Government leaders face a vast array of complex challenges in nearly every domain from national security and cloud computing to the delivery of health care services. In many cases the problems government needs to solve are so complex, it needs expertise from the private sector to do so. And an army of vendors—both products and services firms—stand ready to assist.
But these vendors have a different problem: They must consistently earn a healthy profit margin to satisfy their stockholders. The question is: Who is solving whose problem? Ideally, both problems are solved simultaneously, but often that is not the case.
Reliable estimates of aggregate profit margins for government contractors are difficult to determine. Understandably, contractors do not adhere to a lot of transparency when it comes to their profit margins but suffice to say the range is large. Even when profit margins are low, however, if the government bought the wrong tool or the wrong solution, then the entire effort wasted taxpayer dollars.
A key factor in the success of any project is problem definition. Often program managers have not clearly defined their problem well enough to hire a vendor to solve it. And vendors are known to show up with “proven solutions” to general problems, creating the often-mistaken belief that a given vendor can solve a given problem, even if that vendor has not taken the time or effort to fully understand the problem.
When it’s time to hire a vendor, prestigious, big-name contractors and consultants arrive with slick looking brochures and conduct impressive demonstrations of their innovative solutions. They are reputable firms, and they make convincing sales pitches. And after the meeting, the government program manager walks away convinced that this tool or this 5-step approach is the solution to their problem.
So they buy it.
But as it’s being implemented, it turns out that the technology doesn’t interface with the data system the agency uses. Or the bells and whistles are of limited use to the agency, and they only use a fraction of the functionality of the tool. Or it is too complicated to teach the staff to use. And in the case of services solutions, the vendor’s approach can end up being too generic, overlooking the unique cultural issues that the agency faces, and no one buys in.
The solutions check boxes but don’t solve problems—at least not your problems. They do solve the vendor’s problem. Regardless of the success of the project, they made their profit.
The next time you meet with a vendor, pay attention to what questions they ask. Do they make it seem like they already understand your problem though they haven’t worked with your agency before and don’t know your culture? Do they take notes while listening and say they will have to put some thought into how they might solve your problem? Are they candid about what they don’t know?
And some questions you might ask yourself: Can I clearly articulate my problem and the impacts it is having on my organization and my stakeholders? What would a successful outcome look like? Do I know the type of solution I need or do I need to be educated by the industry as to what is out there?
Most vendors are scrupulous and genuinely want to solve their client’s problems. But doing so requires a lot of listening, the regular incorporation of feedback and the humility to admit when they don’t have all the answers. If you pick a vendor that authentically approaches your problem with a curious mindset and you work together as a team to address it, the outcome will solve both your problems.