Contracting
By far the most time consuming and costly element is the constant to-ing and fro-ing agreeing Terms and Conditions.
In about 1990 our Contract Manager (note, singular; nowadays we have teams of Commercial Managers, 3 grades higher doing a lesser job) developed a computer program the basis of which was the T&Cs every contractor was comfortable with for any given type of contract (R&D, Development, Production, Repair, Support etc). When he received a Request for Contract Action he simply ticked the boxes and printed out a contract, photocopied the RCA and attached it as the Schedule. (Remember, it is not the Contract/Commercial staffs who agree a price is fair and reasonable, contrary to what many believe).
Of course his bosses were apoplectic at this efficiency, he was transferred, his programme quietly ditched and replaced by a few more staff whose inefficiency was never in doubt. This was a double whammy, as the sudden increase in Production Lead Time (which includes time taken to let the contract) meant the Services ran out of whatever product was being contracted, be it spares, repair contracts or whatever.
His little program wouldn’t be suitable for all contracts of course; some are far easier to agree. If it is a service with a known and constant output, you get the contractor to propose one for you. Again, this negates the faffing around leaving you to concentrate on a fair price. In fact, there is an MoD Specification outlining just this process, but it hasn’t been used it for 18 years. Yes, you guessed it, for the contracts designed to maintain airworthiness. Not exactly thread drift, but I imagine (and hope) the new MAA are trying to work out a consistent, efficient process and how to apply it. The answer is implement existing regulations, processes and procedures. The difficult bit is finding some dinosaur who remembers how.