|
Background
Duration of support depends on the program
scope, schedule, foundation of previous
definitions, actual "readiness" of the user to
move forward, senior leadership backing, vendor,
financials, etc.
Most organizations leave
a lot of money on the table because they don't
understand what they really want or need to make
their programs efficient. They devise generic
requirements and expect a vendor to help craft
them into realistic activities or figure out
what is really needed. Further, they
usually miscalculate the risks of certain
decisions on resources (people, funds,
facilities, systems, etc.).
Worse is they
pay for more than what they need. Eg.,
operational requirements task 85% parts or
services availability; yet, they pay the
equivalent of 95% parts or services availability
... and brag about the great support they are
getting, regardless of the extra cost.
As a result, their
customers may lose some level of support, decreased funding is not
well spent and the program office's
support staff could face unnecessary
frustrations trying to compete for dwindling
"bail out" funding.
We candidly challenge
members in your organization to understand the
current programs, decide what needs changing
(why and is their a willingness to pay for the
change), identify risks to both the organization
and the provider, and determine how to reach
best fits for the program office, supplier, bill
payer and operational users.
We spent 18
months
supporting requirements definition, risk
analysis and
various phases of the Performance Work Statement for a $100M DoD
program. The program office desired to
combine 13 Statements of Work into one
Performance Work Statement. We also supported
portions of the
execution phase of this program and initial
efforts on another large program.
Referrals are available,
based on a legitimate need to know.
|
Access Success Classics!
