3 ms·

The problems with opening up big government contracts to multiple bidders is there is then a race to the bottom. However, outsourcing it one component at a time

by davedx 15y ago

The problems with opening up big government contracts to multiple bidders is there is then a race to the bottom. However, outsourcing it one component at a time is definitely an interesting idea. Deliverables!

mquander 15y ago
Isn't a race to the bottom on price the desired outcome? The presence of a race to the bottom on functionality is independent of whether or not the contract is open. If they don't have anyone competent who is vetting the proposals or evaluating the progress and deliverables, then they will wind up with shit no matter how they arrange the contracting. But if it's open to normal software shops, then at least they probably won't wind up with $200,000 shit.
- gte910h 15y ago
  >Isn't a race to the bottom on price the desired outcome Cheap yet sufficient is the desired outcome in government work. I'm guessing 'sufficient' was defined too broadly or too specifically, and therefore was not correctly tested for on delivery.
AerieC 15y ago
Yeah, but if each component is outsourced, there's the potential that the entire system becomes a huge, disorganized, unmaintainable mess with no consistency in coding standards or even technologies. When something breaks, who debugs the system? Who do you call to fix it? Then again, just look at this app. How could it get any worse? lol
tomjen3 15y ago
That is an easy problem to get around - make the bidding for 30 day coding with an option to have in extended for another 30 days until the government is no longer happy with the progress. Then do it Scrum style.
mousa 15y ago
Probably the whole process of bidding for any of these reduces the pool of potential contractors to a couple of these giant government contractors who have bidding down. I know there are bidding procedures for everything to fight corruption but for little projects like this they should come up with a procedure to use odesk or similar services.

by davedx 15y ago

mquander 15y ago

Isn't a race to the bottom on price the desired outcome? The presence of a race to the bottom on functionality is independent of whether or not the contract is open. If they don't have anyone competent who is vetting the proposals or evaluating the progress and deliverables, then they will wind up with shit no matter how they arrange the contracting. But if it's open to normal software shops, then at least they probably won't wind up with $200,000 shit.

gte910h 15y ago
>Isn't a race to the bottom on price the desired outcome Cheap yet sufficient is the desired outcome in government work. I'm guessing 'sufficient' was defined too broadly or too specifically, and therefore was not correctly tested for on delivery.

AerieC 15y ago

Yeah, but if each component is outsourced, there's the potential that the entire system becomes a huge, disorganized, unmaintainable mess with no consistency in coding standards or even technologies. When something breaks, who debugs the system? Who do you call to fix it? Then again, just look at this app. How could it get any worse? lol

tomjen3 15y ago

That is an easy problem to get around - make the bidding for 30 day coding with an option to have in extended for another 30 days until the government is no longer happy with the progress. Then do it Scrum style.

mousa 15y ago

Probably the whole process of bidding for any of these reduces the pool of potential contractors to a couple of these giant government contractors who have bidding down. I know there are bidding procedures for everything to fight corruption but for little projects like this they should come up with a procedure to use odesk or similar services.