Working Up

by Dwayne Phillips

Government exists to spend money. The more money spent, the better it is for those inside government and also for their partners in industry. This is a disappointing system. There are solutions, but don’t look for them to be implemented anytime soon.

I worked over 25 years in government and a few months now for a company that exists on government contracts. I have learned something here (I admit, I am a slow learner on some things):

Government exists to spend more money

and

the individual persons involved benefit more from spending more money.

Let’s look at this at a low level, where people actually accomplish work. 

I think of systems that the government can use to accomplish its mission (serve taxpayers). I tend to think of systems that use available technology and technology (software) that is low- or no-cost. The stuff is out there ready for use. All that is needed is a little imagination to understand how to apply this inexpensive technology to the government’s mission.

That is alright, but not good for the company where I work. I can propose such low-cost systems to the government customer, but the company doesn’t make a lot of money taking inexpensive technology and applying it to government. The company makes much more money by inventing technology and applying it to government. Hence, this company, and all the other companies out there working for the government, is more profitable if it suggests technology to invent instead of inexpensive, existing technology.

Now this isn’t all true. A company that suggests low-cost and high-value solutions to the government is likely to have more business in the future and generate more profits. That, however, is a long-term view, and sometimes companies don’t have a long-term view.

Let’s move back to the view inside the government (I know this one all too well). Surely, the government manager wants to have a company come with a low-cost, high-value suggestion. Wrong.

Government managers are rewarded for managing large projects. Large projects involve lots of people inventing things. Hence, large projects cost more money. When a government manager successfully manages high-cost projects, that manager is recognized. No high-dollar projects, no recognition.

Sorry, government managers are not recognized for managing low-cost, high-value projects. It is too much work for the manager of the government manager to understand that some low-cost projects deliver high value to the taxpayer. It is much easier to read the bottom line – the $$$ spent than to analyze the actual benefit of a project.

So here we are. The company makes more profit by suggesting high-cost projects; the government manager receives recognition by managing high-cost projects. 

High cost is good news for everyone – except the taxpayer

Well, the taxpayer is far away in both space and time. I realize that the government manager and the company manager both pay taxes and both have an interest in this value-for-the-taxpayer concept. Neither, however, pays a majority of their income in taxes. The more money they make personally, the more money they take home. 

Do I have any solutions? Oh sure, but they all involve knowledge and diligence on the part of government managers. I am disappointed to report that both of those attributes are in short supply.