By Steve Kelman

Blog archive

The Lectern: Bid protest anxiety

I'm hearing that contracting folks in government are anxious about the beginning of the new congressionally mandated authorization of bid protests against source-selection decisions for task orders under multiple-award task order contracts. As I wrote when Congress was considering this legislation, it is hard to imagine a lower priority use for scarce and overtaxed government contracting staff members than to prepare to defend more bid protest lawsuits. One maybe can hope that a new administration in January will seek to eliminate this provision.


There is also concern inside the government, in the wake of the Air Force's tanker decision, about the Government Accountability Office establishing standards of source-selection perfection in bid protests -- a sort of Six Sigma Source Selection -- as the old General Services Board of Contract Appeals did before it was eliminated as one of the great achievements of Clinton-era procurement reform. At a strategic level, obsessing with source selection and concentrating resources on source-selection perfection is a huge error. The other two stages of the procurement process -- market research, requirements development, and acquisition strategy at the beginning, contract management at the end -- are far higher priorities for improving procurement than wallowing in the intricacies of selecting a contractor.


The emerging bid protest climate is yet another sign of the dysfunctional environment appearing in our procurement system. This is a moment for industry statesmanship, if firms really take seriously the words about partnership that industry often pronounces. There was a period when respectable companies did not do bid protests, certainly at least not regularly or routinely, and, indeed, either never or only under the most extreme provocation. To use a great German phrase, bid protests were not "salonfaehig" -- literally not "fit for a salon," i.e. not something decent people did.


We need some industry statesmanship to bring that period back, not as a matter of law but as a matter of a decent respect for one's customer.


What do you think? Post a comment on this blog (registration required) or send an e-mail to letters@fcw.com (subject: The Lectern) and we will post it for you.

Posted by Steve Kelman on Jul 17, 2008 at 12:10 PM


Featured

  • Cybersecurity

    DHS floats 'collective defense' model for cybersecurity

    Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wants her department to have a more direct role in defending the private sector and critical infrastructure entities from cyberthreats.

  • Defense
    Defense Secretary James Mattis testifies at an April 12 hearing of the House Armed Services Committee.

    Mattis: Cloud deal not tailored for Amazon

    On Capitol Hill, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis sought to quell "rumors" that the Pentagon's planned single-award cloud acquisition was designed with Amazon Web Services in mind.

  • Census
    shutterstock image

    2020 Census to include citizenship question

    The Department of Commerce is breaking with recent practice and restoring a question about respondent citizenship last used in 1950, despite being urged not to by former Census directors and outside experts.

Stay Connected

FCW Update

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.