Acquisition

Congress pushes DOD on IT acquisition agility

Shutterstock image (by alienant): An aerial view of the pentagon rendered as a vector. 

Members of Congress and panelists alike hinted to a certain sense of deja vu at an April 26 hearing on creating a flexible and effective information technology management and acquisition system in the Department of Defense.

"For years, Congress, the executive branch and industry have attempted to bring DOD's IT programs and processes into the 21st Century," said Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.) at the House Armed Services Committee Emerging Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee hearing.

"Despite attempts like the Joint Information Environment and streamlining of acquisition processes, DOD's pace to improve its IT posture is not progressing with the desired speed to achieve serious efficiencies, increase security, and take advantage of enhanced capabilities that are readily available," he said.

Recently retired DOD CIO Terry Halvorsen stressed the need for the Pentagon to buy commercial off the shelf IT systems and services in all cases unless a compelling argument is made otherwise.

He and Levine argued that DOD often spends more on customizing commercial products than it did on the original purchase, and that DOD needs to change its culture to accept commercial products.

Halvorsen, who now works for Samsung, said that also means the Pentagon needs to stop doing its own security testing of commercially proven products.

"The security accreditation process is costing both the government and industry lots of money and doing a disservice to … our service members for how long it takes to get those products certified," he said. He added that Congress should pass legislation allowing the DOD to accept industry accreditation.

Halvorsen also said Congress needs to look at giving the DOD CIO more flexibility to make small purchases to test technology without having to go through a lengthy approval process.

"I had a $37 billion budget," he said. "Yet I couldn't authorize a million dollars if I saw great technology to put right on the table. That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me."

Giving the CIO more flexibility to watch industry trends and make small, targeted purchases would drive rapid acquisition, he said.

Witnesses also acknowledged that while there has been progress in recent years, both through legislative changes and internal reforms at DOD, the Pentagon still has not implemented a 2009 Defense Science Board recommendation to create a distinct IT acquisition system.

"DOD tries to ensure that change management and business process reengineering take place concurrently with new business systems acquisitions, but it has not been easy," said Peter Levine, former DOD deputy chief management officer.

He said that acquisition officials often lack authority and expertise in business process reengineering, and management officials have "proven to be incapable of running large acquisitions."

Though, he added that the DOD recently issued new guidance on business system acquisition, which he said was a first step towards a stand alone IT acquisition system.

"This new instruction appropriately sequences for the first time decision points regarding business solutions, IT solutions, and acquisition solutions, so that we don't have these redundant processes going on side by side," Levine said.

Panelists argued that another barrier to agile acquisition is the focus on acquisition process compliance rather that prioritizing product outcome and the effectiveness of the financial spend.

When asked how the Trump administration's buy American policy would affect IT acquisition, panelists warned that such restrictions could be harmful for the DOD.

The focus should be on excluding purchases from high-risk countries, they said.

"There are some U.S. companies I wouldn't want to buy from, because when you look at their components, they're all from countries I don't want," said Halvorsen.

He said CIOs for allied nations have the authority not to purchase from domestic companies when there are supply chain concerns, and they can turn to companies from other allied nations.

"We ought to have that kind of flexibility to make those decisions when it's in the best interest of defense," Halvorsen said.

About the Author

Sean Carberry is an FCW staff writer covering defense, cybersecurity and intelligence. Prior to joining FCW, he was Kabul Correspondent for NPR, and also served as an international producer for NPR covering the war in Libya and the Arab Spring. He has reported from more than two-dozen countries including Iraq, Yemen, DRC, and South Sudan. In addition to numerous public radio programs, he has reported for Reuters, PBS NewsHour, The Diplomat, and The Atlantic.

Carberry earned a Master of Public Administration from the Harvard Kennedy School, and has a B.A. in Urban Studies from Lehigh University.


The Fed 100

Read the profiles of all this year's winners.

Featured

Reader comments

Fri, May 5, 2017 Wayne Oronzio PA

The problem as I see it from the inside is that modern business processes are inconsistent with the way the DoD business enterprise has been doing things for generations. This unacceptable and is one of the greatest reasons that only the inbred can understand how the DoD operates.

Thu, Apr 27, 2017

Ditto for the DOJ, their process is just as slow to get items "tested and approved". Even a new version of previously approved software takes years to get approved.

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