Identification of Critical Roles of Program Managers and Contracting Officers

The purpose of this research was to identify current disagreement among acquisition professionals in regards to their role and authority; and to identify benefits and risks associated with combining program management and contracting officer roles into a single position. The research questions were answered through a literature review and use of the Delphi technique. The literature review indicated that the Department of Defense has been operating with multiple conflicting perceptions of authority among its key acquisition professionals. The literature also identified the need for complex organizations, such as Department of Defense acquisition offices, to pair high levels of responsibility with equally high levels of authority. Ten program manager and contracting experts, representing the Air Force and industry, participated in four cycles of the Delphi technique. The research identified critical overlaps in perceptions of the roles and authority between a program manager and a contracting officer. The program manager was noted as having a lack of sufficient authority to guide the program. The contracting officer's roles were noted as shifting towards that of a business advisor. The culmination of this research effort was a discussion and presentation of recommendations for the future of the relationship.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.