GROUND TRUTH
obligate ahead of need. Demonstrate immediate need for credibility at the negotiating table.
LL_690: Providing government- furnished equipment (GFE) to the contractor can reduce both cost and schedule.
COST-CUTTING EFFORT
Wallace Horn clips the band from a pallet of M1 Abrams tank parts at the Combat Vehicle Repair Facility of Anniston Army Depot (ANAD), AL. Data from the Army Lessons Learned Portal suggest that assessing production line capacity and timelines for similar systems with the same configuration can lower costs and improve purchasing decisions. (Photo by Mark Cleghorn, ANAD)
Background As quick reaction capability (QRC) plat- forms are being demobilized and retired, Army programs can capitalize on invest- ments made in these systems through reuse of GFE in future programs. In many cases, the cost-benefit analysis of purchasing new equipment versus refur- bishing existing equipment supports the refurbishment option. In addition, reuse of GFE is often advantageous from a schedule perspective because many GFE products are considered long-lead-time items. Te government can save millions of dollars through reuse of GFE from QRCs for a program of record. In addi- tion, approximately two- or three-week schedule savings have been realized where the integration of GFE was on the critical path and the contractor could not procure the items in time to meet the schedule.
Recommendation Review both cost and schedule benefits of supplying GFE to the contractor. Capi- talize on reuse of GFE from demobilized and retired programs for future programs or spares. Analyze the costs and benefits of purchasing new equipment versus refur- bishing existing equipment, and consider the benefits of reuse on program sched- ules. Review risks and benefits associated with the government providing GFE. Finally, where GFE is not included in the performance work statement, ensure that the government gets consideration of any reduction in overall program costs.
126
INCENTIVIZE PRODUCTIVITY AND INNOVATION IN INDUSTRY, GOVERNMENT
LL_219: Contracts should incentivize cooperation between contractors with interdependent products.
Background Current Army programs often rely on or integrate technologies produced by mul- tiple contractors, requiring cooperation and knowledge sharing. Clear and open communication between program offices and associated contractors and subcon- tractors must be encouraged to support the successful technologies.
integration of these key
Recommendation Contracts should incentivize cooperation between contractors with interdependent products.
Crafting appropriate con-
tract language may require coordination between program offices.
Sample contract language: “As directed, both contractors shall develop and imple- ment an integrated porting plan that is agreed upon by both companies. [Vendor 1] and [Vendor 2] shall provide the nec- essary hardware, software, technical data, engineering, program and facility resources necessary to achieve the objective.”
LL_716: The use of specialized labo- ratories such as the Joint Test and Integration Facility (JTIF) and the Developmental System Integration Lab (DSIL), both in Aberdeen, MD, have allowed sophisticated Army intelligence programs to reduce risks related to sen- sor and software integration.
Background Te DSIL and JTIF allowed on-site subject-matter experts and external
Army AL&T Magazine April–June 2015
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172
