‘SEPARATE CONTRACTING FROM ACQUISITION’
we spent a lot of time before we agreed on the directive authority recommen- dation. This can be addressed with the current ACC approach, but only if there is equal attention to contingency con- tracting and weapon systems contracting; and, with the initiatives of former Sec- retary of Defense Robert M. Gates and former Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics) Ashton B. Carter (now Deputy Secretary of Defense) getting so much attention, I am concerned about this.
Additionally, there is a big need to address services contracting (vs. goods), especially in expedition. Finally, in the Corps of Engineers, the contracting staff works for the districts vs. the chief of contracting, which is contrary to our recommendation.
Q. What steps would you recommend be taken to sustain congressional and DoD leadership interest and momentum toward “fixing” Army contracting?
A. I believe the question should also include Army leadership. The Chief needs to also be in the loop and responsible. The then-Vice Chief’s words—“If I would have known about the contracting issue in advance, I would have done something about it”—are still relevant, in my opin- ion. Additionally, to “sustain” interest and momentum, the Army should report out to both congressional and DoD leader- ship on the status of the implementation of our study. DoD leadership is already changing, and what we recommended will soon be overlooked or forgotten. When the CSA and the SECAR testify, their
FOCUS ON SERVICES
Bringing in “highly qualified experts” from industry would help the Army to better manage its contracting for services, Gansler says. Here, SGT John Cox, a Geospatial Engineer with 2nd BCT, 4th Infantry Division, reads information for an interpreter to translate to Dari in November 2011 at the Operation Coordination Center-Regional (OCC-R) in Herat Province, Afghanistan. (Photo by SGT Ruth Pagan.)
statements for the record should include status of implementation. If we don’t have enough certified contracting profession- als and general officers with contracting experience, we should tell them.
Q. Many people believe that most of DoD’s focus is on the acquisition com- munity (the PEOs and PMs) and less so on the contracting community (the
“shoppers”). This perception continues, despite the intended allocation of five additional general officer billets dedicated for military contracting professionals. What other steps would you recommend that the Army consider to elevate the stat- ure of its contracting workforce?
A. As previously stated, separate them from the Acquisition Corps and establish a separate Contracting Corps reporting to the CSA. The argument against this has been that contracting and acquisition per- sonnel are interchangeable. Since we now have approval for the general officer billets, career opportunities are much better for contracting personnel, so they don’t have to be a program executive officer to be a gen- eral officer or Senior Executive Service. Also, bringing in some “highly qualified experts” from industry (especially regarding services contracting) would be a big help. (The current thrust has been largely interns.)
Q. When we compare the size of the Army’s annual budget at around $160 billion, vs. the roughly $120 billion that the Army spends contracting for goods and services, do you have any thoughts on how the Army can better ensure that $120 billion in contracts receives
104
Army AL&T Magazine
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 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180
