GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Group to rank contractors on ethics programs

• 42429
  

  Previous comments covered almost all aspects; however, I think evaluation should include how they treat their employee populations at large, and compensation packages for their echelon. Additionally, an ethical company should also be judged by how they treat their general empolyess - the heart and soul of their operations - against the compensatory packages given to upper and senior management and how they view their shareholders if any !

  Sally Posted January 28, 2008 6:07 PM
• 42272
  

  Having conceived of and helped to establish the first corporate ethics office in any company at General Dynamics in 1985, I appreciate anything that encourages additional companies to undertake similar programs. As these programs have spread and matured, however, certain problems have arisen and limits to their effectiveness have begun to come into focus. Briefly, here are two issues that should concern companies that have, or contemplate developing, ethics programs. Our recently released research report on ethics and compliance programs found that too many of the people in charge of these programs are lawyers and that their views of the causes of misconduct are fundementally different from those with a background in management. Second, an increasing number of companies are "outsourcing" their hotlines, an implicit admission that the employees do not trust their companies to maintain their confidentiality and protect them when they blow the whistle. Meanwhile, the vendor-run hotlines don't receive requests for advice on ethically challenging situations and those calls decline in companies that have outsourced their hotlines and the issues of mistrust go unaddressed.

  Gary edwards Posted January 25, 2008 2:26 PM
• 42221
  

  Mable, as an acquisition person, I completely agree. However, it is management who prevents us from going after the contractors. We are very frustrated to be unable to use the tools we have to enforce contract compliance.

  a taxpayer and a federal worker Posted January 25, 2008 8:27 AM
• 42082
  

  Isn't this kind of "wolf watching the henhouse". While I'm very concerned what goes on with government contractors (I've worked with them for over 25 years) the other half of the problem is the government contracting/acquisition people who never hold the contractors accountable. No self-assessment is going to fix the problem we have with government contracting.

  Mable Posted January 23, 2008 4:25 PM
• 42041
  

  It seems ludicrous for not only a 'voluntary' survey but, expecting some contractors to submit an honest assessment. I agree with Mr. Bingham's opinion of not painting all contractors with the same brush based on the questionable practices of a few. I consider a contractor who refused to allow sub-contractors (whom they recompensed for refitting their facilities) to provide the military in SWA with ball joints for UAHMMWVs due to the purchasing agency not providing a part number for their newly developed highly improved ball joint (since it was not subjected to testing), due to their preceding ball joint classified as deficient and removed from the system. Moreover, the idea of a contractor intimidating Government representatives by withholding parts is indefensible and shows a complete lack of character. Another product furnished was injector pumps, defective from the get-go. The FSRs on ground in Iraq and Afghanistan effecting repairs to vehicles yet, directed not to impart information on the fix with either Government and/or military personnel. Therefore, Government personnel had no choice but to devise a fix working alongside military personnel ensuring equipment functioned properly and precluding problems on patrols due to overwhelming failure of injector pumps. Although, I consider it audacious and presumptuous of FSRs asking Government personnel to provide defective injector pumps, which could not be repaired for shipment to their company rather than shipped to Government representatives. Other problems encountered were FSR personnel not possessing the aptitude or means to fix problems on vehicles attributing problems to the military due to their ineptitude. In reiteration, not all contractors are incompetent or unethical and focus solely on the bottom line accepting payment for goods and services not conforming to approved standards.

  CAE Posted January 23, 2008 10:38 AM
• 42035
  

  If they want to study the ethics of contractors and report on them they ought to do a couple of things besides see if they have a "code of ethics". They ought to review the number of Board and Court cases they have been involved in. They ought to review the number of change orders they have requested. They ought to see if any Government claims have been made against the company. Review their past performance files that the government keeps. They ought to see how often they brought their projects in on time and on budget with the appropriate quality standards that were agreed to in the contract. By looking at these metrics they can tell if a contractor is doing what it says it is going to do, or if it is simply gaming the system to make it payout. Government contracts disputes and claims is the most under reported and unsupervised area of government. Most of these disputes don't even go to real courts, but are resolved(settled) in administrative board proceeedings. Billions of taxpayer dollars go through this system each year. Government lawyers and Contracting Offices are not particularly effective in protecting the taxpayers funds in these disputes. This area of government is a hugh mess and ought to have more daylight shined on it. The strength of this nation is intregrity, honesty, people shaking hands and doing what they say they will do without a lot of regulation or enforcement. I don't see that happening in the government contracting field. Businessmen need a return to honor and ethics very badly.

  Average Citizen Posted January 23, 2008 10:03 AM
• 41999
  

  Ahhhh this one ought to be good... a self-administered "am i a good-guy" questionaire... now how accurate do you think the data is going to be?

  If I am not mistaken, doesn't the DCMA and other Federal watchdog agencies keep scorecards on all the contractors that do work for the Federal government? Why don't we use the systems that are already supposed to be implemented and working? Why aren't these "scores" posted for the general public and Congress to see? Maybe when folks decide to invest their retirement incomes in some of these corporations, they can take advantage of some of this data. Then we can turn the "ethics" program into something worthwhile. Folks will invest their nest eggs in the corporations that deliver quality products on time, within cost and schedule --- AND ACT MORALLY, ETHICALLY, AND ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE IN THE PROCESS.

  Frank Posted January 22, 2008 10:14 PM