Monitoring Contractor Perf.
Monitoring contractor performance is not simply a negative task that must be done, but rather an opportunity to ensure that both the contractor and the client are understanding each others requirements, strengths, and limitations and to assist in building a stronger teaming arraignment that can and may lead to continued contractual agreements and enhanced performance due to stronger relationships and understanding. Monitoring contractor performance should be viewed as a process rather than a set of tasks. This process begins prior to contractor selection and goes through the Statement of Work (SOW) and throughout the life of the contract. By viewing the monitoring as a process, this will allow for greater understanding on each side of the milestones involved, the requirements and payoffs, and what pitfalls and opportunities exist. In order to build upon this process-oriented methodology, some organizations, including the Federal Government, have taken to using performance-based contracting in order to focus more on performance and excellence rather than on deliverables and completion dates. This method is new and some feel gives too much power over to the contractor. However, this method also allows for greater con
It should be remembered that the contractor, not the organization, should be named as the responsible party for quality management and control and that the organization's role is quality assurance for contract standards (Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan, n. For the organization, performance monitoring must be thought about as soon as the contracting process begins. Both the Technical and Financial Status Reports should be carefully looked at to ensure that task progression is occurring on time and within budget. This allows the ability to minimize misunderstandings and conflicts, while ensuring deliverables meet the client, user, and contractors planned requirements. Incentives should be challenging yet attainable and should be standardized with the units of measurement established in the solicitation (Guidebook for PBSA, 2000). The process of monitoring contractor performance doesn't start upon contract execution, but rather starts during the contract write-up and Request For Information (RFI)/Request For Proposals (RFP) process, before a contractor is even identified. CONTRACT COMPLETIONFormal product acceptance should not be accomplished until all obligations are met as this usually releases the contractor from further performance (Foreign Affairs Handbook, 2003). Adding complexity can cause confusion on both sides and can allow for proposals to be swayed by writing styles rather than on performance merits (BEST PRACTICES FOR PAST PERFORMANCE, 2000). Measuring past performance should take into consideration four elements: 1) quality of performance, 2) cost performance, 3) schedule performance, and 4) business relations (BEST PRACTICES FOR PAST PERFORMANCE, 2000). Another method of evaluating the status of the project is through reporting. It also cuts down on tasks and status reports, but allows for focus to be placed on accomplishing the goal rather than meeting individual reports and tasks.
Common topics in this essay:
PAST PERFORMANCE,
Partnering Success,
Monitoring Performance,
Practices PBSC,
Affairs Handbook,
Statement SOW,
Federal Government,
INTRODUCTION Monitoring,
ABSTRACT Monitoring,
past performance,
PERFORMANCE-BASED CONTRACTS,
performance 2000,
practices past,
practices past performance,
past performance 2000,
foreign affairs,
affairs handbook,
foreign affairs handbook,
performance nd,
contractor performance,
practices pbsc 1998,
affairs handbook 2003,
monitoring performance,
practices pbsc,
pbsc 1998,
|
Acceptance Essays
