Myth Busting

With the government spending more than $500 billion per year on contracts for goods and services -- a large chunk of which comes from the Pentagon -- the Office of Management and Budget has launched a "myth-busting" campaign to improve communication between federal acquisition officials and industry contractors.

In a 13-page Feb. 2 memo to senior governmental acquisition and procurement officials, Daniel Gordon, OMB's administrator for federal procurement policy, writes:

Access to current market information is critical for agency program managers as they define requirements and for contracting officers as they develop acquisition strategies, seek opportunities for small businesses, and negotiate contract terms. Our industry partners are often the best source of this information, so productive interactions between federal agencies and our industry partners should be encouraged to ensure that the government clearly understands the marketplace and can award a contract or order for an effective solution at a reasonable price. Early, frequent, and constructive engagement with industry is especially important for complex, high-risk procurements, including (but not limited to) those for large information technology (IT) projects. This is why increasing communication, in the form of a "myth-busters" educational campaign, is one of the key tenets of the Office of Management and Budget's 25-Point Implementation Plan to Reform Federal IT Management.

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) authorizes a broad range of opportunities for vendor communication, but agencies often do not take full advantage of these existing flexibilities. Some agency officials may be reluctant to engage in these exchanges out of fear of protests or fear of binding the agency in an unauthorized manner; others may be unaware of effective strategies that can help the acquisition workforce and industry make the best use of their time and resources. Similarly, industry may be concerned that talking with an agency may create a conflict of interest that will preclude them from competing on future requirements, or industry may be apprehensive about engaging in meaningful conversations in the presence of other vendors.

Consequently, Gordon's memo has three purposes:

1) identify common misconceptions about vendor engagement that may be unnecessarily hindering agencies' appropriate use of the existing flexibilities, and provide facts and strategies to help acquisition professionals benefit from industry’s knowledge and insight;

2) direct agencies to remove unnecessary barriers to reasonable communication and develop vendor communications plans, consistent with existing law and regulation, that promote responsible and constructive exchanges; and

3) outline steps for continued engagement with agencies and industry to increase awareness and education.

That said, Gordon writes:

Nothing in this memorandum should be read to alter, or authorize violations of, applicable ethics rules, procurement integrity requirements, or other statutes or regulations that govern communication and information sharing. However, all methods of communication that are not prohibited, either by those rules or otherwise, should be considered, if they would be helpful. In addition, contracting officers, program managers, and other acquisition officials should continue to exercise appropriate discretion to balance the practical limitations of frequent vendor engagement, including the demand such engagement places on the time of the acquisition workforce, with the need to better understand the market and make decisions in the best interest of the government.

While agencies do not have the resources, and are not required, to meet with every vendor at every step of the acquisition process, information gathered from industry sources plays an invaluable role in the acquisition process. For this reason, agencies must develop practices that will ensure early, frequent, and constructive communication during key phases of the process. The federal government’s ability to achieve successful program outcomes, effectively and efficiently, depends upon agencies establishing effective strategies for industry engagement and supporting those strategies with senior-level commitment.