The value of a 'home inspector' for IT acquisitions

Jim Soltys

"True wisdom is knowing what you don't know."

That quote by Confucius makes you wonder if he was on the autopsy committee of one of our bigger IT system failures. Each review seems to zero in on decisions made and money spent when we thought we knew but didn't. In government, the missions are complex, and the systems and atmosphere even more so. Representatives of each specialty involved seem to know what they know, but no one worries about what we don't know.

My wife and I recently went through the stressful process of buying a home, in the course of which we hired a home inspector. The inspector had no conflicts of interest, came with excellent past-performance references and was a subject-matter expert in this field. He found problems that we would never even have thought to look for. Working with our real estate agent to ensure that these items were taken care of before we closed on the house gave us peace of mind and eliminated potential headaches later.

Government buyers of technology products and services are no different. They want to acquire the right solution while avoiding downstream problems. In the acquisition process, the program office identifies its needs, just as we did, and works with the contracting office, just as we did with the realtor, to negotiate contracts with vendors. But where is the home inspector in this scenario?

My wife and I don't have time to be experts in realty contracts or home inspections, so we outsourced those functions. Likewise, program office personnel, including technical experts, are typically busy with the essential functions of executing the agency's mission. More important, most are not skilled in the acquisition of technology. Likewise, contracting officers have enough to do without becoming technology experts as well.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the government to obtain the equivalent of a home inspector to assist with complex technology acquisitions? Done right, outsourcing acquisition "home inspection" functions to an independent set of technology experts could yield the following outcomes:

* Acquisition requirements that are right from the beginning due to the availability of accessible domain and process expertise.

* Less ambiguity and lower proposal costs for vendors because requirements are more likely to be in a language they understand.

* Reduced need to pull everyday employees off their "day jobs," potentially for months, to do an acquisition.

* Faster and more efficient evaluations because SMEs with domain and acquisition expertise can analyze vendor proposals for both technical and "gaming" issues that evaluators, with their more limited experience, might miss.

* Fewer protests, especially successful ones, due to more thorough and consistently documented evaluations.

* Fewer post-award surprises (e.g., change orders or unenforceable terms and conditions) from unrecognized structural flaws in your acquisition.

Government personnel are under tremendous pressure. Can resource-constrained program and contracting offices really be expected to develop the technical expertise to successfully acquire the needed innovations for the increasingly digital government? Is it reasonable to expect the buyer to do the "home inspection," too? If not, is it safe to simply trust the builder?

My home-buying experience tells me that the answer to each of these questions is no, and I believe many if not most government program and contracting offices, and their vendors, would agree. The solution of a small but skilled community of SME service providers is often overlooked because the cause and effects don't show up in obvious and immediate ways.

But listen to Confucius: This problem has been around for a long while.

About the Author

Jim Soltys is an account and project manager at Noblis.

FCW in Print

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


  • Shutterstock image: looking for code.

    How DOD embraced bug bounties -- and how your agency can, too

    Hack the Pentagon proved to Defense Department officials that outside hackers can be assets, not adversaries.

  • Shutterstock image: cyber defense.

    Why PPD-41 is evolutionary, not revolutionary

    Government cybersecurity officials say the presidential policy directive codifies cyber incident response protocols but doesn't radically change what's been in practice in recent years.

  • Anne Rung -- Commerce Department Photo

    Exit interview with Anne Rung

    The government's departing top acquisition official said she leaves behind a solid foundation on which to build more effective and efficient federal IT.

  • Charles Phalen

    Administration appoints first head of NBIB

    The National Background Investigations Bureau announced the appointment of its first director as the agency prepares to take over processing government background checks.

  • Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)

    Senator: Rigid hiring process pushes millennials from federal work

    Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said agencies are missing out on younger workers because of the government's rigidity, particularly its protracted hiring process.

  • FCW @ 30 GPS

    FCW @ 30

    Since 1987, 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.

Reader comments

Tue, May 7, 2013 Lee Farquharson

The problem then becomes on how to select the home inspector and to make sure that home inspector only evaluates the requirements and is not involved in selecting of solutions.

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