Click here to close this window
Close Window

About the Better Buy Project/Frequently Asked Questions

Why the Federal Acquisition Process?

On his first day in office, President Obama challenged leaders in government to "use innovative tools, methods, and systems to cooperate among themselves, across all levels of Government, and with nonprofit organizations, businesses, and individuals in the private sector." The acquisition process represents one of the most important areas of collaboration between government and the private sector.

Unfortunately, it is also among the most complex and least transparent. The Better Buy Project is an experiment dedicated to the belief that there's a lot of room for improvement in the way government buys products and services. We're testing this hypothesis by asking for your ideas on how to make acquisition process more open, transparent and collaborative.

The best part of this project is that the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) GSA would really like to adopt some of your best ideas. Promising ideas will be selected by GSA to be piloted on an upcoming acquisition, where lessons learned will be captured for future implementation. But that really depends on us, and the ideas we're able to produce.

BACK TO TOP

What Topics Are At Issue?

This project is concerned primarily with the pre-contract-award stages of the acquisition process—the activities that take place before the government "signs on the dotted line" to buy a product or service. Those areas are:

The ultimate goal is to improve how government learns about and chooses what it buys—in other words, to make government a more informed, more effective consumer.

BACK TO TOP

What Kind of Feedback Are You Looking For?

We are looking for ideas to make federal acquisition more open, transparent, and collaborative. What does that mean?

We believe that making the process more open, transparent and collaborative will make government more likely to end up with the right item at the right price.

BACK TO TOP

What Is Your Moderation Policy?

This online forum allows you the opportunity to post comments and other information that will remain publicly viewable on this website. The site therefore operates a moderation policy to ensure that comments are appropriate and not harmful to others. Comments which include any of the following may be deleted by site administrators:

Additionally, while we invite open participation and diverse viewpoints to be shared, moderators reserve the right to remove posts which do not address some aspect of the stated purpose of this forum: To collect ideas about using collaboration and social media to improve the acquisition process. We deeply value your time and input, and our desire is to remove as few posts as possible while ensuring that a focused, constructive discussion takes place.

Finally, in addition to this policy, this site allows individual users to flag ideas as being spam, duplicate, or otherwise inappropriate. When an idea is flagged a sufficient number of times, it is automatically placed into a queue for review by moderators. We reserve the right to remove any posting that receives a sufficient number of "flags" to be placed in this queue, though will not automatically do so.

BACK TO TOP

What Are The Terms Of Service And Privacy Policy?

This site is hosted using a service called UserVoice. You can read the UserVoice Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

BACK TO TOP

Close Window
Better Buy is a joint project of the National Academy of Public Administration and the American Council for Technology-Industry Advisory Council in conjunction with the General Services Administration
IMPORTANT UPDATE FROM THE BETTERBUY PROJECT TEAM!
GSA FEDSIM has begun to act on the ideas you submitted by launching two acquisitions with the new BetterBuy Pilot Wiki. The new wiki, which was originally proposed in an idea on this site, will gather and utilize input from citizens outside the traditional acquisition community to improve the acquisition process. Be sure to check back with the BetterBuy Project regularly and continue to submit ideas.
-- The BetterBuy Project Team
How can we use collaboration and social media to make the federal acquisition process more efficient and effective?

The acquisition process – the way government buys goods and services – is among the most complex and least transparent aspects of government. The Better Buy Project is asking for your best ideas on how to make it more open and collaborative! Promising ideas will be selected by GSA to be piloted on future acquisitions. We are looking primarily at the pre-contract-award stages of the process – the activities that take place before the government "signs on the dotted line" to buy a product or service:


I suggest we ...

Create a searchable repository for RFQs

The first thing I do when I have to issue a new RFQ is look for someone that has recently had a similar requirement so I can use their SOW and technical requirements as a template. So much effort is wasted on writing and rewriting statements of work, getting SMEs to provide technical specs - all for something that has already been purchased by the government probably numerous times. How many RFQs for web hosting services have been written - does each have to be a completely new effort?

This would be as easy as taking the publicly available RFQs and depositing them into a cloud storage solution and making them searchable. Eventually, you could even have ratings from government personnel or even vendors on the quality of the RFQs in the repository.

74 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Zach BaldwinZach Baldwin shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    3 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Joel WorstJoel Worst commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        More replicated content just means more infrastructure, applications, interfaces, newly funded mgmt groups, data input error and people forced to use it. Also personal judgment calls on what goes in, and what doesn't. As You put it, Mr. Tuttle, the differing needs of divisions within organizations within Agencies can't know what any other Agency entities would consider useful. Plus, requiring Your personnel to manually access one more application to post dumb data that just sits waiting for someone to manually search and pull it isn't collaboration or knowledge transfer. It turns into something more like "what You're going to find out, is all I'm going to tell You".
        *Proposal: Automating content awareness based on its metadata and its evolving context based use is one approach. Software data integration frameworks [not data fusion, cuz we don't want new infrastructure, systems, and training for personnel(COST)] can automate data discovery and awareness real-time delivering only metadata (info about content) so the created data always lives with its creator(best data integrity). The framework builds a single automated intelligent real-time information space of discoverable content through extending the reachable self-healing network to infinite nodes in each of their differing domains. Automated smart push/pull brings content to one's attention based on their specific need, role, or mission. If this content is used in that specific situation, the metadata is automatically updated. This provides greater context (what the content means to probable users) and is now smart push/pulled based on new profile needs requiring that knowledge. And then the Terminator said "I'll be Back"… WOW. Sorry for the rant. This is the field in which I work. And I tell You the problem with Transparency is, it isn't. Even when that's the first order of business or mandate, at some point it's always gonna get to "what You're going to find out, is all I'm going to tell You". Thoughts?

      • David ShumwayDavid Shumway commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This works on the Industry Side too. Nobody likes to reinvent the wheel and if one has information previously used, all the better.

      • Hal Good, CPPOHal Good, CPPO commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Professional organizations serving state and local government (example NIGP) already do this. It is a great resource. One can analyze the best of RFOs others have developed and refine the requirements to fit the specific procurement.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base

      © 2009 UserVoice | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy