Letters

Revisiting Mayflower

As a result of some mix-ups involving vacations, edits and deletions, my column on governmentwide acquisition contracts (GWACs) ["The Mayflower revisited," June 14] was unclear and, more importantly, diluted the message I wanted to convey. Federal Computer Week's editors suggested I expand on my views on this very important issue.

Festering problems with task orders awarded under GWACs have gotten increased attention due to controversies over Iraq contracting and problems shown in an Acquisition Solutions Inc. report on the General Services Administration's Federal Technology Service contracting. As a result, GWACs are under threat in provisions of the Defense Authorization bill.

It would be a shame for the government if GWACs disappeared. As I noted in my original column, GWACs have allowed information technology contracts to be awarded much faster. But that isn't their only advantage. The ease of entering into and breaking relationships with vendors is part of the reason for increased performance pressures on contractors, which have produced a dramatic increase in government customer satisfaction with IT vendors' performance. During the late 1980s, I found that the average satisfaction of government customers with vendor performance on their most recent major contracts was 6.9 on a scale of l to l0. Recent research by two of my Harvard students showed an average satisfaction of 9.4 with vendor performance on GSA IT services orders.

The ease of getting into contracts also promotes modular approaches to systems development, which is good.

In addition, it is good for government that customers have the option of using GWAC contracting officers to award contracts as an alternative to their own contracting shop. Partly, GWACs provide a cost-effective "surge capacity" for organizations with variable contracting needs, so they don't need to staff contracting shops at the higher level required to meet maximum needs. Competition from GWACs is also crucial because it keeps in-house contracting shops oriented toward program customers. Failure to be responsive can cause customers to go elsewhere.

At the same time, the customer orientation that is part of the virtue of GWACs also has been their bane in situations in which program managers want things that are not good from the government's long-term point of view, such as the noncompetitive or out-of-contract-scope orders that have come under scrutiny.

I say the "government's long-term point of view" consciously. We should not demonize program customers. Their choices have generally been due to a view -- typically based on good past performance -- that a particular vendor is very likely to meet their needs well, while the competitive process introduces more uncertainty about whether a good vendor will be selected and reduces the urgency to meet mission needs quickly.

That's why we need an enforcement of basic rules. Competition among contracting shops is good, but there must be constraints on what one is not allowed to do while competing. When I urged a Mayflower Compact in 1997, post-communist experiences in Russia were on my mind. Without rules about what competitors were not allowed to do, the competitive marketplace in post-communist Russia had been characterized by theft and corruption -- phenomena far more unsavory than problems with GWACs.

But these problems did not mean Russia should have returned to communism. They only suggested a need for constraints to establish the boundaries in which competition could occur. That lesson applies to what we should be doing with GWACs today.

Steve Kelman

Editor's note: Find a link to an unedited version of Kelman's June 14 column on the FCW.com Download's Data Call at www.fcw.com/download.

Sizing up coded message options

Your June 21 article "Sizing up coded message options" is useful in describing the value of securing e-mail, but the solutions discussed break many company/organization policies for antivirus, spam and document retention. There are far better solutions than Pretty Good Privacy, Secure Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions and Secure Sockets Layer.

Lyal Collins

FCW in Print

In the latest issue: Looking back on three decades of big stories in federal IT.

Featured

  • FCW @ 30 GPS

    FCW @ 30

    Since 1986, FCW has covered it all -- the major contracts, the disruptive technologies, the picayune scandals and the many, many people who make federal IT function. Here's a look back at six of the most significant stories.

  • Shutterstock image.

    A 'minibus' appropriations package could be in the cards

    A short-term funding bill is expected by Sept. 30 to keep the federal government operating through early December, but after that the options get more complicated.

  • Defense Secretary Ash Carter speaks at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in San Francisco

    DOD launches new tech hub in Austin

    The DOD is opening a new Defense Innovation Unit Experimental office in Austin, Texas, while Congress debates legislation that could defund DIUx.

  • Shutterstock image.

    Merged IT modernization bill punts on funding

    A House panel approved a new IT modernization bill that appears poised to pass, but key funding questions are left for appropriators.

  • General Frost

    Army wants cyber capability everywhere

    The Army's cyber director said cyber, electronic warfare and information operations must be integrated into warfighters' doctrine and training.

  • Rising Star 2013

    Meet the 2016 Rising Stars

    FCW honors 30 early-career leaders in federal IT.

Reader comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group