{"id":44503,"date":"2022-03-11T13:45:00","date_gmt":"2022-03-11T13:45:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/armytimes\/uncategorized\/2022\/03\/11\/the-us-army-must-remember-the-lowest-price-is-not-always-the-best-option\/"},"modified":"2026-08-07T23:35:18","modified_gmt":"2026-08-07T23:35:18","slug":"the-us-army-must-remember-the-lowest-price-is-not-always-the-best-option","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/armytimes\/opinion\/2022\/03\/11\/the-us-army-must-remember-the-lowest-price-is-not-always-the-best-option\/","title":{"rendered":"The US Army must remember: The lowest price is not always the best option"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The United States Army is faced with a challenging dichotomy when it comes to awarding equipment supply contracts. On the one hand, the Army needs technologically advanced equipment<\/a> that will exceed threshold capabilities and enhance the mission effectiveness of our soldiers. On the other hand, the Department of Defense, like all federal agencies, is beholden to budget constraints that could potentially threaten to inhibit the Army\u2019s drive toward tenfold-improved capabilities<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this scenario, it can be tempting for the Army to default to a \u201cminimum characteristics\u201d approach and opt for the lowest price when assessing new contracts. But there is a reason why \u201clowest price, technically acceptable\u201d procurements have been deemed by Congress as no longer valid for military technology purchases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Put simply, the lowest price is not always the best option. Our troops depend on the provisioning of high-quality equipment that exceeds threshold capabilities. They need advanced \u2014 not average \u2014 equipment to be successful when engaged in an all-domain battlefield against peer or near-peer competitors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Therefore, the Army should not focus on \u201cminimum characteristics\u201d and baseline-acceptable standards when assessing its procurement options. Instead, it must assess the overall value of the technology it is considering and, most importantly, take into account the technology\u2019s ability to close capability gaps for warfighters in combat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here are two critical factors the Army should incorporate into its decision-making process to ensure its equipment provides high-end, long-term value:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. Overall tactical effectiveness:<\/b> The most important factor to consider when contemplating any equipment supply contract is how the technology will enable troops on the ground. A low-cost solution that does not help protect our warfighters or give them a tactical advantage against a rapidly evolving enemy is a stopgap at best and could end up putting our troops at risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instead of focusing exclusively on upfront costs, the Army should ask:<\/p>\n\n\n\n