Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Government Contracting Culture

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    I've got lots of problems with that paper, but I'll just choose one...

    All second lieutenants should be instructed in the role of contractors on the battlefield and their role in managing those contractors. They should learn how to deal with specific problems that may arise during the lifecycle of a contract, with particular focus on the prevention of contractor fraud, waste, and abuse.
    This strikes me as absurd on its face. I think the authors are either unaware - or once knew but forgot - of the level of understanding that most 2LTs have about the workings of the military, when in OBC. It is not that 2LTs are dumb or unteachable, but there is a certain level of experience that is needed before one understands administrative details. My IOBC class had 250 2LTs and not one of us understood what on Earth was being taught to us during our 3 days of ULLS training. We simply had no experience to put it in context. Quite frankly, I did not understand it until I was a few months into my XO job. I can quite easily visualize the same blank stares from a sea of 2LTs during a 1-hour, 3-hour, or 3-day period of instruction on contractors on the battlefield.

    While the nature of contractor interaction may be a bit of a stretch for a 2LT fresh out of college to relate to, the fraud, waste, and abuse issue seems to be so simple as to not need a specific focus to relate it to any particular topic, such as contractors. I share the authors' concern about fraud, waste, and abuse, but I did not need a period of instruction regarding contractors to identify or report it (to no avail). A small dose of common sense was sufficient for me to recognize that places like LSA Anaconda and the "Green Zone" are large monuments to fraud, waste, and abuse, perpetrated by contractors, but done so at the direction of, and with the blessings of, the military. If you want to crack down on fraud, waste, and abuse, then leaders need to take basic leadership training more seriously. It is a simple issue of leadership, or lack thereof, when you've got fraud, waste, and abuse all around you and you're not reporting it. People already know that it is wrong - they don't need a course about contractors to remind them of it. They need some kind of impetus - perhaps a boot - to fix it, rather than walking past the deficiencies, walking into the deficiencies, and then getting a giant heap of Baskin Robbins ice cream AT the deficiency.

    The folks who wrote this paper seem to have gotten so focused on their issue that they convinced themselves that the issue is of a much more pressing and dire need than it really is, leading them to make such recommendations as creating new staff billets from the Joint Chiefs all the way down to the battalion level and creating new training requirements from OBC, onward. They do acknowledge that this sounds rather extreme, but they do a weak job, in my opinion, of justifying why it should nonetheless be implemented. My impression is that the reader is expected to share their level of concern and, therefore, to also support their recommendations, which are only justified by the perceived urgency of the problem, rather than by a clear explanation of why the recommendations are necessary.
    Last edited by Schmedlap; 11-17-2008 at 03:03 AM. Reason: Missspelling

Similar Threads

  1. Defending Hamdan
    By jmm99 in forum Law Enforcement
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 05-22-2011, 06:36 AM
  2. How To Win
    By slapout9 in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 02-25-2011, 02:03 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •