Letter: T&M contracts not necessarily risky
A reader writes to say that time-and-materials contracts are unpopular because government irresponsibility.
Regarding "DOD toughens checks on risky contract type"
The
choice of titles for this article showed a narrow — one could say
one-sided — perspective that misrepresents the subject to some extent.
Time
and materials contracts are not necessarily inherently risky unless the
entity contracting for the product or service does not understand its
requirement and/or cannot effectively articulate it to the contractor.
This is all too often the case for the government, particularly the
Defense Department. In this case, T&M can be risky for contractors
as well, since there is significant scope and other associated impacts.
In
my opinion, T&M is unpopular today mostly because the government
cannot absolve accountability for its constant changes and poor vision.
If T&M is deemed risky to the government because the contractor
doesn't understand the requirement, this should be evident in proposal
reviews where the requirement is solidly defined, in which case the
risk to government should be minimized already.
Anonymous
What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.