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 ...

Standardize electronic contracting systems

Federal agencies use different electronic procurement systems, such as AMS's Procurement Desktop and Compusearch PRISM. There's a plethora of them out there. It takes lots of time to train specialists on the use of new systems when they move from one agency to another. Imagine a world where the new contract specialist could simply log on and start using the same system because they knew how it worked. All agencies should use the same software for procurement.

53 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…)
    Sarah CovingtonSarah Covington shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    5 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...
      • AcqProfAcqProf commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Just to amplify on the lack of competition and eroding industrial base, another downside to having a single government-wide electronic contracting system is that it crowds out small business participation from the competitive process – and we know small business is the engine of innovation and creativity especially in the advancement in technology solutions.

      • AcqProfAcqProf commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Regarding the “push for a standard procurement process across the federal government”, on the surface this sounds like a sensible approach in the short term. However, once you peel back the onion several trends appear.

        (1) The “Technology” phobia and barriers will be a thing of the past

        The acquisition workforce is getting younger and technical savvy. The new generation of acquisition professionals don’t get “hung up” about technology as some of us “seasoned” acquisition professionals do. These young professionals will need continual challenges and will not be satisfied with the same old same old – they do not view themselves as back office, transactional electronic “paper pushers” but as forward thinking strategists. They are not challenged buy technology, they will need to be challenged based on the degree of trust and empowerment that management and leadership bestow upon them. This will impact on their ability to effectively structure the appropriate types of business arrangements and creative solutions. Technology is not a barrier.

        (2) Technology obsolescence & lack of a competitive marketplace

        If one source becomes the sole provider of electronic contracting systems across the government, the result will be that many potential competitors’ will target another sector such as state and local governments or completely shift to another line of business. This will erode the industrial base for federal acquisition management systems.

        (3) Been there – done that

        DoD tried this one-size-fits-all approach with the Standard Procurement System more than a decade ago. This standardization effort failed for many reasons.

      • Peter G. Tuttle, CPCMAdminPeter G. Tuttle, CPCM (Admin, Better Buy) commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Sarah: Interesting and intriguing concept. IMHO it would be pretty tough to narrow down to a single "one size fits all" solution given the fact that there are currently multiple commercial sources that can meet the needs of the government competitively. These sources will demand, and rightfully so, fair opportunity to compete for agency requirements. Unless our national focus shifts away from CICA, fair opportunity, socio-economic advantages, harnessing the strength of the competitive marketplace, etc. to some other less open and competitive process, it is unlikely that one source will provide these solutions. Additionally, when you have only one source you create artifical dependance and monopoly and you can see your costs skyrocket.

      • J.D.BaileyJ.D.Bailey commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Within Federal agencies (DOD, Marines, Army, USAF, Navy) use different everything electronic procurement forms, systems.... Presently you re-wright SOWs/PWSs... many ways for each Acq/Contract. One set of requirements, but many ways to get requirements to an RTEP. In the past 12 months I have used three different contracts for task and writing requirements different each time (this is a health/stress issue).
        Automate more, get IT/Services...Weapon requirements from the source customer, feed the requirements to academia for reality checks, solutions, and finally project presentation to industry for proposals, then let industry do what they do best make a product that an Independent party (academia) has well defined .

      • infradantinfradant commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yep, and FBO needs a new up-to-date user friendly system with more options for searches, etc. They need a system that does not have so many logins and clicks

      Feedback and Knowledge Base

      © 2009 UserVoice | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy