Roland
“When Smart Procurement was in its infancy I remember talking to a senior chap in (IIRC) Boeing who said "You cannot have faster, cheaper, better. Delivering all 3 is impossible. You can have faster, or cheaper, or better. You might even get faster and cheaper, but not all three". It seems that he was correct!”
I’d say he was pretty close. It can be done. See my post #23. DEC, guided by a contractor who had told them the solution was hugely expensive kit which required development, had written a laughable URD. The solution was actually in service, but with the other two Services. And, of course, they don’t speak to each other. I re-wrote the URD so it made technical sense, and bought off the shelf (mil standard) kit at a fraction of the cost. Faster, cheaper, better.
The problem is that you make enemies. The company DEC and my predecessor had been dealing with, and who had been promised the contract single tender, were fuming. And certain companies have clout at the highest level. That a single tender had been approved meant very senior people in DPA were made to look foolish, as the new strategy was also single tender, but with someone else. Boss was p*****. So there goes your annual report. Similarly, DEC and related IPTs largely withdrew support, as I’d unavoidably highlighted they’d been wasting money for years. In my experience, and given similar circumstances, I’d say 95% of DPA staff would take the easy option, and deliver on time, to budget, and happily ignore the fact that performance was rock bottom. They know the odium they’d be faced with, so it’s largely self preservation. Sorry, that’s an indictment of the way the system works, but far more senior people than I have condoned it.
Users were over the moon though!