Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://dair.nps.edu/handle/123456789/2455
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Gregory Hildebrandt | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-03-16T18:17:50Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-03-16T18:17:50Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2010-03-03 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Published--Unlimited Distribution | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://dair.nps.edu/handle/123456789/2455 | - |
dc.description | Contract Management / NPS Faculty Research | |
dc.description.abstract | The analysis addresses the use of Performance Incentives and Award Fees in DoD contracting during System Development and Demonstration (SDD). There is discussion of the F/A-18E/F contract that included cost-sharing, Performance Incentives and Award Fees. However, we first discuss recent GAO criticism of profits received on Award Fee contracts and the response by DoD and other organizations. Next, the general policy guidelines established in 1969 by DoD and NASA that are still in effect are reviewed, as are the recommendations made by academic economists beginning in the 1970s. We also discuss the recent introduction of System Design Specifications. While these specifications contain a great deal of information that can be used when developing Performance Incentives and Award Fees, this new policy represents a movement away from performance specifications and may constrain a contractor's ability to make trade-off decisions. The broad conclusion of this analysis is that the intuition obtained from the 1969 DoD and NASA Guide might be combined with that of economists when properly structuring incentive contracts. This may help achieve the objectives of the government when there is pervasive cost uncertainty, challenging performance characteristics, and certain contractor actions not easily observable by the government. | |
dc.description.sponsorship | Acquisition Research Program | |
dc.language | English (United States) | |
dc.publisher | Acquisition Research Program | |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Performance Incentives & Award Fees | |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | NPS-CM-09-141 | |
dc.subject | General Accounting Office (GAO) | |
dc.subject | System Development and Demonstration (SDD) | |
dc.subject | Cost-Sharing Ratio | |
dc.subject | Performance Incentives | |
dc.subject | Award Fee | |
dc.subject | Accounting Profit | |
dc.subject | Economic Profit | |
dc.subject | Cost Uncertainty | |
dc.subject | Moral Hazard | |
dc.subject | Cost-Plus-Award Fee/Incentive Fee (CPIF/AF) | |
dc.subject | F/A-18E/F CPIF/AF Contract | |
dc.subject | System Design Specification | |
dc.title | Performance, Award Fee and Costs Incentives during System Design and Development | |
dc.type | Technical Report | |
Appears in Collections: | Sponsored Acquisition Research & Technical Reports |
Files in This Item:
File | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|
NPS-CM-09-141.pdf | 381.86 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.