When I started in contracting in 1974, GS-1102s were classified as administrative personnel, not professional. As I recall, NCMA and others carried on a years-long campaign of to get 1102 personnel to classified as professionals. I, along with many of my 1102 co-workers, did not think it was all that important. But many 1102s were very passionate about it.

On February 2, 1982, while I was assigned to the headquarters of the Air Force Systems Command, the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Federal Expenditures, Research, and Rules, 97th Congress, Second Session, conducted a hearing about "the Federal procurement work force."

Here is a quote from the opening statement by Senator John C. Danforth, the subcommittee chair:

Today's hearing concerns the Federal procurement work force. The 100,000 men and women who do the Government's buying spent 130 billion tax dollars during fiscal year 1981. They will spend that much and more this year.

The present procurement system requires the implementation of a veritable library of regulations and procedures that define the buyer-seller relationship. Obviously, the people using this system must be qualified, trained, and capable of exercising good judgment.

Concern over the quality of the procurement work force is not new. Its importance was highlighted in the report of the Commission on Government Procurement, released almost 10 years ago. It is a central theme of the draft proposal for a uniform Federal procurement system, which was issued by the Office of Federal Procurement Policy last October.

A trained, self-confident, and professional work force will be required to implement the simplified Federal procurement system. A single Government-wide regulatory framework will rid the system of thousands of pages of redundant regulations. There is great concern, however, that the procurement work force may not be up to its new job. A system that relies less on regulations and more on plain good judgment requires a trained work force.

Efforts to improve the professionalism of the procurement work force are already underway. This morning's witnesses will describe the training and certification programs being undertaken by Government and by universities, professional associations, and others in the private sector. This partnership is being encouraged through the efforts of the Federal Acquisition Institute. Clearly, such cooperative efforts should be continued and expanded.

Increased professionalism within the work force demands recognition that procurement people are professionals. Sometimes such recognition is absent. The Office of Personnel Management's proposed classification standards for procurement personnel, the GS1102 series standards-downgrading certain procurement positions-are a case in point. While not the focus of these hearings, they remain of concern to this subcommittee and to many commentators both inside and outside Government. Senator Chiles and I have joined Government contractors in opposing OPM's plan, and we have been joined, in turn, by Senator Roth and Senator Cohen. We will be watching the progress of these standards closely.

Finally, we must remember that the Government's procurement work force has a significant impact on the Government's relations with its contractors. Unnecessary controversy, all too often born of ineptitude, misunderstanding, or unnecessary rigidity can be avoided-to the mutual benefit of the contractor and the taxpayer. In short, the investment we make in training contract officers in making them smart buyers and tough, but fair, customers-can pay the Government back several times over.I ha

Testimony, written statements, and letters were submitted by the OFPP Administrator, a government contracting firm, the Aerospace Industries Association, other industry representatives, a prominent law firm, and NCMA,.

I have attached the hearing record (74 pages).

OPM finally classified 1102s as professionals as of January 1, 2000.

Two questions for discussion:

1. What is the distinction between professional and other work?

2. What personal characteristics distinguish professionals from other workers?

Free speech is welcome, but PLEASE answer both questions before making other remarks.

Senate Hearing-Federal Procurement Workforce.pdf

Are you asking if it's professional in theory or in practice?

1. Mastering of certain skills obtained through education, training and experience. For many professions, a license distinguishes

2. Objectivity, integrity, desire for continual learning and self improvement, delivering highest quality level of service, and practices accountability.

2 hours ago, Don Mansfield said:

Are you asking if it's professional in theory or in practice?

I'm asking the following two questions:

3 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

Two questions for discussion:

1. What is the distinction between professional and other work?

2. What personal characteristics distinguish professionals from other workers?

The ultimate answer to the title question depends on the answers to those.

1. A profession has professional standards and responsibilities such as specialized training on a complex topic (not necessarily education), ethical standards and codes of conduct including accountability, and continuous learning requirements (formal or informal). Of course entities like OPM and NCMA have their own definitions, but in my mind, the more rigorous standards you require, the more it starts to look like a profession.

2. The interest and ability to adhere to the above. Professionals hold themselves and others accountable to the standards, they demonstrate critical thinking and sound judgement in regulated/complex/vague/ambiguous situations, they share their knowledge to improve and advance the profession. Most importantly, professionals study (broad and deep).

7 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

What is the distinction between professional and other work?

Professional work requires advanced specialized knowledge of a subject with that knowledge acquired through education above the level of high school with education/experience continuing in the particular field.  Other work does not.  Professional work is nonroutine work that is intellectual in character where other work is routine mental effort.  Professional work applies the intellectual knowledge to grasp, analyze, and communicate complex and abstract ideas.  Other work does not. Professional work requires high ethical standards and integrity and might be supported by a certification or license.  Other work does not yet might be supported by some type of certification or license such as skilled labor.

4 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

What personal characteristics distinguish professionals from other workers?

Personal characteristics of a professional are reliability, organization, empathy and emotional stability.  Accountability for actions, ability to change, positive attitude and a strong adherence to ethical work are also characteristics of professional workers. Other workers may demonstrate some of these characteristics but at lower levels.

@C Culham Ah... AI entries, or AI inspired. Well, if we're going to do that, here's another:

A professional is characterized by high levels of competence, integrity, and accountability, consistently delivering quality work while maintaining ethical standards. Key traits include effective communication, emotional intelligence, reliability, and respect for others. They demonstrate adaptability, a strong work ethic, and a commitment to continuous learning and professional development.

I like this one better.

16 minutes ago, Vern Edwards said:

Ah... AI entries, or AI inspired. Well, if we're going to do that, here's another:

No sir. My inspriation!

Here are some but not all of the references I had encountered in the past when going back quite honestly to the history you posted about professionalization of a GS series to stuff I encounter through to today. Such as the what is the basis behind professional General Schedule classification standard. Various editorials by folks like Indeed. An orgainzation www.psychologicalscience.org And the US Department of Labor as demonstrated by this https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/17d-overtime-professional NCMA Standards and Practices. All references that in my casual but continued experience over fovever as a professional that I encountered that addressed a professional worker. I will say as I reached back I did encounter the typical AI responses but I did not stop there but went on to find what I thought I had encountered and read before. My inspiration that found the references.

On 3/3/2026 at 7:29 AM, Vern Edwards said:

Two questions for discussion:

1. What is the distinction between professional and other work?

2. What personal characteristics distinguish professionals from other workers?

I asked those two questions because I believe that the RFO and other regulatory reforms will not accomplish much. I think the workforce is at the heart of its problems.

I have attached an article published by two distinguished members of the faculty of The George Washington University Law School, Jessica Tillipman and Steven Schooner, "FEATURE COMMENT: Institutional Amnesia And The Neglect Of The Federal Acquisition Workforce." Attached. I suspect that most of you have not read it.

Here is a tantalizing quote:

The most capable acquisition professionals exercise discretion and work within the rules to deliver innovative and value-driven outcomes. By contrast, the least experienced tend to merely follow the rules, often defaulting to rigid compliance at the expense of critical thinking and mission effectiveness. The consequence is a widening gap between lofty policymaking goals and the day-today reality of federal acquisition, resulting in a system with increasingly complex rules yet lacking the personnel and expertise necessary to implement them. As Steven Kelman noted decades ago, it would “certainly not hurt … to accompany the grant of increased discretion with efforts to raise the quality of the federal workforce.

Neglect of the workforce? Yes. Especially by the workforce itself.

Now to my questions.

Professional work requires devotion. There are no regular hours or days off. The difference between professionals and other workers is that professionals merge life and work. They are devoted.

A job title does not make one a professional. One is a professional, or not, depending on how one lives and thinks. That does not mean that one must neglect family, forsake other interests and activities, and shun entertainment. (Watch "The Pitt"! Professionals at work!) It means that you are fascinated by what you do and are devoted to it.

If you are a contracting officer in an agency or office devoted to the use of space technology to achieve mission objectives and you haven't read a book about space technology, then you are not, in my opinion, a professional space technology contracting officer. You might be good at processing procurement paperwork, but you are not a professional space technology contracting officer.

If you are a contracting officer busily involved in source selections but you haven't read a book about decision analysis, you might be good at assembling files, but you are not a professional source selection contracting officer.

How can you critique requiring activitys' statements of work if you have not taught yourself to write one and made yourself proficient at doing it?

Don't count on DAU or FAI to provide you with professional training. Don't think you are a professional because you attend NCMA conferences. Don't think you are a professional because you call yourself one.

You are a professional, or not, depending on how you live your work and prepare yourself to live it.

I know that some will be angry with me for saying these things, like one member of the "I Hate Vern" club at reddit 1102.

🤗

But either blame yourself if 1102 work is not what you'd like it to be or work to make it better.

FEATURE COMMENT_ Institutional Amnesia And The Neglect Of The Fed (1).pdf

Absolutely excellent message, Vern. These questions you raised should be something every contracting person needs to ask themselves and honestly answer. Where those answers show shortcomings, they either should decide to take steps to self improve or consider another job.

This got me thinking about IQ versus Emotional Intelligence,@Vern Edwards, and reminded me that there is another way to learn: to achieve a state of flow. “Flow” is achieved when the mind is optimistic, focused, and unstressed while being pushed to just the apex of its abilities. That apex then goes a little higher the next day. Scaling this up to an office where flow is an everyday occurrence would equate to, and could even outdo (through higher grit), those offices with a high median IQ.

If only our workflows and ops tempos could always be structured this way, you would get your wish of workforce improvement. At least you would in a dumbo like me.

Just now, WifWaf said:

If only our workflows and ops tempos could always be structured this way, you would get your wish of workforce improvement.

We're talking about government procurement.

Sometimes, events impose workflows and ops tempos on us by outside events like, say, pandemics, natural disasters, and wars, in which case contracting officers must act in the real world, not some ideal world. Think of the people working now to procure resupply of the weapons being used by the Department of Defense (War) in our war with Iran.

Emotional intelligence is the ability to deal with the real. You gotta come prepared to deal with the work that arrives at your desk, when it arrives and under the circumstances in which it arrives, and with the speed which it requires. That's part of professionalism.

Workforce improvement would develop professionals capable of dealing with the real, as well as the ideal.

1. A profession is different from a non-professional occupation as the professional occupation has developed as set of formal qualifications based upon education; generally has some form of an apprenticeship; has an examination of an individual's skills and knowledge as they progress in their development, and has one or more regulatory bodies with powers to admit and discipline members. While non-professional occupations may have some of these characteristics, they generally do not have all of them.

2. Generally, a person in a professional occupation has a high degree of developed skills with deep knowledge of the domain or specifics within the domain; abides by a moral code of ethics and/or conduct; and in general has autonomy in their decision making and the application of their trade/skills in the day to day course of operation.

   Applying these questions to the 1102, I often think of some of Vern's posts from many years ago how in many offices the 1102 has become a clerk, more focused on the process of contracting rather than the application of art of contracting. In today's federal government, it seems like there are many 1102s that would be better coded as 1105 procurement techs as they are experts in the process of preparing contract document and files, but often flounder when left to their own to think about the "why" they are doing what they are doing. I am also reminded of a gift that I received from an "old salt" contracting officer that I studied under when I got my first SAP warrant. He gave me a framed document that he attributed to Vern Edwards, someone that he spoke very highly of. That document is titled "The Attributes of a Successful Contracting Officer." Having worked in several different offices, I can see a clear distinction between those Contracting Officers that display the 12 attributes described in this document which to me are the professional 1102s vs the 1102s in the offices that are really better classified as 1105s but have been converted to 1102s as the 1105 series has been phased out.

I’ll add another indicator of 1102 professionalism is when the program office you support (client, customer, requisitioned, or whatever) views you as valuable and perhaps essential.

I gave thought to the issue of how does an office increase the degree of professionalism. One is make that part of personnel recruitment. Don’t select a candidate unless you see a strong sense of potential. Another is use that as factors in employee performance appraisals and individual development plans (IDP). Recognize and reward examples of successful demonstration of professionalism and widely publicize it as model behavior. This sends the message that if you want to get head, model this behavior.

The 1102 series is by definition a professional series. 

What I believe is not true is that someone that occupies an 1102 position possess the characteristics of a professional but I would offer that by personal experience many do.

I am confused by the discussion in this thread as it is true that not all 1102 contract specialists (1102) are Contracting Officers (CO).  Yet the words CO are being used interchangeably when discussing what professional work is.  This is where the confusion is as I believe there are salient differences between the two titles beyond the fact of legal authority that is vested in a CO.   In the medical field an intern, resident and attending physician are all professionals yet level of responsibility and autonomy are the difference are they not?  So why can it not be the same with regard to 1102 to 1102 and then to CO?  And if the same does not it change perspective of devotion as well yet this statement

On 3/5/2026 at 7:36 AM, Vern Edwards said:

You are a professional, or not, depending on how you live your work and prepare yourself to live it.

still rings true?

20 minutes ago, C Culham said:

The 1102 series is by definition a professional series. 

That is meaningless in the context of my two questions. Just because you have a job that is considered professional for payment purposes does not mean that you are, in fact, professional in the way you work.

21 minutes ago, C Culham said:

I am confused by the discussion in this thread as it is true that not all 1102 contract specialists (1102) are Contracting Officers (CO).  Yet the words CO are being used interchangeably when discussing what professional work is. 

I'm sorry that you are confused. It's regrettable. I focus on COs because they are the apex of 1102-dom.

The statement I made that you quote is still my view. I think my meaning was clear in context. In any case, I don't intend to explain it further. You either get it or you don't.

Do you have any further response to the two questions?

1. What is the distinction between professional and other work?

2. What personal characteristics distinguish professionals from other workers?

You have already addressed them. Do you have anything more to say?

Or do you want to challenge or otherwise comment on any of the assertions I made in my Thursday at 07:36 AM post, or anyone else's assertions?

As a consultant, one thing I and the company I worked for did was conduct assessments of government procurement offices. We performed these at the requests of various government agencies. The requests generally came from very senior officials who were concerned about quality and responsiveness of the contracting functions and wanted negative issues identified.

What we found across the government was a wide range of capabilities of 1102 personnel with some I would categorize as professional and too many as described in this quote from the Tillipman and Schooner article as the least experienced.

The most capable acquisition professionals exercise discretion and work within the rules to deliver innovative and value-driven outcomes. By contrast, the least experienced tend to merely follow the rules, often defaulting to rigid compliance at the expense of critical thinking and mission effectiveness.

I’ll share two examples of what I view as professional. Back with Bill Clinton was president, he promoted a “Welfare to Work” initiative. A contract specialist/contracting officer decided on her own to incorporate the initiative into the source selection process for an upcoming competition. She briefed agency management of her plans and proceeded. An offerors planned commitment to hiring welfare recipients into contract performance was evaluated in their proposals along with other aspects. What she did as a professional was recognize a government objective and crafted a unique selection plan to help achieve it. Once award was made and word got out she was quickly recognized for her accomplishment. She and I were invited to the White House for a meeting with Al Gore.

Another example is a contract chief of the IT branch. Over time his positive contributions and successful support of various CIO actions by devising strategies tailed to needed CIO outcomes. He quickly became respected and valued by the CIO office staff and was a key participant in all planning. One day he informed me that the CIO asked him to attend his regular staff meetings. It was because the CIO respected his critical thinking, judgement, and insights on all matters and not just contracting.

Unfortunately there are too many conditioned to merely process assigned actions by following laid out steps, copying and pasting from other actions, and avoiding independent thinking and analysis. These are the non-professional.

On 3/7/2026 at 11:28 AM, formerfed said:

What we found across the government was a wide range of capabilities of 1102 personnel with some I would categorize as professional and too many as described in this quote from the Tillipman and Schooner article as the least experienced.

“The most capable acquisition professionals exercise discretion and work within the rules to deliver innovative and value-driven outcomes. By contrast, the least experienced tend to merely follow the rules, often defaulting to rigid compliance at the expense of critical thinking and mission effectiveness.”

While I agree that “[t]he most capable acquisition professionals exercise discretion and work within the rules to deliver innovative and value-driven outcomes,” I disagree that the least experienced merely follow the rules.

First, capability and experience are different. You can have one and not the other - they aren’t two exclusive groups. But more importantly, the least experienced don’t tend to follow the rules. At least not the official rules under law (statutory and case), Executive Orders, regulations, and policies. Instead, the second group follows their instincts and what they’re told or shown. In other words, many—if not most—operate off of rumor, innuendo, and myth-information. This is the problem. Has been and will continue to be until we improve training standards.

1 hour ago, Jamaal Valentine said:

Instead, the second group follows their instincts and what they’re told or shown. In other words, many—if not most—operate off of rumor, innuendo, and myth-information. This is the problem. Has been and will continue to be until we improve training standards.

I view the second group a little differently. There are so many offices in the government that operate in this similar way for a large share of their 1102 staff. That is put the onus on program offices to complete a “ready requisition.” That includes preparing a statement of work, evaluation factors, draft acquisition plan, necessary agency approvals, and so on. The assigned contract specialist then includes the SOW into a contract writing system to generate the solicitation. They often push for a low price technically acceptable (LPTA) approach or if a tradeoff seems best, ensure they don’t have to do much challenging work by including a RFP statement that discussions aren’t contemplated. Then they write up everything with the program office help for review and approval. Very little thinking and minimal accountability.

I don’t see this as work from a professional.

While we're still talking about professionalism, read the bid protest decision of the Court of Federal Claims in the matter of Kropp Holdings, Inc., May 28, 2025, attached. The judge opens his decision with the following:

Whoever came up with the idiom “can’t win for losing” obviously did not have the protestor, Kropp Holdings, Inc. (“KHI”), in mind, but they certainly could have. KHI has made several trips to the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) to protest the award of the contract at issue here to Defendant-Intervenor Associated Energy Group, LLC (“AEG”) and has now brought the instant protest in this Court. During this time, KHI has discovered that AEG submitted a proposal that was ten pages beyond the page limits set forth in the solicitation. Yet, the agency awarded AEG the contract despite AEG’s exceeding of the page limits. So KHI protested this violation to GAO. What did the agency do? The agency took corrective action and extended the page limits by ten pages and re-awarded the contract to AEG. So KHI again protested to GAO because the corrective action did not address the fact that the agency had conducted discussions with AEG based on the proposal with the extra pages without reopening discussions with KHI. Next, the agency realized that AEG submitted a non-compliant proposal because AEG failed to include a required “no cost” certification. What did the agency do? The agency unlawfully conducted discussions with AEG only, which permitted AEG to correct its disqualifying mistake and allowed the agency to award the contract to AEG once again. Finally, once it received the complete administrative record in this Court, four years after the deadline for initial proposal submission, KHI discovered that AEG had submitted its proposal after the deadline for proposal submission. What is more, evidence in the record indicates that the agency was aware that AEG’s proposal did not come in on time. What did the agency do? It did not apply the “late is late” rule. Rather, the agency awarded AEG the contract despite its late submission. In other words, despite all these disqualifiers and other procurement errors that will be discussed below, AEG was awarded the contract at issue here. And KHI could not win for losing.

The Court held for the protester and ordered as follows:

Accordingly, as discussed in detail below, KHI’s motion for judgment on the administrative record (“MJAR”) is granted, the cross-motions filed by the government and AEG are denied, the award of the contract to AEG is held unlawful and set aside, and KHI is granted injunctive relief.

Kropp Holdings, LLC.pdf

The Court just denied a request for reconsideration. See Kropp Holdings, Inc., March 5, 2026. Also attached.

Kropp.pdf

Two questions:

1. Ultimately, who is paying the price for all this madness?

2. Who is to blame?

Two questions:

1. Ultimately, who is paying the price for all this madness?

2. Who is to blame?

1. We, as the acquisition community and everyone as taxpayers. For those arguing the protest process isn’t needed and is a burden, this is evidence of the value. Instances like this often results in more higher level oversight and controls. Instead of thoughts about empowerment of contracting officers, we end up with more bureaucracy and delay. Then there is the impact of costs although all of it may not be immediately measurable. The protestor likely incurred significant legal fees. The government incurred substantial administrative time and expenses especially with their own legal support but we all end up paying later. Maybe not directly but the case likely sends a subtle message to industry on the drawbacks and reasons to avoid government contracting and reduces future competition.

2. Obvious blame rests with the contract specialist, contracting officer, and contract office management. For starters, the RFP had 16 amendments. Most times, any more than a few amendments shows sloppy planing and execution. I blame contract office management for assigning the action to what appears as a contract specialist not capable of performing satisfactorily. After the first miscue or so, the action should have been reassigned or had guidance provided by a senior person. Then remedial steps after each GAO decision were improper. This shows legal representation wasn’t involved or ignored and management didn’t look responses over carefully.

I would put the blame higher up. This is a major malfunction.

The agency issued the solicitation for this procurement on June 22, 2021, as a commercial item acquisition. And it's still not over. Is the next stop the Federal Circuit?

And this is not the only such case. I have another by a civilian agency.

55 minutes ago, formerfed said:

This shows legal representation wasn’t involved or ignored.

Misplaced faith. I doubt it.

23 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

While we're still talking about professionalism, read the bid protest decision of the Court of Federal Claims in the matter of Kropp Holdings, Inc., May 28, 2025, attached. The judge opens his decision with the following:

The Court held for the protester and ordered as follows:

Kropp Holdings, LLC.pdf

The Court just denied a request for reconsideration. See Kropp Holdings, Inc., March 5, 2026. Also attached.

Kropp.pdf

Two questions:

1. Ultimately, who is paying the price for all this madness?

2. Who is to blame?

This is wild. If I were the KO, I would be extremely embarrassed.

1 hour ago, OverThinking said:

This is wild. If I were the KO, I would be extremely embarrassed.

Me, too.

But...

The reality is that COs are not as fully "in charge" as we may like to think they are. What we read in Kropp Holdings is a description of an organizational failure at every level.

I'll provide another such example in the coming dayes. An even bigger organizational failure.

My point is this: While almost any regulatory reform is welcome, it will not fix what is wrong with acquisition today. Only (1) professional knowledge and (2) professional practice can do that.

And I believe that the only way to get those are through personal commitment to the thoughtful application of professional knowledge, which is the product of personal effort and struggle.

That's my whole point. You're not a professional just because you show up for work. Friday does not put an end to your struggle to learn and to know.

There is a book entitled, A B C of Reading (1934) by the late Ezra Pound (a controversial person). In it he wrote:

Real education must be limited to [persons] who INSIST on knowing, the rest is mere sheep-herding.