THE TRUE COST OF ACQUISITION.
-The department of defense has highlighted its vision and mission but has not broken these down into objectives for each function
-Without a breakdown of this mission into workable action plans/ objectives it is therefore very hard to create performance measure and standards of practice -This is evident by the recent happening of Darlene Druyun’s actions while acting in the position of head of procurement -There is several incidents where she acted in a conflicting manner of interest to that of her employers DOD -For instance negotiating for a job with Boeing while handling a major negotiation for a major contract -The polygraphs that she failed are a clear sign of her dishonesty over the matter -There seemed to have also been a leak of confidential bid information to the Boeing which then helped them win a contract which is in violation of tendering procedures -The fact that Druyun had acted legally and ethically in a similar situation with Lockheed proves further her unethical intentions and dealing with Boeing -Further there is also evidence of collusion on both sides as Michael sears the then CFO of Boeing aiding Druyun in negotiation an employment offer with Boeing whilst he was negotiating a $20 billion lease of 100 Boeing KC 767A
-Darlene comes highly recommended and has gained respect in the field of procurement through years of experience with high profile government agencies such as NASA.(Referent power based on personal charisma and leadership quality) -Also evidence of this is proved by the 16 meritorious awards she won... which put her in high standing with her employers (expert power) -Darleen was a hard headed negotiator
-She had a dictatorial approach to change management evidenced by the fact that she handled all the processes from supplier selection, through to contract negotiation and award -She is a risk taker
-This approach to issues did not always win her support among her own staff and superiors alike -Infact she was nicknamed the dragon lady by her subordinates -She was not a team player
-She exhibited a theory x approach towards subordinates – based on direction and authority via a centralized system of organization and the exercise of authority
Among colleagues and superiors she became known as bulletproof after she survived disciplinary action for conduct that breeched procurement procedure while the others did not Darleen was not only a tough woman but was manipulative too, this is evidenced by the fact that she managed to play off her political bosses against her air force superiors, suggesting that she intentionally manipulated the whole system for her gain
-She had the support of the military General and used it to her advantage. -The whole DOD seems very porous as so far there has been no mention of any kind of monitoring of performance, which could have highlighted some of the improprieties of Darleen -Setting objectives would have also given a measure for performance measurement. -All along a chain of well thought out courses of action has been clearly shown For instance during one of the ties when there was a vacuum, Darleen filed in as acting acquisition chief office and negotiated and awarded a contract of $480 million towards Boeing for the upgrade of its Airborne Warning and control Systems(awacs). she had an autocratic style of management ( top down)
-DOD uses tax payer’s money to fund its activities therefore a need for public trust to be protected. -Congress and other bodies ensure that there is transparency and accountability with every contract award -Public wants an efficient, capable and effective defense system -Politicians want to deliver value for money
-Cutting cost in the public sector is not an a priority as budgets for the following fiscal year get cut down by the previous year’s cost savings -The us...