STUDENT 1: Rodney
In the construction industry, the authority has faced several problems due to the incompleteness of the project. Henceforth, the study will emphasise on the issues related to the incompleteness of the project in the construction industry. As per the article of “Competitive and sub constructing bidding”, it reflects that many a times, the authority of construction ventures are not able to measure the incompleteness of the project. Therefore, they cannot predict the timing for completing the project. Henceforth, the authority has faced problem as they cannot meet the deadline of the project properly (Miller, 2014).
Failing in the compliance process can create all types of challenges. It can be caused by failing to establish the appropriate criteria, “lack of enforcement of rules, regulations, or contract provisions”, lack of follow-ups, and lack of risk assessment (Hinton, 2003, p. 2). To avoid compliance failures, businesses must develop an effective contract monitoring system. The compliance system should consist of training, written policies and procedures, contingency plans, and continuous onsite monitoring (Hinton, 2003). The system should also include a communication plan, contingency plan, and an administrative process.
An incomplete Work Breakdown Schedule or Statement of Work can cause and entity to be at risk for spending more funds. Companies must find ways to make a profit in other areas A business that is troubled about taking risks in order keep up with today’s ever-changing society will not be able to advance with supply and demand will eventually fold.
Miller, D. P. (2014). Subcontracting and competitive bidding on incomplete procurement contracts. RAND Journal of Economics (Wiley-Blackwell), 45(4), 705–746. https://doi-org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1111/1756-217…
Hinton, R. (2003). Components of an effective contract monitoring system. Department of Audits and Accounts, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved from https://sao.georgia.gov/sites/sao.georgia.gov/file…
STUDENT 2: Yenny
When using Prototyping, there is not a consistent, replicable method to assess results to evaluate the possibility of a prototype of reaching its benefits. Also taking into consideration additional costs and schedule that makes it even more difficult to conclude if the prototype is or would be successful. Since 2007 Under the Secretary of Defense Acquisition mandated the use of Competitive Prototyping strategies in the defense acquisition, and a memorandum circulated by John Young listed five benefits of prototyping like the reduction of technical risk, validate the design, validate cost estimates, evaluate manufacturing process and refine requirements.
In this article, the author presents research results on the factors that support the achievement of those benefits. A survey was conducted among acquisition programs. From the survey ranking results, the weight of each prototype benefit and factors was calculated using existing weighting techniques. If T&E management knows those research factors, there would be additional levels of measurement, and as a result, more tools to raise the possibility of better assessment for successful prototyping. The author’s purpose is to research the use of prototypes as a strategy to mitigate acquisition risk. The focus is on identifying and verifying the factors required for prototyping benefits, analyze the impact of each element, and to construct a PoPS-like approach to evaluate a prototype likelihood to success.
The author’s findings are not 100 percent complete because of the complexity of the defense acquisition programs. Other studies conducted on the matter trying to measure differences and benefits between prototyping and nonprototyping programs have been insufficient to conclude on the subject.
The determination to use prototyping in an acquisition program varies from program to program. The possibility to analyze certain factors before reaching a decision, or having a higher possibility in figuring out if the prototype is going to be successful, will provide management with tools to make sound decisions. Those decisions may support the reduction in cost and schedule or justify their addition. The author’s findings do not provide a probabilistic assessment model but do show an approach that indicates the likelihood of using prototyping.
Medlej, M., Stuban, S., Dever, J. (2017). Assessing the likelihood of achieving prototyping benefits in system acquisition. Defense AR Journal, 24(4), 626-655. DOI:10.22594/dau.17-774.24.04