In the realm of Procurement, dealing with contracting can pose challenges for individuals and businesses. However, effective Procurement Management can provide a solution to this problem. The United States Government, being an extensive institution, depends on contractors for various logistical tasks that are essential in maintaining a smooth government operation. Due to limited resources in terms of manpower, equipment, and supplies, the government relies on independent companies to compete for contracts related to building construction and street development.
The success of this business approach has led it to shift a majority of its product procurement to this method. However, regulations are necessary for this type of business. It would be unfair if the same contractor were chosen repeatedly, thus compromising the chances of other companies competing for government contracts. To ensure fairness in the bidding process, the Government has implemented guidelines for selecting a contractor. These guidelines encourage the inclusion of minority-owned companies, including those owned by women.
In order to ensure fair treatment for all contractors and their companies during the consideration for a contract, the Government must select contractors based on established Equal Opportunity hiring policies and without a history of unfair treatment towards employees. Moreover, it is important to distribute wealth evenly among contractors, which will likely result in smaller, minority-owned companies being eventually selected to work on a contract.
Now, the goal is to guarantee that the person in charge of awarding the contract remains unbiased and impartial, unaffected by external forces. This presents a new set of difficulties as we aim for fairness. One of these challenges involves deciding which company will be chosen to provide services for a bigger company. In the United States Government, multiple companies are competing for contracts, and some utilize lobbyists to sway politicians and secure advantageous contracted work.
In 1996, the government chose to close Kelly Air Force Base in San Antonio. Rather than retaining control over the land and property, the government decided to return it to the city, granting them the freedom to decide its future use. City officials proposed contracting it out for government aircraft maintenance, with the aim of benefiting both the city and the United States Government. Numerous lobbyists sought to sway the city’s decision in favor of their own company, resulting in allegations of corruption against some city officials.
Eventually, Boeing emerged as the winner of the contract; however, several individuals faced allegations of unethical behavior. It is possible that the lobbyist may not be utilized but rather act as a covert informant. There exist documented instances where competing companies have placed their representatives within organizations responsible for awarding contracts, aiming to establish relationships with key decision-makers. While these tactics are generally viewed as dishonest, they continue to be employed. Clearly, this raises ethical concerns as it provides an unfair advantage to companies that adhere to ethical guidelines.
If a company can afford to hire a lobbyist, it can potentially bankrupt smaller companies through the use of these strategies. Additionally, there is also the issue of the “good old boy” system, where the company with insider knowledge tends to secure contract victories. The individual responsible for awarding the contract may have a connection to a contractor who offers the desired service. Whether they are a friend or relative is inconsequential because, in the “good old boy” system, the contract winner is predetermined.
The bidding process will merely be a formality at this stage to create the appearance of fairness. In a recent incident in San Antonio, city officials were accused of unfairly granting contracts to the same company. Specifically, the company was awarded contracts for street and building repair without considering other companies. Consequently, allegations of unfair business practices arose and resulted in the termination of multiple city officials. Meanwhile, during their search for contractors to fulfill the demand for the Beret, the United States Government had to address the issue of child labor.
The United States Army encountered a challenging situation when they sought a contractor within the country to fulfill an order for one million Berets. Unfortunately, no domestic contractor was capable of meeting the order without outsourcing it to manufacturers overseas. This created a dilemma for the United States, as they needed to find a contractor who would ensure that the subcontractors they employed did not exploit children under the age of 16 in the production of the Berets. Failing to do so would have allowed subcontractors to hire underage children, potentially leading to widespread controversy within our nation.
China, Taiwan, Pakistan, and India were all considered as potential subcontractors for the job. However, these countries were known for employing children under sixteen for labor. The contractor had to be careful in their selection of subcontractors due to the United States Government’s stance on this issue. Disqualification from future government contracts could result in significant financial losses.
This would also be true if the selected contractor was a business accused of numerous Equal Opportunity violations. The Government must guarantee that a company winning a contract complies with our Governments Equal Opportunity policies. How would it appear for the government, which strives to have the strictest E policies, to hire a company that breaches the same rules it enforces? To address such issues, the government has implemented various guidelines aimed at ensuring a fair process when seeking out contractors.
The policy of prohibiting a sole vendor is implemented to promote fairness in the contractor selection process for the United States Government. This policy aims to prevent one company from having a monopoly on all contracting work. However, there is an exception to this rule when the contractor or vendor is the exclusive provider of a service for the Government. In such situations, the Government has no alternative but to engage with that single contractor. Another method employed in contractor selection involves utilizing a points system.
The selection of contractors in this system is based on various criteria including their past work, potential for future contracts, representation of minorities and women, and adherence to other governmental policies. Rather than being chosen solely based on the highest or lowest number of points, contractors are selected based on the company with the best average points among all bidders. This approach ensures that the procurement manager avoids hiring the lowest bidder who may struggle to complete the contract or the highest bidder who does not offer cost savings for the government.
The government has implemented various methods to save money, and today’s discussion focuses on some of the most prevalent approaches. These actions are necessary to promote fairness in the marketplace. Through these efforts, the United States Government maximizes its resources and ensures equity in distributing wealth among our country’s companies.
