The other day, at the weekly staff meeting, the Skyway team discussed the state of the current crop of contracting officers, and their effect on government contracting.  Before I go any further, let me caveat that we were speaking in generalities, and that there are always exceptions to these general impressions.  So, what I am about to express is not only my opinion, but it is an opinion about a group of professionals generally, not specific individuals.  In both cases, I regret any errors in judgment or offenses that may result.

Back to my point: the other day, a group of former government Contracting Officers, with a combined total of more than 100 years of acquisition experience, chatted about certain aspects of the current acquisition workforce, and the guidelines under which they operate.  One point quickly reached consensus: that the COs of today are less experienced and less empowered than they were when we counted among their ranks.  Of course, you can attribute some of that assessment to “old graybeards longing for the good old days,” but the facts tend to support the point.  First, I am the least experienced of all the former government COs on the team, and when I entered the government acquisition career field in 2005, there was common talk about the ‘graying workforce,’ and how the federal government would face a severe shortage of qualified, experienced contracting professionals in the next five years.  About 3 years later, the Great Recession occurred, and that economic setback appears to have delayed some of the anticipated retirements by a few years, but time marches on, and eventually those folks followed through with their intentions.  Second, the government’s Office of Personnel and Management (OPM), which is basically the Big HR Department in the Sky for federal civil servants, has devoted tremendous amounts of money and programs to recruiting, training and retaining contracting personnel for the last 5-10 years.  Obviously, budgetary growth supports the notion that there is now, or soon will be, a dearth of available personnel.

What does this data suggest?  That federal contracting personnel are experiencing a decline in experience as the seasoned veterans pass into retirement and are replaced by younger, less experienced journeymen.  Conversely, when one factors in the massive military operations and spending since 2001, and the growth of regulations that increase administration and oversight, and you see a simultaneous swell in the average workload for the available personnel.  Combined, we have a less-experienced workforce with a vastly increased workload.  Time and urgency are also factors, as national security, international terrorism, economic hardships, natural disasters, and a multitude of social and political factors add to the burden facing these less-experienced personnel.

Bottom line – the Skyway team basically agreed that today’s Contracting Officers have fewer years on the job, less developmental experience, and face daunting challenges for which they are less prepared than ‘in the old days.’  Another factor is that after years of contracting scandals and fraud, waste and abuse investigations, the contracting community has gotten more risk-averse than when I entered the workforce, and certainly less so than when my more experienced teammates began working.  This aversion to risk, and insistence on multiple reviews and the almighty “legal sufficiency” has further disempowered this contracting workforce.  Today’s Contracting Officers have less latitude to make decisions, and are subject to many more levels of review, approval, and nit-picking than I recall.  This makes procurements take longer, and spend much more in time, manpower and resources trying to avoid or ‘manage’ the risks that used to be par for the course.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not judging one way or the other, and it would have to be an attractive offer to entice me back into the CO community (probably based more on interesting work than on financial gain).  So again, I do not mean to impugn government COs, nor malign their work.  If anything, I commiserate with them for being shackled by bureaucracy and administrivia.  But the point remains: COs are less empowered to employ their best business judgment and MAKE DECISIONS, or in other words, to DO THEIR JOBS, than they were ten years ago.

So then Kevin Jans, the Skyway founder and president, put this question into context for all of us: what does this mean for Skyway? Are the COs less empowered, and therefore less challenging to deal with?  If so, then maybe fewer clients will need us?  Or, alternatively, has the process gotten so complicated and exhaustive that it’s impossible to navigate without Skyway or a similarly-qualified team of experts guiding every step of the way.  Conversation continued for a while longer, but we never really concluded it, and the business of the day forced us back on track.  I have pondered the question at length since then, and that has led to this article.

My take on the matter is that both cases are true, but both demand Skyway’s expertise for truly excellent results.  Because contracting is the business of people, it’s a mixed bag – some COs will be more experienced, forceful, and assertive, and a contractor could use Skyway’s knowledge and insights to stand firm in negotiations, assist in problem resolution, and develop mutual respect.  Other COs will be less experienced, less forceful and more passive, and in these cases, Skyway can help contractors fill the void between the government and the contractor.  By this, I mean that a less confident CO may fall short of optimal efficiency, initiative and momentum, and opportunities may be lost as a result.  The government gets less than it deserves, and the contractor basically leaves money on the table.  But if the contractor can call on Skyway to cover the gap between them and the CO, to encourage initiative, suggest solutions, and proactively address impending issues, then the contractor can be a valued stakeholder in the process, and can help the CO fully realize the potential of the contract.  And in both cases, the process has gotten more restrictive, cautionary, and Byzantine in nature, resulting in greater demand for the expertise and skills that Skyway provides.

Basically, government has grown, which means government spending has grown, and that has caused the experience and accumulated wisdom of the government contracting workforce to be thinned out and diluted.  At the same time, the process has gotten more complex and burdensome, clogging the system and straining the gears, levers and pulleys that make it all work.  These factors all serve to enhance the value of Skyway as advisors, partners, and ultimately, as friends.