Industry Must Explain Commercial Best Practices To Government Agencies

“WASHINGTON TECHNOLOGY By Ross Wilkers

Assuming government leaders know what those practices are and how they work is not a good idea, according to the General Services Administration’s chief acquisition officer.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“Multiple cycles are running at once in the Trump administration’s push for structural changes in how the federal government buys $1 trillion in goods and services each year.

One cycle involves a rewrite of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the rules of the road that govern the purchasing. A second cycle focuses on shifting those buys more toward what is commercially-available and away from the custom-made route that dominates much of government acquisition.

A third cycle centers around how the government buys what it needs, especially on the technology front, and in particular the contracting mechanisms used to do so. Outcome-based or fixed-price contracting is high on the discussion agendas everywhere across public sector, and a focus for new leadership at the General Services Administration.

So if the government wants to move in the outcome-based direction that many at agencies and contractors have long wanted to go in, what does that mean for the GovCon industry and how does it alter the way tech services are priced?

At the Professional Services Council’s Federal Acquisition Conference on Thursday, GSA’s chief acquisition officer Larry Allen recommended companies both “promote those commercial best practices” and to not “assume that people in government know what they are.”

“Some will, some will not, but I think the general direction that we want to go in is getting away from government-unique pricing constructs,” said Allen, who also serves as GSA’s associate administrator for government-wide policy. “A large part of that is going to be looking at how we use cost-plus contracting and where we use cost-plus contracting.”

Wholesale changes in how those practices inform the structures of government contracts is likely to be a multi-year effort as FAR reforms and the movement to more commercial-like purchasing work their way through the system.

By the same token, elements of fixed-price contracting are being added as line items into larger programs as a way of introducing both the contractor and customer to that method.

Whereas cost-plus contracting means the risk is shared on both sides of the arrangements, outcome-based or fixed-price methods put substantially all of that risk onto the contractor. But the potential reward is higher based on savings achieved, which could mean higher profits for the contractor as opposed to cost-plus.

Carving out pieces of contracts and making them fixed-price is a method Leidos uses with its customers as a way to get both sides more familiar with the concept, Leidos’ chief growth officer Jason Albanese told us in an interview for our 2025 Top 100 ranking release.

During a June 4 earnings call, Science Applications International Corp.’s chief executive Toni Townes-Whitley told investors that some contracts could be better positioned for a fixed-price structure like enterprise IT.

Allen did caution PSC conference attendees that even if the idea is to bring down the overall use of cost-plus contracting, “it probably will not be eliminated” in its entirety.

The end result of how GovCon pricing structures change seems likely to be a hybrid of how commercial industries operate and the unique fabric of government buying, but Allen recommended companies make the connection between both worlds in talking with customers.

“I would try to emphasize, particularly to the senior leaders in our agency and other agencies, how these mirror your standard commercial practices,” Allen said. “The government isn’t going to be able to get there entirely, but we would like to move closer to those, and this is a particularly receptive audience to that theme.”

The onus is on industry to explain commercial best practices

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Ross Wilkers covers the business of government contracting, companies and trends that shape the market. He joined WT in 2017 and works with Editor-in-Chief Nick Wakeman to host and produce our WT 360 podcast that features discussions with the market’s leading executives and voices. Ross is a native of Northern Virginia and is an alumnus of George Mason University.

#CommercialTechnology #Education #governmentContracting #GovernmentContractors #Internet #Science #technology
Industry must explain COMMERCIAL BEST PRACTICES to government agencies. Don't assume they know what those practices are according to the GSA’s Chief Acquisition Officer.
https://rosecoveredglasses.wordpress.com/2026/04/21/industry-must-explain-commercial-best-practices-to-government-agencies-2/
#GovernmentContracting #CommercialBestPractices

Pricing Service Contracts With Credibility in Small Business Federal Government Contracting

“SMALLTOFEDS” By Ken Larson

Assuming a proposal to a government agency has an acceptable technical solution and past performance and management factors that convince the customer it is a viable candidate, then pricing may be the winning element in the source selection equation.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“The mechanics of government contract pricing have been discussed previously at this site. The discussion relates how pricing should be a natural outgrowth of the organization structure, market strategy, competitive analysis, business system design and long range planning:

Pricing Service Contracts


The above article also explains how long and short term pricing factors should be integrated with the management and technical elements of any given proposal and that a total view of the business is best presented by integrating long-term company strategy with short term proposal objectives. 

The purpose of this article is to augment the above discussion with tips on establishing and maintaining credibility in pricing to a government customer.

Certified Cost or Pricing Data

Certified cost or pricing data under the “Truth in Negotiations Act” (10 U.S.C. § 2306a) or TINA statute is proposal pricing, which for procurements greater than $750,000, is certified by the contractor as accuratecomplete and current as of the date of agreement on price. (Section 811 of the fiscal year 2018 NDAA includes a provision that increases the threshold up to $2,000,000). 

Truth In Negotiations Act (TINA)

The Absence Of A Certificate Does Not Eliminate Defective Pricing Liability.

The statement underlined above is a key principle in relationships with the government and its auditors. TINA influences a government auditor’s thinking and it is in the back of the mind of every contract negotiator. They are taught and learn by experience to look for TINA faults.  

Thus, even if your procurement does not meet the above threshold for TINA certification you should price to establish a similar credibility with your customer, even though you may not have to sign a TINA “Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing”. Doing so is simply good risk management in business.

You may read more about cost and pricing data and the negotiation process at the following link:

Contract Negotiation

Remember Historical Data is Precedent Setting

All auditors, negotiators and pricing analysts are preconditioned to utilize historical data. The last or most favorable price offered a customer for a commercial off-the- shelf product is strong support for what is currently being quoted. This is particularly true of GSA Schedule negotiations, product updates or repetitive buying situations.  If you are a commercial supplier, a quantity factor will also enter into play.  In general, orders of higher quantity than historical pricing quantities undergo downward pricing pressure by the buyer unless some other factor such as a non-recurring tooling charge, learning curve interruption, obsolescent material or other upward factors can be offered as support for a higher unit price on a higher quantity buy.

Educate Your Auditor

An auditor who is familiar with your forward pricing rates, your business system and your product lines will understand your proposal cost and pricing data better than one who has not been briefed on the big picture of your company business operation.  Take the time to conduct briefings at that level and acquaint new government personnel with your operations.  Do not assume he or she has read prior audit reports.  They may have done so but a face to face courtesy briefing is much more effective than reading some other auditors view of a specific proposal. 

This factor can be a double edged sword, however. An auditor who knows the operation extremely well can also spot deviations in cost and pricing data and require explanations for anomalies in pricing based on observed trends.

Develop a Comprehensive Basis of Estimate (BOE)

A good BOE should have the following principal attributes:

* Clear identification of the products, services, skills, materials and performance factors required to complete the contract and material/subcontract quotes, labor categories and skill sets to perform the effort.

* A description of the conditions under which the contractor will be required to perform and any related environmental or location factors that affect the hours or dollars quoted

* Specific references to product specifications that govern an acceptable product or services performance outcome and delivery acceptance so that the cost data has boundaries.

* A schedule for the contract that identifies discrete delivery dates for products and specific start and end dates for supporting labor so that escalation and price expiration are established. 

* A precise description of government/customer furnished material or facilities required and when it will be made available to the contractor to bound the expectations of the client with respect to elements your company cannot or will not control. 

Insure Compliance with Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Requirements

Small businesses are generally required to meet modified CAS coverage for service contracts. This requires consistency in the manner in which a small business quotes a proposal and the manner in which costs and billings are accounted after award.  You can read about these requirements at the following link:

What Small Business Should Know About FAR and CAS

Insure your proposal contains no unallowable costs and that your direct labor as well as your overhead and G&A rates are applied in accordance with your latest forward pricing agreement. If you do not have a forward pricing agreement, explain precisely how your rates were developed from a CAS compliant business system perspective:

FAR And CAS Compliant Business Systems

Utilize Weighted Guidelines as a Check to Prepare Support for the Profit Rate Quoted

Although policy in FAR Part 215-404-4 states that contracting officers ….” do not perform a profit analysis when assessing cost realism in competitive acquisitions”, it is wise to understand the contracting officer and his representatives are indirectly forming opinions of the risk to the contractor and the mix of cost elements in the proposal. That opinion directly effects profit negotiations and judgments.

Contractors should be aware that the Weighted Guidelines Method is mandatory for all negotiated procurements except Cost-Plus Award Fee Contracts and exceptions as approved by a higher authority. Contracting officers are to prepare their position using DD Form 1547 with associated backup and file it at the conclusion of negotiations.

Understanding the weighted guidelines method can assist in achieving a higher profit on a negotiation because a contractor can present a position at the table that logically supports the following elements required by FAR Part 215-404-4:


* Performance risk

* Contract type risk

* Facilities capital employed

Read more regarding the Weighted Guidelines Method at the following link:

Weighted Guidelines

Summary

A reputation for defective pricing leads to accusations of waste fraud and abuse in government contracting and is mostly about what a contractor knew regarding company prices at the time a bid was negotiated and what the contractor did not disclose in the supporting data regarding the likely cost outcome of the contract.  

Actions taken by the government and litigation resulting from defective pricing become part of the contractor past performance record and must be disclosed during competition for other programs. 

Avoid defective pricing accusations by establishing credibility with your customer through consistent, regulatory-compliant, cost and pricing in your proposal submissions and negotiations.”


Pricing Service Contracts With Credibility in Small Business Federal Government Contracting

#credibility #governmentContracting #GovernmentContractors #news #pricing #technology

Simplified Acquisition Procedures And Fast Payment On Government Contracts

By Jennifer Jones 

“Simplified Acquisition Procedures (SAP) are a flexible tool when conditions are right. They are low visibility and not “sexy” like weapons systems. But they account for most of the purchases we [the government] make, and a substantial amount of the money we spend.”

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

“New contracting professionals often start out using these procedures. So, I feel it is warranted to spend some time discussing them. An often misunderstood or over-looked aspect of SAP leveraged by the government contracting workforce endeavors to balance government risk with a contractor’s need for cash flow—namely, use of Fast Payment procedures.

As discussed in previous articles in this series, cash flow is a major motivator for industry (see “Prompt Payment Act” article, July-August 2025 issue of Defense Acquisition magazine). It can increase the size of the industrial base, enhance competition, and otherwise encourage participation in our mission success. And if we can reassure vendors about timely payment, their prices may be lower. 

Enter Simplified Acquisition 

SAP means the procedures covered in parts 12 and 13 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) are designed to reduce administrative costs, improve opportunities for all types of small businesses, promote efficiency and economy in contracting, and avoid unnecessary burdens for both government and industry. 

These goals are accomplished by designing procedures and processes that are less formal than those used in other parts of the FAR. Documentation requirements are reduced; timelines can be compressed. Detailed steps are reduced or eliminated and great discretion is afforded the government when using SAP. Also, certain statutes and clauses do not apply to SAP [e.g., the Competition in Contracting Act—SAP (Simplified Acquisition Procedures | Acquisition.GOV)]will be a topic for another article. 

But in brief, the procedures in question include use of the governmentwide commercial purchase card, Blanket Purchase Agreements, and purchase orders. For purposes of this article, note that an entire FAR subpart 13.4 was dedicated to Fast Payment. With the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO), this topic has been moved to RFO FAR subpart 32.12. 

The Uniqueness of Fast Payment 

To understand how unique (to the government) Fast Payment procedures are, we first must discuss normal receipt and payment processes. We normally issue a contract; the vendor delivers and invoices the government. The government receives supplies or services, inspects and accepts them. Only then will the seller get paid in accordance with the Prompt Payment Act, which generally establishes a payment due date 30 days after the acceptance of supplies/services or receipt of invoice. This can create hardship for vendors carrying those costs, sometimes for months, until we (eventually) make payment. This is especially problematic when delivery occurs at distant locations with limited communications (e.g., to a war zone or remote area). When we elect to use Fast Payment procedures, the entire process changes. 

When using these procedures, we are allowed to pay the contractor prior to the government receipt, inspection, and acceptance of the supplies! This could cut weeks if not months off the payment timeframe. So, it is very beneficial for the vendors. 

But do you see any risk involved? What if we never receive the items or the vendors are not vetted? Since we have already paid, we have no recourse, right? That is not so! Herein lies the beauty of Fast Payment procedures. The government is willing to take some risks to help the vendor with its payment timeframes. But in return, we put some of that risk back on the vendor. Specifically, when we include that clause in our purchase orders, it means that by submitting an invoice, the vendor is certifying the supplies have been delivered in accordance with the contract (to post office, common carrier like UPS, or first point of government receipt [like a transshipment point for things going overseas]). 

The clause also requires the vendor to replace, repair, or correct any supplies the government does not receive—or receives damaged—or that are not in accordance with the contract. Therefore, while the government assumes some risk, we mitigate that risk by the language of the Fast Payment clause at RFO FAR 52.232-90.

Conditions for Use 

Well, this is a good deal, right? Why don’t we use it all the time? The answer lies in our willingness to accept risk, in terms of contract/project performance and dollar exposure. So RFO FAR 32.1202 establishes parameters to balance risk equitably. The language specifies the following conditions when and where we may use the Fast Payment procedures: 

a. The transaction cannot exceed the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (currently $350,000 in normal circumstances) per the FAR. However, the DoW FAR Supplement (DFARS) 232. 1202(a) states an individual order may exceed the Simplified Acquisition Threshold for brand name commercial subsistence products for commissary resale and for medical supplies being shipped directly overseas. 

b. Delivery will be to a distant, remote location where communications may limit the use of normal receipt processes. (Use of these procedures enhances our ability to find suppliers willing to ship to overseas locations, to ships at sea, and to war zones.) 

c. Title to the supplies passes to the government upon delivery to the post office, common carrier, or initial point of government receipt. 

d. The supplier agrees to replace, repair, or correct supplies not properly received. 

e. The purchase is made as a firm-fixed-price purchase order or contract.

f. A system is in place to ensure the documentation of delivery, timely feedback to the contracting officer in case of problems, and verification that the supplier in question does not have a record of poor integrity with prior fast payment orders.

Procedures 

Once we meet the conditions noted above, we must take a few more steps when issuing our purchase order or Blanket Purchase Agreement per RFO FAR 32.1203. The items must be shipped with prepaid transportation included. The vendor must send invoices directly to the payment/finance office clearly marked “FAST PAY” per the clause to ensure that the invoices are not held pending documented acceptance. Also, per the clause, outer shipping containers must be marked “FAST PAY.” (This ideally will trigger the receiver’s recall of their duties under the next bullet.) The copy of the contract sent to the receiving office (consignee) must include the following statement: 

Consignee’s Notification to Purchasing Activity of Nonreceipt, Damage, or Nonconformance

The consignee shall notify the purchasing office promptly after the specified date of delivery of supplies not received, damaged in transit, or not conforming to specifications of the purchase order. Unless extenuating circumstances exist, the notification should be made not later than 60 days after the specified date of delivery. 

This notification is intended to ensure that we “close the loop” with the contracting officer in the event of any issues so that they may demand correction, replacement, or repair within the 180 days allowed by the clause. 

The government is willing to take some risks to help the vendor with its payment timeframes. But in return, we put some of that risk back on the vendor. Specifically, when we include that clause in our purchase orders, it means that by submitting an invoice, the vendor is certifying the supplies have been delivered in accordance with the contract. 

I was curious about how this all works considering DoW’s use of Wide Area Workflow (WAWF). Well, the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.232-7006 Wide Area Workflow Payment Instructions specifically state that “Fast Pay requests are only permitted when FAR 52.213-1 (sic) is included in the contract.” So Fast Pay is considered and allowed when using WAWF. 

I also was curious about the Government Accountability Office (GAO)’s take on Fast Payment procedures. In 1968, the GAO issued an appropriation act decision in B-155253. In this decision, GAO opined on the legality of Fast Payment procedures as included in the Armed Services Procurement Regulation (predecessor to the Defense Acquisition Regulation, predecessor to the FAR/DFARS). GAO stated that initially they disapproved of using such procedures unless the DoD included reviews and internal audits as outlined in their letter to DoD. The revised Fast Payment procedures included such internal controls, so they were approved. This emphasizes how critical it is to “close the loop” on items paid for as discussed in the procedures. Also, to avoid an illegal advance payment, you will recall that the government takes title to the supplies at the same time that the vendor is allowed to invoice. 

Later GAO decisions, often motivated by savings, followed. In B-158487, the concern about advanced payments was addressed, and documented savings swayed the GAO to approve a similar procedure for the General Services Administration. In B-205868, GAO addressed the use of similar procedures by the former Veterans Administration (VA) to enable the VA to take prompt payment discounts. In all of these decisions, a main concern of the GAO was risk and the need for internal controls to ensure that the government actually receives the supplies and services it purchases. The safeguards established in Fast Payment procedures provide those internal controls. 

I refer you to the purposes for using SAP as noted at the beginning of this article. Clearly, the use of Fast Payment procedures contributes to at least two of those purposes: It improves opportunities for small businesses (who find it more difficult to carry the finance costs) and it avoids the unnecessary burden doing so imposes on vendors. Missions accomplished! 

When I was an intern, my first real assignment was working in an office entitled “Special Purchase Urgent Requirements.” We were running fast and hard, with minimal time for on-the-job training. I will never forget preparing my first purchase order and wondering whether to include the Fast Payment clause. I asked my mentor, and she said I should use it whenever the delivery location was far away from the vendor’s facility. So, I took that advice and ran with it. I did not understand what it meant until at least 15 years later, when I started teaching the then-called “small purchase” course. And in fact, a student (AP) in a recent class is working in a similar office now, which prompted me to write this article.   

To summarize, if you are purchasing supplies for delivery to a remote location and you meet the conditions, consider using Fast Payment procedures unless there is evidence to the contrary. This is especially valid if your order includes shipping items overseas, to a ship afloat, or to a deployed unit, and experience difficulty finding suppliers willing to wait for payment.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

JENNIFER JONES is an intermittent professor of Contract Management in the Warfighting Acquisition University South Region. She has worked in the warfighting contracting field for 46 years and holds a B.S. from the College of William and Mary. The author can be contacted at  [email protected].

#books #FARPart12 #FARPart13 #governmentContracting #news #PromptPayment #simplifiedAcaquistion #technology
SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITION PROCEDURES and fast payment on contracts are a flexible tool when conditions are right, accounting for most of the purchases the government makes.
https://rosecoveredglasses.wordpress.com/2026/04/17/the-merits-of-fast-payment-on-government-contracts/
#GovernmentContracting #SimplifiedAcquistion #PromptPayment

The President calls January 6th a Day of Love, and it was, according to reporting from @fahrenthold.bsky.social & Andrea Fuller in @nytimes.com , at least for Event Strategies, which was awarded a no-bid contract to plan the event.

The company, with principals with ties to Trump, has been awarded $13 million in contracts, many of which were no-bid contracts.

#law #contracts #GovernmentContracting #Trump #Corruption

https://www.contractsprofblog.com/2026/04/a-shocking-crime-occurred-on-january-6-2021/

‘Total Time Accounting’ In Small Business Government Service Contracting

“SMALLTOFEDS” By Ken Larson

“It is necessary to establish a written policy and procedure disclosing time keeping practices to government auditors and fact-finding teams.

Total Time Accounting” makes all hours a part of the record and keeps records free from waste fraud and abuse or defective pricing allegations.”

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

“In small business government service contracting, it is necessary to establish a written policy and procedure disclosing time keeping practices to government auditors and fact-finding teams. Included must be the company process for both pricing and accounting for overtime. In doing so, topics such as compensated and uncompensated time must be addressed.

Include in the policy/process for pricing and job cost accounting those steps required for compensated overtime to personnel who are non-exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act (hourly who receive time and one half).

Also include the policy/ process for pricing and job cost accounting, those steps required for uncompensated overtime to personnel who are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act (salaried who receive pay at straight time for hours in excess of 40 and those who do not receive pay at all for hours in excess of 40) The former are usually engineers and technicians. The latter are usually management or staff.

I encourage “Total Time Accounting” to my clients to make all hours worked a part of the record and stay away from waste fraud and abuse or defective pricing allegations.

I believe the below article by Find Law contains the best approach to the issue of uncompensated overtime and I encourage my clients to make part of their policy the practice specified:

 “In our view, contractors performing labor-hour, time-and-material, or cost reimbursable contracts should avoid any timekeeping system that fails to accurately report the total time worked. Such a system under-bills clients for work performed and thereby affects a company’s bottom line. Moreover, any timekeeping system that by its very design under-reports actual hours worked invites labor mis-charging and false claim allegations.

A total time accounting system that accurately reports hours will generate the proper amount of revenue for contractors on each of their labor-hour and time-and-material contracts. Cost reimbursable contracts have an added twist. Many cost reimbursable contractors who report total time use a diluted hourly rate approach for distributing labor costs to projects. For example, if an employee is paid $1,000 per week and works 40 hours, the projects are charged $25 per hour. If the same employee works 50 hours the following week, the hourly rate is diluted and projects are charged $20 per hour. In this example the contractor gets no additional revenue for the extra 10 hours of effort — they are provided free of charge to the Government.

 Fortunately, acceptable standard cost approaches will negate this windfall to the Government and still allow the contractor to take advantage of uncompensated overtime. The most common of these approaches involves charging direct labor to projects at a standard hourly rate established annually for each direct labor employee. Actual hours are charged to projects at this standard rate.

For uncompensated overtime situations, the variance between labor charged to projects and actual compensation is credited to overhead. Such an approach allows contractors to account for their hours in an accurate, straightforward manner, bill for the hours actually worked, and effect a competitively beneficial decrease in their overhead rates. DCAA has recognized this as an acceptable method of accounting for labor costs, and we think that it generally beats just giving the Government hours of effort for free.

‘Total Time Accounting’ In Small Business Government Service Contracting

#books #governmentContracting #GovernmentContractors #news #technology #totalTimeAccounting

Last week, Judge Lin granted Anthropic injunctive relief against the DoD and other agencies. In a related case, a panel of the DC Circuit denied injunctive relief but granted expedited review. I think the panel misunderstands the nature of the relief sought.

Both the panel and AAG Blanche act as though Anthropic were seeking to prolong its contract with the DoD. It’s not. It is seeking to enjoin the DoD’s designation of Anthropic as a “Supply Chain Risk,” which impairs its contracts with other agencies and with contractors.

#law #contracts #AI #litigation #GovernmentContracting #Claude #Anthropic #DoD

https://www.contractsprofblog.com/2026/04/update-on-anthropic-and-the-pentagon/

How Veterans Can Master The Spoken And Unspoken Rules Of Government Contracting

“WASHINGTON TECHNOLOGY” By Alan P. Balutis And Dennis Lucey

“There seems to be a few common “truths,” some “givens,” and a whole lot of conventional wisdom spoken as to how to get into the door of government. Basic rules to gain your first foothold with the customer.”

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

  • “Know what the agency does and what it’s looking for.
  • Bring specific ideas, not a panoply of promises.Show specific examples of applications that have worked in similar situations (government examples are best, but private sector ones are helpful too).
  • Send a senior executive who can connect with the federal IT professional.
  • Network, network and do more networking.
  • Partner with other companies.
  • Make strategic hires, especially those who know government from the inside.
  • Use government contract vehicles and know which one(s) your customer turns to.
  • Winning presents its own guidelines to go by in order for that run of success to continue, however.

Here is another set of seven rules for what continues that positive cycle:

  • Read the procurement, re-read the procurement.
  • Read the contract, re-read the contract.
  • Get competent assistance at the beginning.
  • EXECUTE — Be prepared to implement what you win.
  • Be prepared for change after you win.
  • Know who wanted the contract awarded.
  • Communicate continually.

But there are also some unwritten/unspoken rules, less often discussed but equal in importance as those noted above.

Let’s start with one expert that could be seen as slightly left-of-field, but surely had GovCon in mind.

“He who does not lay his foundation beforehand may by greater abilities do so afterwards — although with greater trouble to the architect and danger to the building” — Machiavelli, The Prince, 1532.

When a government customer is interested in working with your company, one of the first questions s/he will ask is “How do I reach you?,” meaning what contracting vehicle could our agency use to acquire your products or services.

So know what government-wide contracting vehicle(s), schedule or agency-specific contract is most convenient, available and more often used? Do they give priority to one or more small or disadvantaged business categories (veteran-owned, HUBZone-certified etc.).

Be ETDBW = Easy To Do Business With. Deliver MVA = More Value Add.

Companies usually deliver a product or a service. Think of that as the first rung of a ladder. Now start climbing the ladder, rung by rung.

What do your customers do with your product or service after receiving it? Distinguish between what you are selling and what your customers are buying. What are the broader problems those customers have?

Take a broad view of your customer’s underlying problems that go beyond you and your product or service. What more can your company do to help them solve those problems? See what your customers do with what you give them, and either do it for them or help them with it.

As you answer those questions, you’ll be able to add more value. You’ll be delivering a solution, not just a product or a service. You will be able to price in terms of value rather than cost.”

Mastering The Spoken And Unspoken Rules Of Government Contracting

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Alan Balutis is the president of APB Ltd and managing partner with the CIO Collective. He’s also a former senior director and distinguished fellow at Cisco Systems Inc. 

Dennis Lucey is a vice president with TKC Global, part of the Akima family of companies. He has over 40 years of business development experience in the federal market.

#governmentContracting #GovernmentContractors #MarketingSuccess #technology
How Veterans can master the SPOKEN AND UNSPOKEN RULES of government contracting. Basic rules to gain your first foothold with the customer.
https://rosecoveredglasses.wordpress.com/2026/04/11/how-veterans-can-master-the-spoken-and-unspoken-rules-of-government-contracting/
#GovernmentContracting #VeteranOwnedBusiness #Marketing