Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements Essay

Exclusively available on IvyPanda Available only on IvyPanda

Introduction

According to Engelbeck (2002), the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) is a law that establishes several methods and procedures for contractual acquisition supposed to be handled by a federal asset regardless of the form; that is, either tangible or intangible. Such rules and processes have several differences but are similar in the sense that they endorse ultimate competition, which is usually referred to as full and open competition. Although the FAR plays a crucial role in the federal acquisition process, it has various shortcomings that must be addressed in order to improve the selection process. This paper, therefore, seeks to establish various ways of improving some of the existing competition requirements in the acquisition process.

We will write a custom essay on your topic a custom Essay on Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements
808 writers online

Main body

The government acquisition process is comprehensive because it dedicates the entire competitive process to sealed bidding, negotiations, as well as alternative contracting methods. For instance, competitive procurement has different contracting techniques that are characterized by distinct levels of competition as established in the following paragraphs (TechnologyEvaluation, 2012):

  • Sealed bidding: This depends on competitive bids known as sealed bids, and are usually provided in response to an invitation for bids (IFB).
  • Contracting by negotiation: This depends on the competitive proposals, and is normally issued in response to a request for proposals (RFP).
  • Simplified acquisitions: These depend on quotations and are normally issued in response to a request for quotation (RFQ).

Simplified acquisitions are reserved for small acquisitions that are limited to $100,000 while contracting negotiation is reserved for acquisitions that are related to the overall value other than price (TechnologyEvaluation, 2012). Finally, sealed bidding is linked with the selection of the offeror with the least assessed financial value. The following elements describe the bidding procedure for sealed bidding.

Preparing the invitation for bids.
Making public the invitation for bids.
Receipt of bids.
The public opening of the bids.
Evaluation and comparison of received bids.
Selection of the lowest-priced bids.
Contract Award to the lowest bidder.

Similarly, the FAR Part 15 Process Model is another section of the acquisition process that needs to be looked into because it is ineffective in several ways (Edwards, 2003). This section deals with the solicitation of finalized proposals from the offeror and creates a platform for negotiation with several competitors. The first key characteristic of this process model is that all competitors are expected to provide a full proposal at the start of the completion, which must cover all the evaluation factors necessary for the award of the contract. The second characteristic is that an agency carries out negotiations with more than one organization.

Implementation of Change

Edwards (2003) asserts that the FAR Part 15 process model is extremely cumbersome, time-consuming, as well as costly for use where there are several competitors. For that reason, I would propose that the current acquisition procedure be simplified further so that offerors can have a better chance of being considered in complex contracts. In my opinion, it is quite irrelevant that all competitors must provide complete proposal information, or that agencies must evaluate all competitors in accordance with all evaluation factors. Instead, it is more realistic where competitors are evaluated in phases that gradually reduce the competitive field because much less information would be needed from the competitors. As a result, the procedure will be much simpler than before due to the elimination of voluminous information that was needed from the competitors. Some key changes that should be implemented are explained in the following paragraphs.

Reduction of Evaluation Factors

The number of evaluation factors is crucial in setting the intensity of information required by the government so as to make an informed decision (Engelbeck, 2002). Several evaluation factors require excessive information from the competitors; thereby, making the selection process long, time-consuming, and tedious. As a way of eliminating this problem, I will ensure that only relevant evaluation factors are retained in order to have a smooth and simplified process. This decision will allow for a faster selection process than before because all the unnecessary requirements will be eliminated.

1 hour!
The minimum time our certified writers need to deliver a 100% original paper

Reduction of Proposal Information

Similarly, the intensity of proposal information expected from competitors play a central role in slowing the acquisition process; therefore, it is essential that such information is reduced (Engelbeck, 2002). As such, I will eliminate the need for accessing unnecessary information from competitors such as the writing of technical or management narratives, which are technically irrelevant. Instead of using written management proposals, I propose that agency personnel allow oral presentations where prove of competitors’ job performance is needed. This will save a lot of time that would otherwise be lost during the assessment of long management proposals.

Conclusion

As established, the acquisition process is considered ineffective because of the long and tedious process that must be followed in order to complete the selection process. Apart from wasting a lot of time, some competitors usually become victims of unfair selection. For that matter, proper change initiatives such as the ones proposed should be implemented in order to improve the situation. In conclusion, the acquisition process can be improved by implementing the proposed changes that include the reduction of evaluation factors, as well as required proposal information.

References

Edwards, V. J. (2003). Competitive Processes in Government Contracting: The FAR Part 15

2012. Web.

Engelbeck, R. M. (2002). Acquisition Management. Vienna, Virginia: Management Concepts,Inc.

TechnologyEvaluation: Sealed Bids (FAR Part 14). (2012). Web.

Print
Need an custom research paper on Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements written from scratch by a professional specifically for you?
808 writers online
Cite This paper
Select a referencing style:

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, February 1). Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements. https://ivypanda.com/essays/acquisition-process-and-competition-requirements/

Work Cited

"Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements." IvyPanda, 1 Feb. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/acquisition-process-and-competition-requirements/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) 'Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements'. 1 February.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements." February 1, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/acquisition-process-and-competition-requirements/.

1. IvyPanda. "Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements." February 1, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/acquisition-process-and-competition-requirements/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Acquisition Process and Competition Requirements." February 1, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/acquisition-process-and-competition-requirements/.

Powered by CiteTotal, the best bibliography tool
If you are the copyright owner of this paper and no longer wish to have your work published on IvyPanda. Request the removal
More related papers
Cite
Print
1 / 1