Return to Article: Between the Lines
-
33897
There are two additional components to this discussion that warrant some consideration. 1. While outsourcing has increased by over 75% in the past 6 years, the Government has failed to adequately resource the required oversight component. 2. As demonstrated by the excessive number of contractors on the battlefield in Afghanistan and Iraq, we need to consider a definition of "inherently military".
-
33893
You're a little misleading in your article. Government agencies are currently using support contractors to administer contracts. When it comes down to the nitty gritty, about the only thing they can't do is sign the contract.
-
33886
Isn't it interesting that there is talk of a similar war spending review like the Truman Commission. The very core of the issue on wartime spending is the role of contractors performing "non-inherently" governmental positions. We are using these tacit A-76 actions to resolve DOD personnel shortfalls. Henry's point "Federal agencies should be held accountable to be efficient and to use the BEST tool (which may not be a competition) to determine that for each function," is a well-stated point in the debate. As government managers, we must not look at A-76 as the panacea to resolve personnel issues, budget constraints, or legislative limitations. As Henry states A-76 is only one tool to instill process efficiencies in our programs.
-
33855
I agree with Mr. Singer's comments, and I am compelled to add that over-contracting has in many cases compromised critical missions. I will point no fingers here, but we all are aware of several cases where objectives were not met, lives endangered or lost, due to mismanagement of contractors, or a complete lack of government oversight over contractors. This trend must be halted, approach reassessed, and corrections implemented.
-
33831
The problem with whether to consider a function for contracting is not primarily an issue of the defintion of the words inherently govermental. The problem is that OMB (thru the President's Management Agenda competitive sourcing initiative) is implementing a policy based on the ideology that ONLY a public-private competition can determine if an activity is efficient. So competitive sourcing is the ONLY tool in a toolbox that should also contain business process re-engineering, rigorous cost efficiency reviews, rightsizing, direct conversion to contract, and many other tools. Federal agencies should be held accountable to be efficient and to use the BEST tool (which may not be a competiton) to determine that for each function.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.