{"id":15767,"date":"2016-05-20T18:08:08","date_gmt":"2016-05-20T18:08:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/federaltimes\/uncategorized\/2016\/05\/20\/how-to-embed-better-buying-power-tools-into-dod-acquisition\/"},"modified":"2026-08-08T04:44:47","modified_gmt":"2026-08-08T04:44:47","slug":"how-to-embed-better-buying-power-tools-into-dod-acquisition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/federaltimes\/opinions\/2016\/05\/20\/how-to-embed-better-buying-power-tools-into-dod-acquisition\/","title":{"rendered":"How to embed Better Buying Power tools into DoD acquisition"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

For the past four years, Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, has updated Congress on the Better Buying Power (BBP) initiative and the need to firmly embed tools such as should-cost analysis into DoD acquisition culture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Three key areas can help drive adoption should-cost analysis into the DoD acquisition culture: people and training, tools and processes, and leadership and should-cost pilot programs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Complex categories like software serve as a good case study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Both Kendall and Richard Lombardi, now principal deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force (acquisition), have cited how the F-22 program leveraged strong should-cost techniques to deliver benefits that align with many of BBP’s objectives. Leadership in the F-22 program positioned the software should-cost initiative as a collaborative effort between the DoD and its suppliers, showing how the contractors and partners could improve profits, reduce cost and still develop a highly advanced weapon program.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The initiative resulted in profits for the suppliers and DoD savings of $66 million from the initial contractor proposal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

People and training<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Acquisitions organizations across the DoD need well-trained employees with the appropriate technical skills to find opportunities for reducing costs within a contractor’s proposal. Like the DoD employees working on the F-22 should-cost initiatives, they also need the ability to drive a thorough should-cost analysis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tools and processes<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The should-cost training must focus on the tools and processes employees need to understand the deep analysis and how it can benefit their program. Such training will help them circumvent the confusion generated by the many definitions of “should-cost” used throughout the private and public sectors, which make it harder to embed a well-structured should-cost analysis into the DoD.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In software, for example, a should-cost analysis is often driven by multiple sets of tools and processes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n