Contingency Contracting Posts $30billion Waste According to CWC

The Commission on Wartime Contracting (CWC) has issued their interim report on wartime contracting in IRaq and Afghanistan.  I would recommend reading it if contracting in warzones is either something that you do now, something that you have considered doing or are a taxpayer of this country.  No matter what your level in the workforce would be, it is a good read and will give you valuable insight.

A few myths that are dispelled in this text are:

  1.  KBR was awarded LOGCAP III with no bidding.  You hear this constantly from the media that the evil KBR won the LOGCAP contract without bidding.  Simply not true.  They won the IDIQ contract in fair open competition.  However, the way the IDIQ was written there was no mechanism to include other bidders in future IDIQ task orders.  The original contract was only meant to last 18 months, not going on 10 years!  No one thought we were going to be in Iraq and Afghanistan this long.

  2.  KBR is doing a bad job in Iraq.  Again, you hear this in the media.  It is simply not supported by the facts on the ground.  KBR has consistently out performed their competitors on other contracts, consistently getting top reviews and rankings from Award Fee Board (AFEB) members throughout the life of the contract.  Reading thru the report you will find numerous areas where KBR has delivered on the ground.  Supplying the troops with what they need, good meal facilities, adequate facilities for eating, sleeping and recreation and meeting surge needs whenever asked.  I invite you to become more educated on this by reading the report in full, not just the headlines.

The purpose of this post was not to pontificate about the greatness of KBR.  It's really to point out a few simple facts:

     1.  The contractor civilian workforce that volunteers to go and work in these places is just that, volunteer.

     2.  The contractor civilian workforce will stay.  The contractor (KBR, FLuor, Dynacorp, etc) constantly change due to politics, rebidding, contract expiration, etc.  In the end, the contractors will end up with the SAME workforce. 

If you've been around this business long enough you will find that every place that you go in the warzones you will find there to be familiar faces and names.  That's because the cadre of folks, especially in specialized fields (engineering, construction and logistics) tend to be recycled. 

From the report:  The corps of engineers is executing a project to construct 900 Afghan National Army (ANA/ANSF) security compounds for a total cost of $11billion.  The SIGAR report and the CWC report point to the fact that due to 'inadequate planning for construction' the entire $11billion is at risk!  The corps of engineers is the largest construction agency in the world, how could that be?  Could it really be as simple as people?  The people on the ground for the corps of engineers and other agencies generally follow the same rotation as military personnel, 1 year maximum tours. 

Could be that this is especially problematic in this environment as the rate of change is dramatics and shifting out key leadership positions with this amount of frequency has greatly enhanced the mismanagement problem.  By the time the leader gets his arms around things it's time for him to go.  The CWC recommends that the government needs to extend these tours, provide a dedicated contingency contracting managmenet force and centralize it's execution. I agree with this approach.

There is a table included in the report that shows the number of government agencies supporting contingency construction activities.  The table shows over 17 government agencies that support contingency operations in the warzone.  How could the government possibly expect to do this work effeciently when supporting only one year tours for the leadership in country for these positions?  Not realistic or possible in any environment especially in a complex / contingency environment that has political, social, interpersonal, tribal and hostile factors added to the equation.

What does happen and I've experienced this myself is the contractors themselves become the resident experts and end up being the driving force behind much of what goes on.  Think of it this way, when a new director of an agency in country arrives in the warzone with saucer sized eyes, the first person he meets likely is his civilian contractor.  The civilian contractor profile shows that he has been on the ground for 2 or more years and knows the in's and out's of how to get things done.  Should it be this way? Even though I was one of those contractors for 2 years, I would say no. The government agency leaders need to be the ones with the institutional knowledge, not the contractors.  This can only happen by being there.  Period.  Conference calls, white papers, video conferences, etc, etc all help, but in the end the government needs to commit to putting these leaders on the ground for a minimum of 2 years.  It sucks for them, but they are well compensated for it and would earn better retirements and rank in the long run.

The Difference Makers

I've worked in the engineering, operations and construction industry for almost 20 years now.  Most of my career has been spent in the consulting business working for large municipal and federal agencies advising on highly technical and sensitive issues. 

Here is one key piece of information that I have learned in my travels overseas.  You can take the smartest, brightest engineer (substitute any profession here) into a complex technical situation and he will likely fail.  You can take a reasonably educated, non-technical engineer and dump him into the same complex scenario and guess what?  He will not fail.  Hmm, how can that be?  Shouldn't the smartest guys always succeed?  I mean doesn't it make sense to send the guy that has the most subject matter expertise to solve a problem?  Hmm, again, history and experience show that is not the case. 

Well then, what is the difference between the smart/technical guy who knows his subject backwards and forwards and the reasonably educated.. difference maker?  Often times, the smart, technical guy may not have the correct communication skillset, or he may talk to much and listen too little.  Yes, I think it comes down to listening skills.. by that I really mean the ability sit quietly, analyze a situation, sort out the facts from heresy, misinformation, urban legend and determine what the true hard facts are.

When the difference makers gets to that point, when he knows he has the facts sorted out guess what he does?  He gets out his cell phone or email machine and finds the smart technical guy and frames the information, puts it into context FOR him and lets the smart technical guy then solve the problem.  Yep, that's it. 

Often times I've seen the smart/technical guys get out there and make too many far reaching assumptions.. the older they are, the worse it is.  You'll have a 30 year technical guy show up to solve a problem for you and often times you'll have to drag him out to 'see' the problem because from afar he had decided that he had it solved because of his immense intellect... well 9/10 he was wrong and when he gets to the problem area and is shown the facts in the appropriate context, miracles happen.

So, remember this, find the difference makers, let them make a difference and as a manager your job will be easy... put the smart/technical guys without the ability to listen and observe and watch mayhem and chaos ensue.

The Latest (Updated)

I'm still asked on a regular basis asking me 'how do I get a job in Iraq or Afghanistan?'. Scrolling down you'll see a lot of information that I compiled based on my experience with the big contracting companies (KBR, Fluor and Dynacorp) over the past 3 years or so. The big contract that has the most positions open is Logcap IV. Logcap IV was split up amongst the three big guys with Fluor and Dynacorp receiving the largest pieces.

Fluor operates in Northern Afghanistan, Dynacorp in the south.  KBR has the transportation and postal missions in Iraq under Logcap IV.  They also have some work in Bahrain, but it doesn't pay very well.

Logcap III is still operating in both Iraq, yes still operating in 2011 even though troops are supposed to leave, the mission is ongoing. However, word on the street is the program will be closing up shop in the near future.  I wouldn't apply to Logcap III as you may get there and be sent home.  It's happened before in that program so don't think it cannot happen to you, they could fly you to Houston, do all your shots and get you all geared up to go.  You could land in Dubai and then be turned around.

Afghanistan / Logcap IV is probably your best bet right now.  I wouldn't anticipate that changing for the next year or so.  There is a lot of construction going on there and the war is still pretty hot and heavy, so you'll see job postings on all the major contractor's websites (Fluor, Dynacorp, IAP Worldwide, etc.).  I would recommend reapplying fairly frequently and if possible get your resumed tailored to the specific jobs you applying for, this will increase the chances you get picked up.