either too inexperienced or unaware that they are often poorly written and difficult, if not impossible to implement. Also, few, if any, are ever repealed/removed. There are never fewer, only more. Steve Ward Posted November 3, 2006 8:35 AM
