22

Implementing Acquisition Policy Reform in the Face of the Acquisition Workforce Deficit

Breakout Session #710

Christopher J. ZemberDeputy Director, DoD Information Analysis Centers

July 21, 2010

10:00 – 11:15

3

Agenda

• Background

• 3 Interdependent Components– Acquisition Policy Reform– Acquisition Workforce Development

• Government• Industry

– Program Execution

• Path Forward

4

Background

• My background: an outside perspective– Strategy, BPR, PgM, information sharing

(Intel Community)– Intro to NCMA at 2009 WC

• This session– Overview– Why this topic?

• Chasing the pendulum• Operational imperatives

5

Three Interdependent Components

• Acquisition Policy Reform

• Acquisition Workforce Development

• Program Execution

6

Acquisition Policy Reform

7

Impact of Recent Changes on Interdependent Components

• January/February 2009: three pro-labor Executive Orders affecting federal procurement processes– IMPACT: deploy procurement resources to achieve policy

objectives (vice focus on workforce capabilities to meet operational mission requirements)

• March 2009: memo on Government Contracting– IMPACT (reduce outsourcing): affects skill mix, cost, and

workload across the board– IMPACT (minimize cost-reimbursement contracting): new

skills required for contracting and program personnel (requirements generation)

– IMPACT (increase competition): affects processes, timelines, workload, required skills, and cost

8

Impact of Recent Changes on Interdependent Components

• July 2009: memos on implementing March guidance– Added guidance on managing contractor performance data

• IMPACT: required skills, contractor behavior, cost

• October 2009: EO on green procurement– IMPACT: required skills, timelines, acq strategy, cost

• November 2009: EO on improper payments– IMPACT: required skills, processes, cost

• April 2010: inherently governmental defined– IMPACT: workload distribution, skills, timelines

• BOTTOM LINE: policy changes have intentional and unanticipated consequences for both acquisition workforce and program execution

9

Acquisition Workforce Development

10

Statistics and Trends We All Know by Heart

• 1980s: over 460,000 government acquisition professionals• Primary focus: MDAPs

• 2000s: reduced to 230,000 government (126,000 DoD) acquisition professionals• Shifting focus: from

MDAPs to IT and services • 2015: projected increase to

147,000 DoD acquisition professionals • Primary focus: IT and

services contracting

11

Acquisition WorkforceThe Government Side

The government acquisition workforce is “overworked, under-trained, and underappreciated.” Karen Manos, in Schooner & Berteau, Emerging Policy and Practice Issues (2009)

• Existing legislation supports the development of the federal acquisition workforce– DAWIA, Special Projects Acquisition Team (FY2003 Authorization

Act), Workforce Development Fund (FY2008 Authorization Act), Career Path (FY2009 Authorization Act, DAR Report), Human Capital Plans

– DAU’s Rapid Deployment Training, agency-specific internship and mentoring programs

• Recommendations and proposed legislation further seeks to bolster the workforce– DAR Report, IMPROVE Act, House Bills (Acquisition Workforce

Improvement Act & FAI Improvement Act)

12

Acquisition WorkforceContractor Support

“Without contractors, our military simply cannot project its technical superiority abroad.” - Steve Schooner, Federal Contracting and Acquisition: Progress, Challenges, and the Road Ahead

• Tracking new and proposed rules– Numerous sources (White House, DoD, Congress, FAR/DFARS,

case law, GAO, agency guidance)

– Opportunity for preview and comment limited

– Difficult for Large Businesses; prohibitive for Small Business

• Impact: identified need to establish training programs that teach staff to adapt (core technical competencies + agility, critical thinking)

• Impact: increases risk, decreases innovation, increases cost

13

Acquisition WorkforceIs It Just About the Numbers?

“Agencies must also have the right people with the right skills to successfully meet the increasingly complex demands expected in the future.”

“When workforce reductions do not consider future needs… the result is a workforce that is not balanced with regard to experience and skill sets.”

(GAO-03-443)

• Initial focus of the current Administration on changing the rules, then increasing numbers– Recent legislation redirects focus back to skills development

• IMPROVE Act• Sen Collins’ 2 bills: Master’s/Intern program and Federal

Acquisition Institute enhancement/realignment

• Impact on existing workforce and on policy/mission execution of adding new acquisition staff

14

How Will the Acquisition Workforce React to Policy Changes?

• Performance-based service contracting established performance measurements for contractors

• Recent studies recommend establishing performance measures for acquisition workforce– Steve Kelman suggests that “rather than transforming,

learning, and challenging themselves,” they may hunker down and stay out of trouble

• Will the workforce be expected to adapt by simply “working more hours,” as an internal memo indicated in association with the Recovery Act?

• What will we measure?– Achieving objectives/goals; or– Achieving value (Schooner: “customer satisfaction”)

15

How Will Policy Makers React to Workforce Challenges?

“Initial rounds of downsizing were set in motion without considering the longer term effects on agencies’ performance capacity” (GAO-01-753T)

• What’s changed since 2001?– IMPROVE Act– Other legislation

• Role of Functional Leads / Functional IPTs

• What if we don’t succeed in developing the needed skills to implement the latest policy changes?

16

Workforce Development is Linked to Policy Success

• GAO found that the lack of proper workforce development led to increased risk, converse to the intent of introducing such streamlined purchase methods as GWACs, purchase cards, etc. (GAO-03-443)

• Failed implementation leads to more change (feedback loop… chasing the pendulum)

• We need to maintain an operational focus– “Meeting the warfighter’s needs in a timely manner is a

primary task of the government” (Guy Ben-Ari, CSIS, Addressing Concerns About US Foreign Policy Outsourcing)

17

Program Execution: A Case StudyDoD’s Information Analysis Centers

18

IAC RoleBuilding on R&E for Immediate Impact

• IACs serve as a ready tool for strategic, operational and tactical organizations within DoD and the broader community– Invest up-front in discovering and covering areas of strategic

and tactical importance (IAC Basic Centers of Operations)• Scope of IACs represents current and emerging areas of DoD

interest• Combat and enable strategic surprise by trend analysis and

capacity building• Enable rapid response by proactive knowledge development

– Data: Scientific and Technical Information (STI) repository– Information: IAC products / responses to technical inquiries– Knowledge: access to SME network (govt, industry, academia)

19

IAC RoleBuilding on R&E for Immediate Impact

– Customer-funded efforts build on knowledge to provide an efficient vehicle for rapid response (IAC Technical Area Tasks)

• Builds on the work done by the Basic Centers of Operations• Enables collaboration between researchers and operational staff

to provide timely and relevant support• Promotes cutting-edge concepts to reduce cost and risk, and

increase the speed at which we deliver technical capabilities– Integrate knowledge base and customer-funded work to

provide increased value in a time of shrinking budgets and growing requirements

• Provide tactical relevance by responding to an immediate need• Develop strategic capabilities by analyzing trends and

recommending improvements to the acquisition community

• IACs are a valuable resource for accessing evaluated STI culled from efforts to solve new and historic challenges

20

IACs serve as a bridge between the Warfighter and the Acquisition Community

WarfighterIACsAcquisition Community

• STIPLs• Tech Inquiries• Data (e.g., aircraft shoot down forensics)

• Data access• Rapid solutions• Tech data & analysis

• Trend analysis• Recommendations• Input to material solutions, TTPs

• R&D objectives• Emerging requirements• Collaboration on solutions

Steering Committees

IAC PMO (DTIC)

21

IAC Contract ConstructSignificant Policy Changes

• Current contract structure– Single Award– ID/IQ– 10-year length (3-year base / 4-year option / 3-year option)

• 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, Section 843– Limitations on single award contracts

– No single award IDIQ contracts exceeding $100M w/o Head of Agency written approval

– IAC contracts will not be able to obtain exemption

– Enhanced competition for orders in excess of $5M– Provide all offerors “fair opportunity” to be considered

• Verbal guidance from DPAP on additional limitations – No more than 5-year length– “Strong preference” for annual options

IAC Program Way-AheadRevised Contract Construct

Current StructureSingle-award IDIQ contract for all requirements for each IAC

Way-Ahead

AMMTIACCore & TATs

Single-award contract for the IAC Core requirements

Multiple-award IDIQ contracts for TATs

MSIACCore & TATs

SURVIACCore & TATs

WSTIACCore & TATs

RIACCore & TATs

CBRNIACCore & TATs

CPIACCore & TATs

DACSCore & TATs

SENSIACCore & TATs

IATACCore & TATs

Defense Systems TATs

Weapons Systems

Survivability

Vulnerability

RMQSI

Directed Energy

Non-kinetic Energy

Advanced Materials

Homeland Defense TATs

Homeland Security & Defense

Critical Infrastructure Protection

Weapons of Mass Destruction

CBRN Defense

Biometrics

Medical

Cultural Studies

Advanced Sources of Energy

SNIM TATs

Software Analysis

Information Assurance

Information Sharing

Knowledge Management

Modeling & Simulation

Some existing coverageNew Area for IACs 22

Single contracts covering Core functions in the following areas: ∙ Advanced Materials ∙ Information Assurance ∙ Advanced Energy Sources ∙ Knowledge Management ∙ Biometrics ∙ Medical ∙ CBRN Defense ∙ Modeling & Simulation ∙ Chemical Propulsion ∙ Reliability ∙ Cultural Studies ∙ Sensor Technology ∙ Data, Software ∙ Survivability/Vulnerability ∙ Directed Energy ∙ Weapons Systems Technology

23

Challenges to Success

• New contract construct adds complexity– Rapid succession of new contract awards– Introduction of SBs into prime positions on IAC contracts– Likely expansion of companies competing for IAC Task

Orders– Acquisition reform: new rules, frequent changes, high

visibility

• Workforce not aligned with policy requirements– Workforce shortages (#s and skillsets)– Lack of experience with awarding and administering

Multiple Award Contracts– Risk aversion due to increased scrutiny

• More time, less innovation…

24

Overcoming Obstacles to Achieve Policy Intent

• Partner with existing stakeholders in government, industry, and academia to develop way ahead

• Identify and involve new stakeholders– Both potential new customers and potential offerors on new

contracts– Buy-in + new ideas / outside perspective

• Leverage operational focus: direct benefit to warfighter

25

Path Forward

26

Utopia: Ideal Improvements to the Process

• Imbed considerations of workforce skills in policy making– Consider time/effort/risk of developing

required skills– Utilize recently proposed performance

measures to assess

• Ensure workforce development happens before policy implementation– Strengthen FL / FIPT

27

Let’s Get Real

• Your thoughts on how this will play out– DAR Panel recommendations?– IMPROVE Act or other proposed

legislation?• Measuring performance and reinforcing

accountability• Acquisition curriculum, internships, SMEs,

mentorship, etc.

– Should we brace ourselves for another 262 studies over the next 24 years?

28

What Skills Does our Acquisition Workforce Need?

• Where does the pendulum swing next?

• How do we (or do we) ever catch it?

29

What Skills Does our Acquisition Workforce Need?

AT&L Human Capital Strategic Plan: top priority is maintaining a “high performing, agile, and ethical workforce”

• How do we teach agility?– Mentorship– Operational focus– Forward planning– Soft skills– Transferrable competencies

• Let’s stop chasing the pendulum

30

Contact Info Christopher Zember

Deputy Director, DoD IACs

Email: czember@dtic.mil

Office: 703-767-9235

Mobile: 571-236-6135