Jump to content

Ways to Improve Acquisition Training in FY16


metteec

Recommended Posts

While I support the renewed “professionalization” of the contracting workforce, I am pessimistic that the workforce’s knowledge of law, regulation and market environment will improve. If anything happens to workforce knowledge, it will decline. This is due to the transfer of non-professional workload to the professional workforce.

If I recall correctly, the professionalization of the contracting workforce began in the early 90s with the establishment of an educational requirement – a bachelor’s degree with 24 credit hours of business or business related subjects. Unfortunately, this laudable event was accompanied by other events that have undercut the effort to improve the professionalism of 1102s.

First, there was the introduction of automated procurement systems (APS) driven, not by clerk typists (1106s), but by contract specialists. Increasingly, the contract specialists spend more time and effort learning how to create documents and to enter data in the APS than learning the substance of their profession.

Currently, I work in a space adjacent to a staff of 1102s whose raison d’etre is an APS. All day long, 1102s line up to get help with the application of the APS to their specific procurements. If only they spent as much time reading the SOWs, the regs, the GAO and COFC decisions, and materials on the market they are seeking to use.

Prior to my current experience, I cannot count the number of times I, or a colleague, was told a particular procurement strategy or tactic cannot be accomplished because SPS or PRISM won’t allow it.

Because of the introduction of the APS, I believe contract specialists devote more time to learning their APS than to learning the substance of their “profession”.

Closely related to the impact of APS is the impact of FPDS. FPDS entries and corrections are accomplished by 1102s. How many hours do contract specialists spend on the FPDS? Why can't 1106s do this?

Next, while the procurement leaders were celebrating the new educational standards for 1102s, they were also eliminating 1105s, procurement agents. The work on small purchases – now simplified acquisitions – was transferred from 1105s to 1102s. I guarantee you that much/ most of the time 1102s spent/ spend on this new work was/ is spent on forcing the small purchases into the office APS.

Until the procurement hierarchy demonstrates clearly the importance of procurement knowledge vice knowledge of APS, FPDS and small purchase, the test methodology is irrelevant. This demonstration will be the reduction or elimination of time 1102s spend on the creation of APS, FPDS and small purchase.

Restore document preparation and reporting tasks to 1106s; return small purchases to 1105s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The leadership of a career field should have something in common with those in the career field. This becomes harder the higher you get as specialization is less likely to be desired.

At the higher levels, policy makers are simply out of touch with reality and don't know what training is really required and face it, few officials hire vocal opposition that is willing and able to identify the failures in the system.

Who would ever allow the Attorney General, Surgeon General or Secretary of Health & Human Services, etc. to lead an organization they don't have the credentials for and simply have little understanding of? Has a former 1102 ever lead AT&L? Who in the front office of OFPP or AT&L, etc. have a working knowledge of the FAR system (from practice)? What is the growth potential for an 1102?

In addition to training, opportunity is needed. Without growth opportunity fewer of the good people will stay within the government and turnover isn't something that good training will solve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Until the procurement hierarchy demonstrates clearly the importance of procurement knowledge vice knowledge of APS, FPDS and small purchase, the test methodology is irrelevant. This demonstration will be the reduction or elimination of time 1102s spend on the creation of APS, FPDS and small purchase.

Restore document preparation and reporting tasks to 1106s; return small purchases to 1105s.

Hear, hear!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regards to a written exam, who would be the grading authority? If DAU’s Ask a Professor is any sort of guide, it shows that everyone has an opinion. One professor may say one thing, while another professor may believe something else. Answers to written exams aren’t always clear cut. Then again, multiple choice exams seem to encourage rote learning/memorization, rather than critical thinking.

Perhaps rather than having three levels of certification, would it be worth looking at having some form of certification for specific segments within the FAR? Perhaps a mandatory general certification followed by a specialist certificate in areas such as IT, construction, commercial, and simplified? The only reason I suggest “specialty areas” is because it seems like many people stay in the same area for long periods of time. Would that be too limiting?

I can’t speak for everyone else, but most people in my shop have stayed within one general area (construction, for example) for their entire time in contracting. The folks in the construction branch couldn’t be of assistance during the end-year rush because none of them had ever worked on commercial and simplified buys.

Should training focus more on specialized areas within the FAR?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Closely related to the impact of APS is the impact of FPDS. FPDS entries and corrections are accomplished by 1102s. How many hours do contract specialists spend on the FPDS? Why can't 1106s do this?

Next, while the procurement leaders were celebrating the new educational standards for 1102s, they were also eliminating 1105s, procurement agents. The work on small purchases – now simplified acquisitions – was transferred from 1105s to 1102s. I guarantee you that much/ most of the time 1102s spent/ spend on this new work was/ is spent on forcing the small purchases into the office APS.

Until the procurement hierarchy demonstrates clearly the importance of procurement knowledge vice knowledge of APS, FPDS and small purchase, the test methodology is irrelevant. This demonstration will be the reduction or elimination of time 1102s spend on the creation of APS, FPDS and small purchase.

Restore document preparation and reporting tasks to 1106s; return small purchases to 1105s.

CPARS as well. Seems like a large amount of my time is spent on reporting and administrative duties that take up a great deal of valuable time. What was the real reason for eliminating the 1105 series anyways?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vern mentioned something about the Cornell Method (or Cornell Notes).

How about creating law school outlines in class, which help you apply the rules to scenarios at a later date (i.e. work)?

In my mind, the goal of classroom training is to build and test specific knowledge and ability: to apply what you have learned to real problems later. In that regard, pure recall of particular rules, while beneficial, is unnecessary, but mastering the concepts, and ability to conduct adequate analysis is. Law school outlines are great for that purpose.

Ultimately can you look at a set of facts and make a timely, accurate assessment of what rules apply, the best options available, and recommend a course of action? Law school outlines can help you with all three by organizing your learning and thoughts. Instead of preparing for an exam you'd be preparing for future procurement, etc.

I guess the quickest and cheapest way to improve training is to improve the way we train as individuals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Q: Which numbers are odd?

A: All integers (whole numbers) that are not multiples of 2.

Your multiple choice approach would show only that the student knows (or does not know) that certain numbers are odd, but would not show that he knows why they are odd or what "odd" means.

Look, you're okay with multiple choice, and I don't like them. But I understand your point that if used properly they can be respectable.

Does DAU use them properly, as a general rule?

Your answer illustrates another weakness of short-answer questions--they can be ambiguous. You've given me a property of odd numbers, but I still don't know if you could identify any. In my multiple choice example, I can assess whether you can identify an odd number. It's true that I can't assess whether the student knows why they are odd or what "odd" means, but those are different learning objectives. If I wanted to assess those two learning objectives, I would have to come up with different questions.

As far as whether DAU uses them properly, I would say 75% hit, 25% miss. Some courses are better than others. I think the students taking the exams would know better than me.

With regards to a written exam, who would be the grading authority? If DAU’s Ask a Professor is any sort of guide, it shows that everyone has an opinion. One professor may say one thing, while another professor may believe something else. Answers to written exams aren’t always clear cut. Then again, multiple choice exams seem to encourage rote learning/memorization, rather than critical thinking.

FAI/DAU would be the grading authority. There would be an answer key to eliminate inconsistency. I don't agree that a particular type of question encourages rote learning/memorization. A test condition (closed-book v. open-book) would have more of an effect on how a student prepared for an exam.

Perhaps rather than having three levels of certification, would it be worth looking at having some form of certification for specific segments within the FAR? Perhaps a mandatory general certification followed by a specialist certificate in areas such as IT, construction, commercial, and simplified? The only reason I suggest “specialty areas” is because it seems like many people stay in the same area for long periods of time. Would that be too limiting?

I can’t speak for everyone else, but most people in my shop have stayed within one general area (construction, for example) for their entire time in contracting. The folks in the construction branch couldn’t be of assistance during the end-year rush because none of them had ever worked on commercial and simplified buys.

Should training focus more on specialized areas within the FAR?

Yes, I think so. I've advocated for this type of approach in the past. I don't think we should be requiring all 1102s to take the exact same courses after Level 1. I don't think it would be too hard to identify five or six specialties and have certifications for each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've heard several older timers talk about having procurement clerks and whatnot, but was it any better then? How many people worked on a single contract file? Did a CO make a decision and have a clerk type up the memoranda? If so, it seems the clerk would have to be equipped with the same knowledge and competence as the CO.

What prevents offices from assigning duties that resemble the old time structure to today's 1102s? Seems the 1102 series consist primarily of overpaid scriveners anyhow so let a few serve as COs and specialists on other than simplified purchases, and another share serve as COs and specialists for SAP. Each team can assign some specialists as admin and clerical help to process CARS, CPARS, etc. I don't think this helps because the knowledge required is still absent.

Was infighting, over responsibilities, prevalent when offices were staffed with 1101s, 1102s, 1105s, and 1106s?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

"Better" is too broad a term to be the foundation for a good question. Without some objective standard, all you'll get is diverse opinions. Having a procurement clerk do the administrative stuff was better for me. Whether it was better for anyone else is anyone's guess.

Go read OPM's position classification standard for procurement clerks/technicians and then come back and ask questions.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/classification-qualifications/classifying-general-schedule-positions/standards/1100/gs1106.pdf

Here's the position definition:

This series includes positions that involve performing or supervising clerical and technical work that supports the procurement of supplies, services, and/or construction. Procurement clerks and technicians prepare, control, and review procurement documents and reports; verify or abstract information contained in documents and reports; contact vendors to get status of orders and expedite delivery; maintain various procurement files; resolve a variety of shipment, payment, or other discrepancies; or perform other similar work in support of procurement programs and operations. The work requires a practical knowledge of procurement procedures, operations, regulations, and programs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read the classifications for 1102 (dreamscape), 1105 (fits many of today's 1102s in general), and 1106 (fits most of today's contract specialist).

I still don't understand how they worked as a team, in practice. I see how it could work if each series was staffed with people who knew their job well, so maybe that was the case. Maybe workload was lighter so fewer COs were needed.

One of the challenges I see today is that very few people are good at any facet of purchasing or contracting (duties of clerks or technicians, specialists, and contracting officers). Distributing the duties will not make individuals more competent, but reducing the overload and focusing on specialization could.

From my experience, you either work in construction or supplies and services. Within those teams you can be assigned anything from a $3,500 SAP to a multi-million dollar competitive negotiation and anything in-between. Most requirements are filled through task or delivery orders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jamaal,

I have worked in offices with 1102s, 1105s, and 1106s. It can work great! The 1105s do all the simplified acquisitions, and they can do them expertly! The 1106s can take responsibility for invoices and bid openings and filing and so forth. The 1102s can then be free to do what only they can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

When I started as an 1102, my job title was contract negotiator, not contract specialist. I worked with an 1106 procurement clerk. This was doing R&D and major systems.

The 1106 received all incoming paperwork. When we received a requisition the clerk started a contract file and started preparing the routine paperwork, such as small business clearance, etc. The clerk would prepare boilerplate determinations, like the determination of non personal services. I would hand write documents, and she would type them. He or She would coordinate documents through the various staff offices. When we got a (more or less) automated contracting system, the clerk processed the system documents necessary for preparation of the RFP and final contract. In short, the clerk did all the routine administration and paperwork and processed coordinations. I wrote the content of substantive work, such as advanced procurement plans, D&Fs, justifications, etc., but the clerk would type and coordinate the documents and prepare the synopsis, unless there was something special about it. The clerk did the reporting that is now made to FPDS, but was then done on a DD Form 350.

Like anything else, how well it worked depended on the quality of the persons involved. I was lucky in most of the offices in which I worked. Like contract specialists, some clerks were great and some were lousy. What I liked, in retrospect, was being free of all the routine administrative stuff. I might add that my workload was much less than that of the typical contract specialist today, and the administrative tasking was much lighter. Ironically, as workload and administrative burden increased, the government did away with 1106s and put the entire burden on the 1102s.

Perverse management behavior.

A continuing problem was that the best procurement clerks wanted to be contract negotiators and would become angry when they couldn't rise. The influx of college graduates made advancement difficult for those who didn't have degrees. In some cases, the clerk would have made a great negotiator. In others, advancement would have been an instance of the Peter Principle at work. Being a great clerk did not mean that one would be a good contract negotiator, but it was difficult to make people understand and accept that reality.

In any case, being a contract specialist today is nothing like it was for me and my peers. The contracting workplace today is entirely different. Almost unrecognizable to someone of my era. A very big factor in workplace change was the arrival of the desktop computer, which changed everything everywhere, and not entirely for the better. Some day someone will write a great book on the effect of the desktop computer on workplace organization and sociology. Another factor was the gender divide. Virtually all of the clerks and purchasing agents were women and most of the negotiators were men. Negotiators were paid a lot more. That was a source of concern, discomfort, embarrassment, tension, anger, and conflict. I think the gender divide was a factor in the elimination of clerks and purchasing agents. I think it was seen as a way to close the gap. Today, about 60 percent of the 1102 workforce is female.

The week after Christmas I'm flying to L.A. for a reunion of some of the Air Force Copper Cap trainees I came up with. We all became GS-15s or SESs at a time when such positions were rare. Several of us went on to the private sector. One became a prominent public prosecutor. All but one of us are retired. I retired from teaching last month. The only one still working is with a California lobbying organization. It will be a gathering of the denizens of a lost world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our last 1105s and 1106s were converted to 1102's for the pay reason. In Washington we could not get anyone any good at the paygrades of an 1105 and 1106 (Typically GS 5 to 9). Those we had that were good wanted to get above GS-9 and could not. They would move to the program offices that had higher grades.

The pay grades have all escalated because the pay has not gone up enough within the grades. Now the "journeyman" (4 to 8 years) is a GS13 and looking to be a GS14 very soon. You must have 4 years to get your level III certification and many new personnel expect an unlimited warrant and a GS14 to come with that certification. A world of unrealistic expectation and yet many get it so it is not unrealistic anymore. I had a fast rise after a military career so I can not complain too much. It is good times for the staff but not so good for the organization.

It used to be only Division Directors were GS15 but now we have Branch Chiefs and in some cases independent COs as GS15. I have relatives in the midwest that would die to get a steady $50K a year job but inside the beltway you feel unwanted if you don't make six figures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I retired from teaching last month.

I'm sorry to hear that, Vern. I realize that teaching was often a very frustrating experience for you ... but I very much enjoyed the one class I was able to attend. I tried hard to "think critically" but I'm afraid I didn't hit the mark you set. To be clear, I was okay with that. I learned more from your course than any three "seminars by PowerPoint."

I'm sad to think that my colleagues and direct reports won't have the same opportunity to be challenged and to stretch.

H2H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

help:

Thanks. I had fun. Met a lot of people. Made a lot of friends. Got to go all over the world.

Everyone's time must come. (Peyton, are you reading this?)

Vern

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone's time must come. (Peyton, are you reading this?)

Perhaps you can extend your career by abandoning the QB position and taking up the placekicker role.

Both score points for the team, but the QB expends much more physical and emotional energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps you can extend your career by abandoning the QB position and taking up the placekicker role.

Both score points for the team, but the QB expends much more physical and emotional energy.

Haha! That would be like asking Vince Lombardi or Nick Sabin to step down and become the assistant coach!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...