The General Services Administration buys a lot of stuff (products and services) for the country, and they're figuring out how to help us all get what we pay for.

Overall, the GSA's trying to figure out how to break from traditional bureaucracy, learning from private industry and the public, asking people what they think via a site BetterBuy.

One really good idea from BetterBuy is being tried now.

The GSA wants to break away from the traditional system where the companies that provide the stuff help specify what the stuff should be. Normally, they put out Requests for Information and Requests for Proposals, and companies help the GSA figure out what to specify.

That means the companies that want the business gets to define what the business is, and can tailor that to their strengths and weaknesses. Any change to this could threaten the less effective, less competitive businesses.

The deal is to open up this process to everyone, including the public and the companies who want business from the Feds, so that we can work together for the country. One way to do that is on the Net using a Wiki, and that's what they've created, the BetterBuy Pilot(s) Wiki.

GSA is seeking input on a requirement to provide a data repository for data.gov. The data.gov pilot was ready to launch on March 25, 2010. The second is called "Clearpath". For this one, GSA is looking for input on the technical infrastructure for our Clearpath hosting, and developing the approach for a future acquisition. GSA will launch Clearpath in a few weeks.

You are invited to contribute in multiple ways:

(1) Help us write the draft solicitation

(2) Ask questions below each section

(3) Engage in meaningful technical debate below each section

(4) Point out mistakes

(5) Ask general questions

(6) Contribute! This is the most transparent acquisition that GSA FEDSIM has ever attempted.

For better explanations check out Federal Computer Week GSA tries wiki approach to develop RFPs or GSA solicits wisdom of the crowd for acquisition improvements

Let me first apologize to Andy Krzmarzick, as I have been promising a post on performance-based contracting and how it relates to the Better Buy Project and the Acquisition 2.0 initiative. I actually started that post, but put in on hold a bit as I found something of interest that I have also been meaning to discuss.

At the Better Buy Project forum at the National Association of Public Administration (NAPA) last December, I was discussing with Mary Davie of the General Services Administration the need to reform not only acquisition, but the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) itself. We both commented that we often get curious looks when we mention this in conversation, but part of the rebuilding of the acquisition mission is to look at the FAR, as it seems ripe for an overhaul. In fact, the FAR can be fertile ground for change, and that change can certainly be done under the umbrella of Acquisition 2.0 tools and methodologies, much like performance-based contracting.

The FAR, in my opinion, has become a snake-pit of over-regulation; a maze of parochial interest. As lawmakers turned to help constituencies and thus narrow interests, or through well-meaning yet poorly planned and poorly though out policy, the current FAR is an example of simply how not to conduct world-class buying.

I was revisiting a wonderful piece of common sense approaches to reform by the Procurement Roundtable (PRT) that are very relevant to the current transformation discussion, not to mention illustrative of how difficult reform can be as the report is dated December, 1999.

The recommendation regarding policy guidance I believe to be spot on, and concur with the PRT that the way forward is much less regulation and far fewer detailed procurement laws. The reform process would work in an Acquisition 2.0 construct, where mission and broad policy statements commence the process of the final outcome; a digital, e-procurement guidance or FAR 2.0.

Under FAR 2.0, guidance should focus on outcomes and mission by concentrating on National or agency goals and objectives. This guidance would not be regulation, and would certainly not be details about how to perform the mission.

The next step is recreating FAR 2.0 would be a crowd sourcing initiative, much like the Better Buy Project. The acquisition community would be able to comment on eliminating the redundancy and over-regulation, focus on commercial best practices, and eliminate those existing statutes, agency regulations, and other directives that burden procurement and detail how to perform the mission. This approach is what the PRT referred to as a "zero-based" approach; which is to start with a blank sheet and add only what can be thoroughly justified.

Further input would of course be proposals for re-creating and streamlining the buying process, changing the new FAR to make it a "what, not how" model of world-class procurement. The rule for streamlining and creating FAR 2.0 would be to follow those commercial processes that allow for a fair and open acquisition process, and allow for real transparency and accountability to the taxpayer. This new process would be based on constant innovation; eliminating and revising any existing guidance or policy that does not allow for the leveraging of new information technology. The goal is to build an acquisition process for the 21st century, and executed by a right-sized and blended 21st century acquisition workforce with the right skills and capabilities to leverage this new process.

Not an easy task, no doubt. However, recognizing the institutional challenges that have hampered reform in the past are the first areas to attack by change agents and leaders who claim to want real, meaningful reform, and who are also demanding accountability and transparency. Some agencies will continue claiming uniqueness, and Congress may the biggest obstacle. However, the Acquisition 2.0 forum and the collaborative nature of this FAR 2.0 initiative can use the successes and lessons learned from Better Buy to involve all the concerned stakeholders, including the organizations that published the overly prescriptive guidance and have legitimacy to claims of uniqueness. Only by taking risks and exploring innovative ideas can we expect to see change that matters.

After attending the recent Better Buy Project panel this past week, I blogged about my observations and some issues that came up from that conversation.

That lively discussion continued on the GovLoop Acquisition 2.0 community. Although many commentators took different takes, I think we all agreed that one of the central tenets of successfully implementing Gov 2.0 can focus on one principal area: change management.

Like the Better Buy Project and all Gov 2.0 projects, these initiatives are typically undertaken to changing the overall business environment, and the federal procurement process for Acquisition 2.0. Whether trying to improve the requirements definition process, change roles, or define new ways of doing business, and effective Change Management Process is paramount to stress the benefits, demonstrate long-term value, and minimize the resulting impact on current projects.

Implement a Change Management Process in Gov 2.0

Unlike most projects with a typical project manager, I do believe in the need for the extra project leadership via change agents; committed leaders who are willing to take the risks associated with these initiatives and drive them to fruition. Due to the nature of the current environment in Government procurement (e.g. risk-aversion and status-quo mentality), change is a difficult pill to swallow. This mindset is further exacerbated by the perception of disrupting productivity, as the acquisition workforce has been forced to do more with less. Many past improvement initiatives have also not been driven by change agents, and thus go nowhere. In regards to Gov 2.0, many procurement officials feel they do not have the time to bother with yet another program from leadership that only makes one roll their eyes with the perception of no real value or benefit to helping one do their job better, faster, and cheaper; another passing fad. Thus the need for real commitment from the top and the change agents as demonstrated with Better Buy, as the project is showing real value and a commitment to execute.

Successful implementation will rest with Change Management, which is defined as the process of monitoring and controlling change within a project. By managing the implementation of Gov 2.0 initiatives in regards to acquisition, leaders can:

• Reduce the negative impact on current acquisition projects
• Identify new issues and risks, and implement lessons learned as a result of changes implemented during execution
• Ensure that implemented changes do not affect overall desired objectives and outcomes
• Control cost of implemented changes

Successful Change Process: A Four Step Model

Change Management in itself is a project within a project. It is already being executed at the General Services Administration (GSA), where projects are actively being sought to pilot the inputs from Better Buy users. Nonetheless, implementing and executing on Gov 2.0 initiatives can follow these Change Management steps:

Identify: The first step in the change process is to identify the need for change, which is apparent in federal acquisitions. This is the overall objective of the Better Buy Project, where any member can suggest a change to the process. Some of the discussion at the panel included capturing statistical data of the user community and their input. However, it is the relevancy of the input that is most important. Further, anonymity can be a powerful tool to providing desired input, free from possible managerial reprisals. The Better Buy Project will hopefully serve as a template for capturing input for change, and helping leaders identify needed focus on process improvements and areas to retool business operations. The Securing Americans Value and Efficiency (SAVE) program is another example of real benefit through collaborative processes, although these types of tools should be done with more frequency. Identifying the need to change is driven by value added; describing the change, and identifying drivers, benefits, costs and likely impact of the change on the project, process, or agency.

Review: This is what the Better Buy Project is currently doing in its Phase II, which is to investigate the recommended changes to identify feasibility and impact, both long and short-term. GSA experts are looking for the low-hanging fruit, and those suggestions that can be successful delivered to have the greatest impact with the least disruption. Normally changes which are not critical to project delivery should be avoided whenever possible to prevent "scope creep," but the Web 2.0 construct seemingly turns this project management dictum on its head. Implemented changes will have impact on project delivery, specifically by buying better, faster, cheaper. It is the disruption on current delivery that can not suffer, and why Butter Buy implementation will be so difficult. Finding ways to implement gradual change is preferred, as lessons learned can be studied, reviewed, and implemented with more meaningful impact.  

Approve: Experts have to review the recommended changes and input, as some recommendations are real and others use these forums as an outlet for venting frustration. Nonetheless, it is the naysayers that can also have value on the conversation, as they may point things out that are not always clear to those who are committed and engaged towards success. As discussed at the panel, the suggestions on Better Buy with the greatest number of votes does not necessarily mean ranking, so leaders do need to weigh the value of the input. More importantly, these decisions need to be communicated to the user community, as members should be able to see what input is being considered, and what is not. Ultimately, these decisions should be based on the level of risk, impact, benefits and cost to the overall project or process, and the decision may be to decline, delay or approve the change request. Either way, this level of communication and transparency can go a long way to refining input. More importantly, input will hopefully keep coming as users can see execution is the real end goal, and the initiative is a worthwhile investment of time to participate.

Implement: Here is another way to use collaboration tools with user input. Who knows best on the projects or processes that can be improved than users? Of course members will no doubt vent some more, but that is why input is vetted by experts and leaders to ensure the cream rises to the top. Leadership needs to ensure proper input gets implemented, and also ensure that proper communications strategies are put in place such that changes are scheduled and implemented accordingly. After implementation, leadership, helped with the users, can review the effects of the change on selected  project and processes to ensure that they have achieved the desired outcomes. This in effect creates a change agent community, which helps leadership further communicate outcomes and execute more efficiently. Further, these successful changes then need to be broadly communicated to the overall Gov 2.0 community, to further build bridges and roadmaps for successful implementations across Government.

Throughout a sound Change Management Process, Government leaders can monitor and control changes to selected projects and processes by communicating often, and in turn ensuring that communication is broadcast using the same collaboration tools and keeping track of changes that have been accepted, rejected, or in review. This in effect creates a transparent, up-to-date Change Register.

By completing these steps, Government leaders can carefully monitor and control project and process changes, which in turn increase the likelihood of success. I look forward to further actions by the Better Buy Project, and other initiatives that are leading the way in changing how the Government operates.

The other day, someone said to me: "Hey, Dan, how is the BetterBuy Project like legendary recording artist Bruce Springsteen?"

"Simple," I replied. "You haven't really experienced it until you've seen it live!"

Happily, your chance to really experience the BetterBuy Project has arrived! The next executive session of the Industry Advisory Committee, one of the project's key sponsors, will feature the founders of BetterBuy live and in person, discussing the project and answering your questions about it. Here's the event info:

We are pleased to announce the next IAC Executive Session featuring The BetterBuy Project on December 16th, 2009 from 9:00am - 11:00am at The National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), 900 7th Street, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20001. The BetterBuy Project, a collaborative initiative with GSA, ACT-IAC and the National Academy for Public Administration (NAPA), has become front page news and has captured the imaginations of both government and industry acquisition professionals. Come and learn more about this dynamic project and how it could dramatically change - for the better - the way the government buys products and services. BetterBuy Panelists:

• Chris Dorobek, Managing Editor of FederalNewsRadio.com and Co- Anchor of the afternoon Federal News Radio program (Moderator)
• Mary Davie, Assistant Commissioner of GSA's Office of Assisted Acquisition Services
• Peter Tuttle, Senior Procurement Policy Analyst with Distributed Solutions, Inc.
• Chris Hamm, Operations Director of GSA's Federal Systems Integration and Management Center (FEDSIM)
• Esther Burgess, SVP and Deputy COO of Vistronix, Inc.
• Lena Trudeau, Director of Strategic Initiatives for the National Academy for Public Administration (NAPA)

IAC Executive Sessions are great opportunities for IAC members to meet with key government executives and gain a first-hand understanding of the organization's plans, issues, and challenges. This event is on the record.

We hope you can join us for this great event. Register now!

Note: The following was also posted on Huffington Post, SF Chronicle, and Craig's personal blog You can also follow Craig on Twitter.

We're seeing something new from Washington, sites which are being used to help figure out how to better serve citizens.

Toward that ends we're seeing sites used to get ideas as to how to run agencies better, and how to improve fundamental processes involved in areas like acquisition, the purchase of the stuff people need to do their job. Some innovation sites are internal, focusing on ideas from the rank and file that management needs to hear about. Some innovation sites are outward-facing, trying to figure out how better to work with the public.

The American Council for Technology/Industry Advisory Council, the National Academy for Public Administration and GSA have launched the BetterBuy Project. The focus is on how our government can do a better job of buying stuff needed to serve the country.

Their blog has an explanation, in brief:

The federal government spends approximately $530 billion annually on the acquisition of a wide range of goods and services to meet mission needs, and the acquisition process represents one of the most important and complex areas of collaboration between government and the private sector. As demand increases, the complexity of what program managers need and what acquisition officials are buying has also increased. Government acquisition officials are being asked to do more with fewer resources. To provide the government with the goods and services it needs, the private sector is faced with an equally complex and challenging environment. Think of the hundreds of thousands of buys the government makes each year and the demand on the private sector to respond to those requests.

The BetterBuy Project team believes that we can increase transparency and openness in the process, potentially reducing costs to both the government and private sector, ultimately allowing government to deliver more value to taxpayers through the use of collaborative technologies. This vision, coupled with encouragement from the Obama Administration for federal agencies to use emerging social media platforms to share information and generate discussion on key issues, resulted in this collaborative effort between the General Services Administration, the American Council for Technology and Industry Advisory Council and the National Academy of Public Administration.

Our success depends on your ideas and support as we test those ideas.

In a few moments, GSA's Mary Davie and the National Academy of Public Administration's Lena Trudeau will be holding a press conference on the BetterBuy Project from the 2009 Executive Leadership Conference. They'll be discussing how the project works, what we hope to gain from it, and how all this stuff is actually making government better. Assuming all the A/V stuff works out, we'll be live-tweeting the whole thing! Follow @betterbuyproj or follow the whole event at #elc09.

Update: Schedules being what they are, we're now slated to start a bit after 4:30. Sorry for the delay!

Update 2: Via the excellent GovCon (@GovCon), here's a very cool live twitter stream of the ELC action: The livestream has been moved below the fold, along with a transcript of our livetweets. Thanks for playing along!

Thanks for checking out the BetterBuy Project. The federal government spends approximately $530 billion annually on the acquisition of a wide range of goods and services to meet mission needs, and the acquisition process represents one of the most important and complex areas of collaboration between government and the private sector. As demand increases, the complexity of what program managers need and what acquisition officials are buying has also increased. Government acquisition officials are being asked to do more with fewer resources. To provide the government with the goods and services it needs, the private sector is faced with an equally complex and challenging environment. Think of the hundreds of thousands of buys the government makes each year and the demand on the private sector to respond to those requests.

The BetterBuy Project team believes that we can increase transparency and openness in the process, potentially reducing costs to both the government and private sector, ultimately allowing government to deliver more value to taxpayers through the use of collaborative technologies. This vision, coupled with encouragement from the Obama Administration for federal agencies to use emerging social media platforms to share information and generate discussion on key issues, resulted in this collaborative effort between the General Services Administration, the American Council for Technology and Industry Advisory Council and the National Academy of Public Administration.

Our success depends on your ideas and support as we test those ideas. We are excited by the thought that we'll encounter some new and unfamiliar territory. We'll keep you posted on what we're doing and how it's going throughout the process. You'll also hear from our contributing bloggers who will provide their thoughts, insights and experiences throughout our journey.

Thanks again for your help!

Hello and welcome to BetterBlog, the official blog of the BetterBuy Project! I'm Dan Munz, and I'll be your host-slash-webmaster here on this site.

As you know (or can find out by reading our FAQ), BetterBuy is a project dedicated to surfacing innovative ideas for making federal acquisition more open, participatory, collaborative -- and, ultimately, making government an efficient and effective customer. My organization, the National Academy of Public Administration, is part of the BetterBuy team because we believe that, as our President Jenna Dorn often puts it, "none of us is as smart as all of us." Federal acquisition is an area of government that could really benefit from some fresh eyes. We're seeking ideas not only from those who oversee the federal acquisition process, but from experts who study it, as well as the real customers of the acquisition process -- the federal agencies and vendors who have to navigate it.

We're collecting those ideas over at our main site, a nifty little web portal where you can suggest ideas, discuss them, and vote on the best ones so that they rise to the top. The coolest thing about this all, in my humble opinion, is that we're not all talk; as part of this project, GSA (in particular, the truly awesome Mary Davie) will actually pilot some of the best ideas on real, living, breathing acquisitions. This, my friends, is government 2.0 in action.

Our recipe on this blog is simple: One part transparency, two parts great ideas, shake vigorously. This is the place where you can follow along as we select, implement, and report on how the selected ideas are really turning out and what lessons we're learning along the way. We'll also be inviting a whole bunch of exciting guest-bloggers - from renowned experts on federal acquisition to new leaders in the world of "government 2.0" - to share their perspectives and ideas about making the acquisition process more open and accessible.

So take some time to explore the blog, click around - and, more importantly, to head to BetterBuy and share or vote on some great ideas - and check back often as we document the process of making federal acquisition more transparent, less complex, and, well...just plain better.