Jump to content

Better Buying Power Principles - What Are They?


Recommended Posts

I recently read an article in the current edition of AT&L Magazine entitled "Better Buying Power Principles.", written by Frank Kendall, USD AT&L. It is interesting to read about a senior leader's thoughts and ideas. The article can be found here - http://dau.dodlive.mil/files/2015/12/DATL_JanFeb_2016.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those principles are nice.

I wonder who came up with them?

I wonder who will enforce accountability for compliance with them?

As for me, after a long time doing this I have come up with only one principle. It's over there on my profile picture.

H2H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

H2H, not sure if that was a facetious questions or not, but the answer is Ash Carter. BBP is pretty front and center for DOD acquisition. Some of the initiatives started from 2010 have become policy, such as DFARS 215.371- Only One Offeror. While not policy, use of FPI contracts are in- vogue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JMG,

Those were not facetious questions. I'm willing to bet that Dr. Carter is not the individual who will hold people accountable for complying with the BBP principles (as opposed to the actual initiatives).

A lot of people, myself included. don't hold out much hope for BBP. I don't think you fix processes by adding more processes.

I hope I'm wrong.

H2H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Those principles are dumb. If I'd been up at AT&L that article would never have gotten by me.

1. Continuous improvement is more effective than radical change? Maybe, but how does he know? See Principles 2 and 3. And is he saying that TQM doesn't work? If he is, then why does he call Deming a genius in Principle 2? Doesn't he know that TQM was Deming's baby?

2. Data should drive policy. Sure. So why Principle 6 when the data (documented by many and repeatedly since the 1960s) indicate that FPI contracts don't work as advertised? See 6, below.

3. Critical thinking is necessary. Agree, so why doesn't he do it? See comments 1 and 2 above and 6 and 7 below.

4. Controlling life cycle cost is one of their jobs and their managers are doing so effectively? Really? See Principle 2. Where's the data? Hard data. No bs estimates.

5. Professionalism. MAAP. (Motherhood And Apple Pie) The workforce is already professional? Really? Then explain the F-22, the F-35, the Litoral Combat Vessel, the Future Combat System and of several other big programs of the last decade or so. Explain the outcome of the Boeing protest against the air tanker source selection and several other protests of large acquisitions in recent years (despite "peer reviews"). What makes someone a professional, anyway? A job title? He just didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings.

6. Incentives work? Really? They work? See Principle 2, then read GAO Report GAO-06-66. December 2005, (the report from Hell), "DOD Has Paid Billions in Award and Incentive Fees Regardless of Acquisition Outcomes," page 31:

"DOD’s use of monetary incentives is based on the assumption that such incentives can improve contractor performance and acquisition outcomes; however, past studies have challenged the validity of this assumption. Research on incentive fees going back to the 1960s has concluded these incentive fees are not effective in controlling cost. Studies conducted by GAO, Harvard University, and the RAND Corporation, among others, have concluded that these incentives do not motivate cost efficiency, in part because profit is not the contractor's only motivation."

7. Competition and the threat of competition provide the most effective incentive? Really? What does he mean by "competition"? Market competition? Adam Smith's competition, which doesn't exist in much DOD acquisition, or competitive bidding in search of best value, for which there is no evidence of effectiveness and which encourages lying, cheating, exaggeration, underpricing, and litigation? And see Phishing for Phools: The Economics of Manipulation and Deception (2015), by Akerlof (recipient of the 2001 Nobel Prize in economics and Georgetown professor) and Shiller (a Yale professor of economics). The CICA mandate for price competition in all cases is terrible policy based on no data whatsoever. We've had competition in every major system disaster of the past 40 years. Time to think critically. See Principle 2 and 3.

8. Team sport? Right. More MAAP.

9. Our tech superiority is at risk? If he says so, but see Principle 2. Nothing but a plea for more money from Congress. For yet another strategic bomber. We'll never get another B-52, airmen. Never. Accept it. The Triad is dead. We take 20 years to design a Rolls Royce just to take dogs to doggie day care.

10. We should have the courage to challenge bad policy? Really? Okay, put your money where your mouth is AT&L. Set up a special prize for policy challenges and a direct line to the Pentagon that anyone can use to challenge a policy without going through the chain of command. Publish a report of all challenges and the result.. Set up a deviation hotline where a CO can make a direct, telephonic request for a deviation without going through the chain of command. Promise a response within 48 hours. Now, we'll see how serious you are. Oh, and read Turn the Ship Around! A True Story of Turning Followers into Leaders (2012), by L. David Marquet, Capt. USN (ret.), a former nuclear submarine commander, and Stephen Covey.

Yeah, publishing that article as is was a bad idea, but AT&L can repair the damage and regain some credibility by doing No. 10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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