Defense Acquisition Workforce Modernization

Abstract

To a large degree, DoD's organization, processes, and workforce have all been inherited from a time when the United States faced a unique threat from the Soviet Union. Today, this singular threat has been replaced by a series of distributed and complex threats (to include failed and failing states, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; and growing threats from global terrorist organizations) that have proven far more difficult to satisfactorily address. This volatile international security environment makes it difficult to project, with any level of confidence, the specific threats that the nation may face, even a short time from now. Furthermore, additional environmental considerations such as rapidly changing technology, a wide array of new military operations, significant budgetary pressure, and many legislative and regulatory changes, all serve as added factors impacting the state of DoD acquisition and the members of its workforce. In this latter case, the impact of these considerations on the acquisition workforce has been significant demanding new skills and acquisition strategies, as well as additional personnel to successfully meet the emergent challenges of the twenty-first century. For example, changing technological and operational requirements, and decisions to outsource many non-inherently-governmental support services (such as many logistics support functions), have created additional acquisition workforce complexity, requiring members to have different skill-sets (e.g. more of a focus on management and oversight), and a wider knowledge-base to draw from. Furthermore, emergent acquisition requirements have resulted in greater contractor support for the acquisition workforce. Recently, this support has been met with resistance, because of ambiguity in what work is considered to be inherently governmental and the potential for conflicts of interest. As a result, there has been an emerging belief that many contractor augmented support services should be brought back in-house (using Federal employees) through the practice of in-sourcing. However, this, too, has been highly controversial; raising issues of higher costs, less flexibility, required training, needed skills, etc. from a time when the United States faced a unique threat from the Soviet Union. Today, this singular threat has been replaced by a series of distributed and complex threats (to include failed and failing states, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction; and growing threats from global terrorist organizations) that have proven far more difficult to satisfactorily address. This volatile international security environment makes it difficult to project, with any level of confidence, the specific threats that the nation may face, even a short time from now. Furthermore, additional environmental considerations such as rapidly changing technology, a wide array of new military operations, significant budgetary pressure, and many legislative and regulatory changes, all serve as added factors impacting the state of DoD acquisition and the members of its workforce. In this latter case, the impact of these considerations on the acquisition workforce has been significant demanding new skills and acquisition strategies, as well as additional personnel to successfully meet the emergent challenges of the twenty-first century. For example, changing technological and operational requirements, and decisions to outsource many non-inherently-governmental support services (such as many logistics support functions), have created additional acquisition workforce complexity, requiring members to have different skill-sets (e.g. more of a focus on management and oversight), and a wider knowledge-base to draw from. Furthermore, emergent acquisition requirements have resulted in greater contractor support for the acquisition workforce. Recently, this support has been met with resistance, because of ambiguity in what work is considered to be inherently governmental and the potential for conflicts of interest. As a result, there has been an emerging belief that many contractor augmented support services should be brought back in-house (using Federal employees) through the practice of in-sourcing. However, this, too, has been highly controversial; raising issues of higher costs, less flexibility, required training, needed skills, etc.