Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

MV2009

Staying in vs leaving

Recommended Posts

The "Ethics and Transparency" thread posted by Eagle93 led a number of people to recommend for the individual to head for the exits and do not look back. I wanted to see what steps the community would recommend if the individual sought to improve the organization vice leaving. Reading and gaining the technical knowledge and demonstrating what you learned will be the most important elements to gain respect within your office but how does the individual change the perception of the office that industry may have? Revising the requirements is key but the lack of interest from industry regarding the requirements makes me believe there is more to the story than just the requirements being revised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MV2009 said:

The "Ethics and Transparency" thread posted by Eagle93 led a number of people to recommend for the individual to head for the exits and do not look back. I wanted to see what steps the community would recommend if the individual sought to improve the organization vice leaving. Reading and gaining the technical knowledge and demonstrating what you learned will be the most important elements to gain respect within your office but how does the individual change the perception of the office that industry may have? Revising the requirements is key but the lack of interest from industry regarding the requirements makes me believe there is more to the story than just the requirements being revised.

MV2009 - Your question starts in one place and ends in another. It's a bit confusing. You may want to be more specific as to the problem you're experiencing with regard to industry and suspected causes in order to get useful feedback here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MV2009 said:

... how does the individual change the perception of the office that industry may have? Revising the requirements is key but the lack of interest from industry regarding the requirements makes me believe there is more to the story than just the requirements being revised.

First, industry's perception of the competency of the office should be irrelevant to the individual government employee's decision whether to stay in that office or to depart.

Second, industry really doesn't care how inept (or ept) government employees are, so long as they do their jobs fairly and impartially to the best of their ability. I sometimes run across government employees and think to myself "Dang I wish they worked for the contractor"--but of course I cannot even hint at that. Less frequently I run across government employees and think to myself "How do they keep their job?"--but of course I cannot even hint at that either. However, the most common reaction is "meh" -- so long as the individuals do their jobs reasonably well and reasonably impartially, industry is usually good. And believe me, industry does not tend to form judgments about offices or components very often. (Except DFAS.)

It's when government employees depart from the rulebook (whether documented in FAR, an agency supplement, or in the contract) that industry starts to care. Thus, requirements do matter to industry, but only to the extent that they are (a) reasonable, and (b) implemented consistently and fairly. Other than that, industry mostly keeps its nose out of government business and tries to perform its contract(s) to the best of its ability, and it hopes the folks on the government side are doing the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FrankJon, you are correct and I’ll try to clarify what I intended.  Organizational success is dependent on a lot of variables.    Employee morale is an important variable towards obtaining that success. If individuals do not feel like the work they are doing is meaningful, the work product quality may decrease.  If the buyer receives no feedback from industry on the requirement or only one offeror responds to a competitively solicited action, it can have an adverse impact on morale as an inidivual may feel helpless in achieving its objective to provide best value to the government and taxpayer. I understand there is more to it as there are internal items (management, contracting officers) that impact employee morale significantly as well. Since these internal items require an in-depth look and assessment of the organizational, which cannot be provided here. I was seeking an answer to the following:

How do you promote competition in markets where suppliers do not seem very interested in responding to solicitations? Are there items in the notice or at the industry day event that need to be explicitly written or said to promote feedback and questions from industry? 

I did wonder if it was a perception issue but after reading here_2_help post, its clear that is unlikely the reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MV2009 said:

.Since these internal items require an in-depth look and assessment of the organizational, which cannot be provided here. I was seeking an answer to the following:

How do you promote competition in markets where suppliers do not seem very interested in responding to solicitations? Are there items in the notice or at the industry day event that need to be explicitly written or said to promote feedback and questions from industry? 

MV, you asked a broad question.  

I’m wondering what type of acquisitions you are referring to.  You mentioned uninterested “suppliers”.  If you are experiencing a lack of interest across all types of acquisitions, then it would seem to me that few firms want to deal with your organization. You should want to become a “great customer”. 

I can say that a simple answer from my perspective and experience is to “make the solicitation attractive to industry”;  read your solicitations from a supplier’s perspective; treat suppliers fairly with respect and honesty; and make prompt payment for goods and services provided. 

As for “how to” make the solicitation attractive to industry, it depends upon the type of acquisition but frame the requirement so as not to restrict competition. Use reasonable evaluation and selection criteria.  Don’t over complicate the acquisition process and keep industry response costs as low as possible. Make prompt selections and awards.

Don’t go on “phishing expeditions - effectively  use market research before issuing solicitations. Seek industry feedback during your research. 

In summary, to promote competition, you must become an attractive customer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MV, what type of industry day events are you referring to?  For individual actions or for presentations of programs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2017 at 1:13 AM, MV2009 said:

How do you promote competition in markets where suppliers do not seem very interested in responding to solicitations? Are there items in the notice or at the industry day event that need to be explicitly written or said to promote feedback and questions from industry? 

MV2009 - My recommendation is to go directly to the source - the contractors - and ask the questions. I'm sure they would be happy to give you information that would make it worth their while to compete. You can do this via RFI (future facing; "Would you be interested if X?") and/or direct communications with targeted contractors (retroactive; "Why didn't you bid on X solicitation?").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joel,

We’ve done command wide as well as individual events for specific contract actions. For purposes of this discussion, I was referring to the individual events for a specific action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×