To print a PDF version of this article, click here.
Authors: Brian Schultz and David Dotson
Competition in acquisition is an important topic and has been since the Department of Defense (DoD) started acquiring systems from the defense industry. The key premise is that DoD will get greater value for the price paid as a result of competition. Some studies suggest savings in the 15 percent to 25 percent range and even greater under some conditions as a result of competition. However, greater value is not always tied to lower prices or cost savings. Greater value can be realized through a superior technical solution as part of a trade-off of price and other factors in a source selection.
Authors: Ian D. MacLeod and Capt Robert A. Dinwoodie, USMC
A prime managerial concern is how to decide which investment alternatives provide the greatest return with least risk of loss. In civilian organizations, numerous methods and formulas assist these decisions. However, in military and other governmental agencies, these methods often fall short because typical governmental investments do not have a monetary return. The processes underpinning governmental resource allocation and acquisition decisions are often cumbersome and time consuming. In this article, the authors present a unique application of composite indexing methods to compare the return on investment in military equipment. They posit that this analytical method can improve government agencies’ investment decisions for capital equipment, especially when methods that are more laborious cannot be executed in the allotted time frame.
Authors: Ivar Oswalt, Tim Cooley, William Waite, Elliot Waite, Steve “Flash” Gordon, Richard Severinghaus, Jerry Feinberg, and Gary Lightner
As budgets decrease, it becomes increasingly important to determine the most effective ways to invest in modeling and simulation (M&S). This article discusses an approach to comparing different M&S investment opportunities using a return on investment (ROI)-like measure. The authors describe methods to evaluate “benefit” (i.e., increased readiness, more effective training, etc.) received from an investment and then use those metrics in a decision analysis framework to evaluate each M&S expenditure. Finally, they conclude by discussing the importance of viewing M&S investments from a Department of Defense (DoD) Enterprise view, evaluating investment over multiple years, measuring well-structured metrics, and using those metrics in a systematic way to produce an ROI-like result that DoD can use to evaluate and prioritize M&S investments.