I’m interested in getting some honest feedback from any Wifconers who have taken the subject course. 

Did you consider it to be valuable learning experience?

Are there any similar source selection courses you would recommend instead? 

Any caveats that might limit its usefulness for some individuals?
 

 

I cannot speak to the course directly, but I might address your third question...

A source selection class would only address acquisitions under FAR subpart 15.3 -- but most acquisitions are not under FAR subpart 15.3 -- many acquisition persons err in using a FAR subpart 15.3 mindset for every acquisition, and do not realize their error.  This error is one of the major problems of our career field.

Even where an acquisition properly is under FAR subpart 15.3, many acquisition persons err in thinking they must all be done the same way; viz., the way that person learned when he or she went to training.  I hope the instructors in your course will help you understand the tremendous flexibility that is possible under FAR subpart 15.3.

 

@FrankJon,

I used to teach the course. It's not really a "how-to-do" source selection course. It's more of a "how-to-think-about" source selection course. We would go in to depth on the concepts underlying source selection that other source selection courses gloss over if they cover them at all. For example, other courses may tell you that you should evaluate x, y, and z in a source selection and use the rating tables stated in this or that instruction. In Source Selection Bootcamp, we'd start with "what is value?", "what is evaluation?", "what is an evaluation factor?", "How do you measure an evaluation factor?", "What is rating?", "What is competition?", etc. There are also a lot of examples of what not to do in a source selection.

It's for people who like to think about what they're doing. The feedback I would get was mostly positive, along the lines of "I never thought about source selection this way." Some students would leave frustrated because we didn't teach them how to do a source selection or provide examples they could copy and paste from. Not sure if they understood that was on purpose.

Well said ji20874.  

FAR 15 has a great deal of flexibility which most training, agency procedures, and legal advisors overlook.  If I took a training course, I would immediately start looking afterwards at other sources like the PIL successes and the Periodic Table of Acquisition Innovations.  Also concentrate on streamlined procedures of GSA Schedules and ordering under multiple award IDIQ contracts.  Finally examine placing orders under FAR 13. 
 

Edit:  Didn’t see Don’s post while I was responding.  Completely agree with him as well.

On 10/29/2020 at 11:49 AM, FrankJon said:

I’m interested in getting some honest feedback from any Wifconers who have taken the subject course. 

Did you consider it to be valuable learning experience?

Are there any similar source selection courses you would recommend instead? 

Any caveats that might limit its usefulness for some individuals?

It’s invaluable if you really want to understand source selection more deeply and broadly. It’s a gateway to streamlining and innovation that many offices want.

I’m not aware of anything similar. The course content is great, but the instruction and dialogue may be even better. (Vern was the instructor when I took it.)

It’s usefulness may be limited or delayed by organizational norms and traditions that prevent or discourage students from applying what they learn. In my experience, contracting offices can’t be changed from the bottom up. This course should be required for contracting officers, reviewers, policy makers, clearance authorities, etc.

I see three types of procurement people.  Those that see overall objectives and continually find better ways to achieve them; those that are curious and want to try new things but are constrained by either their organizations or self reluctance; and those that are comfortable with the status quo and don’t want change to occur.  

A perfect example of the first are innovators and people looking to try new things - the flood of responses to work at PIL demonstrates that.  This course won’t really help them because they are already thinking and doing things that way.  The second group can benefit but likely won’t help unless a big segment of those organization also attends.  Jamal Valentine pretty much says that in his post.

Thanks all.

On 10/29/2020 at 8:10 PM, ji20874 said:

A source selection class would only address acquisitions under FAR subpart 15.3

Actually the course description says that the material is applicable to all acquisition procedures except FAR Part 14. I was surprised too given Vern's association and his past strict interpretation of the term "source selection."

On 10/29/2020 at 9:18 PM, Don Mansfield said:

It's not really a "how-to-do" source selection course. It's more of a "how-to-think-about" source selection course.

 

On 10/30/2020 at 2:03 AM, Jamaal Valentine said:

It’s invaluable if you really want to understand source selection more deeply and broadly. It’s a gateway to streamlining and innovation that many offices want.

So interesting, Don and Jamaal. My management recently told me a group from our office attended the course a couple years ago and returned disappointed because it was completely focused on the mechanics of writing specific evaluation criteria. Seems like the exact opposite of the theory-based "big thinking" approach you describe. Perhaps that specific class was bad, or perhaps their account has been distorted over the years.

On 10/31/2020 at 5:36 PM, formerfed said:

A perfect example of the first are innovators and people looking to try new things - the flood of responses to work at PIL demonstrates that.  This course won’t really help them because they are already thinking and doing things that way.

I don't necessarily disagree with your 3 categories of contracting people, but the flood of PIL applications is certainly not evidence that the applicants are proven innovators or even qualified!! There are many other more plausible reasons I can give you for why so many people applied to those positions.

5 hours ago, FrankJon said:

I don't necessarily disagree with your 3 categories of contracting people, but the flood of PIL applications is certainly not evidence that the applicants are proven innovators or even qualified!! There are many other more plausible reasons I can give you for why so many people applied to those positions.

I don’t believe PIL applicants need to be proven innovators but people wanting to innovate.  If not they likely won’t make the cut.

Going back to your original question, I believe a thorough understanding of the marketplace is essential and often overlooked in source selections.  So market research training is important.  That means learning who are the leading providers and what makes them that way.  You need to analyze what’s important to your acquisition success and what attributes of an offeror contributes to the success.  That could be work processes, methodologies, and demonstrated competencies and evidence.  It’s difficult to craft a source selection approach if you don’t know what to look for as the best

On 11/10/2020 at 2:16 PM, FrankJon said:

Actually the course description says that the material is applicable to all acquisition procedures except FAR Part 14. I was surprised too given Vern's association and his past strict interpretation of the term "source selection."

The concepts and principles have application in any evaluation that includes price and other factors.

On 11/10/2020 at 2:16 PM, FrankJon said:

So interesting, Don and Jamaal. My management recently told me a group from our office attended the course a couple years ago and returned disappointed because it was completely focused on the mechanics of writing specific evaluation criteria. Seems like the exact opposite of the theory-based "big thinking" approach you describe. Perhaps that specific class was bad, or perhaps their account has been distorted over the years.

Me commentary is based on my Oct 2020 attendance.

On 10/29/2020 at 9:18 PM, Don Mansfield said:

@FrankJon,

 Some students would leave frustrated because we didn't teach them how to do a source selection or provide examples they could copy and paste from. Not sure if they understood that was on purpose.

I had my whole organization take the class in October 2019. The most common piece of feedback is what Don typed above. I was disappointed that those folks missed the point, to say the least. I'd guess that less than 50% of the 1102 community actually wants to do more than cut and paste. (And sometimes cutting and pasting is fine; but it is never very interesting or intellectually engaging.)

I thought the class was good to very good. Our instructor could have done a better job making it more of a conversation--there were long periods where he just read the material to us.  That said, I enjoyed it and thought the focus on "how to think about source selection" was insightful.

On 12/28/2020 at 1:41 PM, KeithB18 said:

I'd guess that less than 50% of the 1102 community actually wants to do more than cut and paste. (And sometimes cutting and pasting is fine; but it is never very interesting or intellectually engaging.)

Cutting and pasting can make someone productive, but it does not lead to being knowledgeable as to why they do it. 

Everyone wants examples. Many want them for cutting and pasting, because cutting and pasting is easier than thinking things through.

Cutting and pasting instead of thinking is one of the reasons source selection is the mess it is today.

Cutting and pasting is the antithesis of thinking. If you don't want to think, don't take the Source Selection Bootcamp®.

There’s really little excuse for cutting and pasting for source selections in my opinion.  Productivity is a poor excuse.  When a requirement reaches a contract office until a solicitation goes out, months elapse.  So the contract specialist/co has lots of time.  It’s a shame we have people earning GS-13 pay and can’t do a proper source selection plan geared towards specific acquisition requirements.

On 10/29/2020 at 5:10 PM, ji20874 said:

A source selection class would only address acquisitions under FAR subpart 15.3

 

On 11/10/2020 at 2:16 PM, FrankJon said:

Actually the course description says that the material is applicable to all acquisition procedures except FAR Part 14. I was surprised too given Vern's association and his past strict interpretation of the term "source selection."

Since this thread exists and mentions me, a comment about those comments and The Source Selection Bootcamp®. I post only to clarify some misconceptions.

FAR does not define "source selection" and term is used in contexts other than FAR Part 15. See, for example, the definition of source selection information in FAR 2.101, which reads in part as follows:

Quote

Source selection information means any of the following information that is prepared for use by an agency for the purpose

of evaluating a bid or proposal to enter into an agency procurement contract, if that information has not been previously made

available to the public or disclosed publicly:

(1) Bid prices submitted in response to an agency invitation for bids, or lists of those bid prices before bid opening.

(2) Proposed costs or prices submitted in response to an agency solicitation, or lists of those proposed costs or prices...

Boldface added.

See also FAR 36.601-3(b):

Quote

(b) Sources for contracts for architect-engineer services shall be selected in accordance with the procedures in this subpart

rather than the solicitation or source selection procedures prescribed in parts 13, 14, and 15 of this regulation.

Emphasis added.

By statute, the competitive process described in FAR Part 15 is "competitive proposals." See 10 USC 2305(a)(2) and 41 USC 3301(b)(2). See also FAR 6.102(b) and 6.401(b). The FAR Part 15 process is also described as "competitive negotiation."

It is true that FAR Subpart 15.3 is entitled "source selection" and that in common parlance "source selection" refers to the process addressed by that subpart, but it is not true that a source selection class "would" address only FAR Subpart 15.3. Broadly defined, the term "source selection" encompasses the contractor selection and contract formation processes prescribed by FAR 8.4, 13, 14, 15, 16.5, 35.016, 36.3, and 36.6, and a "source selection" class could address any process by which the government chooses a "source," i.e., a contractor.

In short, a source selection class would presumably address whatever the person conducting the class wants to teach about contractor selection and contract formation.

It is true that agencies use FAR Part 15 procedures when not required to do so. The Source Selection Bootcamp® discourages such practices. But the fact is that people do it, and when they do the GAO will look to FAR Part 15 for guidance when deciding a protest. See Innovative Quality Solutions, LLC, GAO B-419009.2, Dec. 17, 2020. So the course teaches the concepts, principles, and rules of FAR Part 15, as applied, to anyone who wants to understand them, no matter what kinds of acquisitions they conduct.

The course does not teach detailed procedures, although it makes recommendations, because agencies and offices within agencies use a wide variety of detailed procedures, and what is "right" for some is "wrong" for others. The course teaches ideas, such as what kind of thing an evaluation factor is and about factor measurement and value functions, ideas you would learn in a class or from a book about multiple attribute decision making, which is what the source selection tradeoff process referred to in Part 15 is really about. The course also teaches ideas such as that contrary to FAR usage of common parlance, the government does not evaluate "proposals," it evaluates offerors and their offers based on information in proposals and available  elsewhere. It teaches people how to read, interpret, and apply Part 15.

What The Source Selection Bootcamp® tries to do is disperse the cloud of unknowing that inhibits simplification.