Week 2 forum post 423

  Please before you understand that this bid requires a forum post along  with 2 forum post responses below, both must be done. The budget is what  it is posted, please do not try to raise the price, either you will do  it or the next person will. 

Better  Buying Power or BBP is the title of a Department of Defense document  that is a blueprint of policy and advice and guidance for this week’s  discussion. In today’s new climate of “doing more without more” and the  goals from the Pentagon and White House since the beginning of 2017,  this topic has taken on more importance. 

Use the following resources plus any additional you deem necessary to answer the Forum questions.

References Reading to start this discussion:

Resources for this week’s discussion start with “What is Better Buying Power” located at http://bbp.dau.mil

Within this BBP site, go to the item listed as “Eliminate  Unproductive Processes and Bureaucracy.” Within this set of related  documents provided, develop a foundation for answering this week’s Forum  questions.  Read the documents provided. Use them to assist in  answering the Forum question.

Become familiar with this web site as we will visit this again in the coming weeks. 

Source  for Forum questions: 2017 President’s Executive Order Executive Order  on a “Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch”  https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/13/presidential-executive-order-comprehensive-plan-reorganizing-executive

Forum Questions:

1. Speculate on how will  the 2017 President’s Executive Order Executive Order on a  “Comprehensive Plan for Reorganizing the Executive Branch” impact the  Better Buying Power of government contractors for military equipment  requirements across all the Defense Department?
2. Should the President  of the US issue any additional executive orders to impact the Better  Buying Power to support the Defense Department mission support equipment  needs? If not, why not? If yes, what would such an executive order  include?

Instructions for a successful Forum:

Your initial post should be at least 250 words. Please respond to at least 2 other students.  Responses should be a minimum of 100 words and should include at least one direct question related to what that another student posted or in response to a student’s posting to your initial post.

Please do review how this Forum and all Forums are graded using the attached rubric.

Initial Post Due:  Thursday, 11:55 p.m., ET

Responses Due:  Sunday, 11:55 p.m., ET

Response question 1

 

Normally I try to keep these short but, 

                When looking at better buying power, figuring out  exactly what the changes are expected is a part of the challenge. The  President spoke here in mid September, during the speech he mentioned  improving the military and working smarter. This idea has not yet  filtered down to the field as of yet. A big piece of the program is to  eliminate unproductive processes and bureaucracy. While this would work  and is surely needed there is not any push that I have seen at my level  to stop using some of the needless processes and rules. Some of the  extremely low limits we have on using purchase cards to maintain  equipment is a great example.

                When I arrived at my shop there was a large 125 foot  JLG lift in the equipment lot. I found out that this piece of equipment  worth over $100K had sat for over a year because of a broken hydraulic  line and a control panel that needed replaced. The problem was that it  could not be fixed for under $2,500 so needed to be sent out for bid.  Finding companies who can work on this was not easy and without paying  for an inspection to find out what exactly needed done that the  government wouldn’t pay for nobody would bid. Finally I worked this mess  out but in the end of the day it sat for a 16 months in the weather  with birds and squirrels living in it causing more damage. This type of  equipment cost around $150/Hr to have worked on and parts on $135K  equipment mirror those of a $135K car. Essentially nothing can be fixed  without a bid that we cannot pay to have done. This is an example of the  type of total failure of reality that the over-restrictive rules cause.

                This ties into the DAU site from this week’s lesson.  Specifically number 2 control costs throughout the lifecycle, and number  6 improve tradecraft in service acquisition. To control the future  costs of in this case an item, it might be a good idea to have some plan  to maintain the thing down the road. The way to do this is by acquiring  services, in this case an IDIQ or BPA for labor from a company who can  repair and maintain this. These people who purchased this had no plan  for doing a yearly safety check required or oil changes even. The worry  over spending too much to repair the item without three bids caused more  problems in the end. Maybe having an amount higher than the $2,500, at  least something 10% of the value of what is being repaired. The amount  of time and effort spent to save a small amount costs three times the  amount saved and only serves to slow things down in too many cases  (Better Buying Power).

                In place of sequestration, which is not really a  budget plan but more of a political game, we could use less rules, less  regulations and more trust in the acquisitions professionals the DoD  has. Finding things that serve dual purposes is another area where the  DoD could save. Many of the same things required for warfighting, can be  used in the humanitarian missions we keep being thrown into. This even  effects the weaponry we develop, in the next few decades there will  likely be a requirement for more non-lethal weapons. As the military is  called upon for disaster relief, civil disobedience policing and into  battlefields where the media cannot prey hard enough for civilian  casualties, these will be relied on more and more heavily.

Referenced 

Better Buying Power, (n.d.). retrieved October 9, 2017, from http://bbp.dau.mil/

Response question 2

 

In March of  2017 an executive order was issue that mandates all federal agencies  justify themselves. The order makes it so that federal agency must  evaluate themselves and come up with a plan to reorganize. In  reorganizing themselves they are in a way slimming down. Agencies have  about six months to develop a plan and turn it in to the OMB. 

Once in  their hands the OBM has about six months to review and propose a more  robust plan for the president. Then he will take appropriate actions  via, legislation or administrative action. The executive order is  absolutely inline with the 2010 BBP goals of the government. If this  works then the results could be a more efficient, less bureaucratic  government. The implications would be felt across the DoD as there would  be less redundancy and more effective response to world events.

In regards  to issuing more executive orders to achieve the impact to the BBP  initiative is not a stet I believe should be take. There have been many  presidents with several plans and executive orders to address the issue  of a slow, wasteful and inefficient government but all have been  unsuccessful in achieving reform. There are issues far beyond just  rearranging federal agencies. While I do applauded the actions and  determination of this president I feel like the real issue is the  Congress. And that is too many people and dollars that would have to be  addressed in order to fully see a reform in our government that will  produce the goals of the BBP. 

 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/03/16/trump-wants-to-reorganize-the-executive-branch-good-luck-to-him/?utm_term=.cc86a36f81c0