GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Defense develops tool to assess skills of acquisition workforce

• 24843
  

  The increasing demands on contracting professionals are taking a toll on the workforce. We never have quite enough personnel to handle the additional workload, and we are constantly having more additional duties piled on us, such as spending hours working with DFAS to get our contractors paid. Even if the contracting workforce increased 20% to handle the workload, the decision to downsize and downgrade DFAS personnel before all contracts are under WAWF is causing a serious degradation of service to the contractors.

  Patricia Maxson Posted June 5, 2007 8:44 AM
• 24787
  

  Unfortunately, most of the DAU courses which are required for workforce certification are simply regurgitations of regulations. Yes, it is important to know these, but they are no substitute for college level business courses or even basics such as statistics, business writing, or negotiating.

  In my work I see good contracting officers and others retiring and being replaced with inexperienced and poorly trained workers. The workload is increasing, with fewer of us handling it.

  Ron Posted June 4, 2007 8:14 PM
• 23103
  

  I agree with JD--DoD acquisition (esp. of weapon systems) is incredibly complex. As one who has written course content, and then had to 'dumb it down' for online delivery, I watched 2 full days in-class (14 hours) turned into something that just scrapes the surface of a complex process. And that will be the extent of training on that topic. It's not nearly enough.

  DD Posted May 10, 2007 3:53 PM
• 20962
  

  I obtained my DAWIA Level II certification in Acquisition back in 1997. Since that time, I have consistently been denied opportunity to take higher level certification courses, and also "refresher" training, due to either my current GS level not supporting the need for the higher level training, or a lack of funds to support the refresher training. Each year I am required to complete and submit an Individual Development Plan--and each year I am denied higher level acquisition courses to expand my knowledge, and also denied refresher courses to update me on the constant changes within the acquisition field.

  What is left? I am referred to on-line courses, but these lack the real life experiences that are both educational to acquisition personnel and provide learning curve improvements. We are expected to provide high levels of expertise, but are denied the training to ensure we maintain a high level of knowledge. It seems the government is more willing to allow the acquisition professionals to learn from costly mistakes, rather than invest in sufficient funds to adequately train and maintain a high level of professionalism - no matter the cost to the taxpayer!

  JD Posted February 5, 2007 8:46 AM
• 20948
  

  There have been statistical methods available for decades that would have identified bottlenecks in the procurement process as well and other support programs. It is management that has vehemently objected to using them.

  DoD will keep spending millions of dollars developing these assessment tools. But, until they actually are used to gage competence and productivity and hold people accountable, it's no different from giving calculators to chimps. They can go through the motions but the results mean nothing.

  You want more training funds? Lose the fat instead of paying people to retire in their cubicles.

  Robert M. Posted February 3, 2007 2:29 PM
• 20919
  

  Under current funding constraints for DoD there are seldom training funds available. Primary career field certification training which is centrally funded is the only training some career professionals are able to get other than online training. Although the online training is a good way to maintain proficiency, classroom training is more effective. Many organizations seem to lump training funds in with TDY funds. They are usually the first to be cut.

  If we want to maintain a professional workforce in DoD we need to realize that funding for training and a professionally managed program to assure equal opportunities for training is critical to our future and not just nice to have. Properly trained acquisition professionals can save an organization much more than their annual training budget. On the other hand, poorly trained acquisition folks can cost an agency far more than their training budget.

  Jim Demetroulis Posted February 2, 2007 2:35 AM