CASE STUDY #3 | A Moral Imperative: Fielding Mine-Resistant Vehicles
“A Moral Imperative: Fielding Mine-Resistant Vehicles” is the latest installment in the ‘Defend & Reform’ Case Study series and you can read it here. In this study we look at the traditional defense acquisition process and why it was bypassed in order to get live-saving vehicles to the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan. Mine resistant vehicles were urgently needed, but the conventional Pentagon bureaucracy couldn’t deliver. Why? How was is bypassed? And is this case study a lesson in how to reform the defense acquisition process?
The ‘Defend & Reform’ Case Study Series includes five case studies and will culminate in a “lessons learned” event in December that will examine various defense reforms and cuts, in order to identify what makes for smart, strategic, and effective defense reforms.
Ed Payne
Oct 12, 2012 @ 14:21:56
With 30 years of federal government contracting under my belt, I have seen how the system works, that is why I got out of it. I would like to leave you with a couple of thoughts as you tackle this maze.
1. Federal Processes, not just procurement, are not designed to produce a technical result, a ship, plane or MRAP, they are design to provide the maximum political shelter for all those involved, no matter how closely they are involved, except the contractor, hence Sarbanes/Oxley for example. This is largely driven by the media as they love to destroy careers over anything, it makes for good reading.
2. The only way to avoid cost overruns is to use 10 year old technology. When you are working in the world of tomorrow, it is unpredictable and expensive, but given patience and proper guidance, it is worth the price.