Conclusion - Research and Reform

Conclusion—Research and Reform

It has recently become common in DoD to associate the phase "acquisition reform" with the major policy initiatives of the mid-1990s, for example, the move away from military unique specifications, teaming, Federal Acquisitions Streamlining Act, and Federal Acquisitions Reform Act. Such a view diminishes perspective of the long history of defense acquisition reform efforts in the US, efforts that are linked to names such as Goldwater-Nichols, Grace, Carlucci, Packard, and Hoover, and which indeed extend back to the Continental Congress' attempts to reform the buying practices of General Washington's Army. Considering this history, "reform" may well be acquisition's defining characteristic.

Of course, acquisition can never be truly and completely "reformed." As a process, acquisition constantly evolves as military and political priorities shift, as economic and business conditions change, and as technology advances. Acquisition reform, then, must also be viewed as a process rather than as an end state. The slogan of 16^th century Protestants, Reformata et Semper Reformandum (Reformed and Always Reforming), must apply in acquisition.

How may such a perspective take hold in acquisition? Elected and appointed leaders can provide the political will to pursue reform, but reform cannot simply conform to shifting political landscapes. Acquisition professionals have the expertise to implement reform measures, but as "owners" of acquisition processes they often have difficulty challenging the status quo. We assert that a process of reform must include acquisition researchers. Only scholars can provide the type of critical and focused inquiry that informs acquisition's policies and practices and thus promotes its reform. It is in such a spirit of reform that the research program described in this chapter seeks to engage scholars in the study of acquisition and its important issues.