DoD Weapon Systems Acquisition: Procurement Law Analysis
This paper compares and analyzes two publications addressing the challenges of government contracting in the acquisition of innovative technology and weapon systems for the Department of Defense (DoD). The discussion examines Mlinarchik and Myers (2016), which advocates for other transaction authority as a flexible alternative to traditional contracting, and Sullivan et al. (2015), a GAO report recommending streamlined decision-making processes. The paper evaluates the role of procurement law — particularly the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and FAR section 5 (5000.02) — in shaping DoD acquisition programs, identifying both the advantages and disadvantages of existing regulatory frameworks, and outlines applicable government requirements for improving complex procurement programs.
- Introduction: Overview of DoD contracting challenges and paper scope
- Primary Goals of Each Reading: Goals of Mlinarchik & Myers and Sullivan et al.
- Importance of Procurement Law in DoD's Purchase of Primary Weapons: How procurement law shapes DoD acquisition programs
- Advantages and Disadvantages of FAR Section 5 (5000.02): Pros and cons of FAR 5000.02 information requirements
- Applicable Government Requirements: Reform recommendations and compliance requirements
- Conclusion: Regulatory reform needed for innovation in procurement
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds its analysis in two concrete, credible publications — a journal article and a GAO report — and consistently cross-references them to build comparative depth.
- It moves logically from identifying the problem (regulatory burden) to examining the governing law (FAR section 5) to evaluating reform recommendations, giving the argument a clear progressive structure.
- The balanced treatment of FAR section 5's advantages and disadvantages demonstrates critical thinking rather than one-sided advocacy.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative literature analysis applied to a policy context. Rather than summarizing each source in isolation, it uses both sources together to triangulate findings — identifying where Mlinarchik and Myers (2016) and Sullivan et al. (2015) converge on the problem (regulatory inefficiency) but diverge on solutions (other transaction authority vs. streamlined review elimination). This technique strengthens analytical credibility by showing awareness of multiple expert perspectives.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a framing introduction, then dedicates a section to the primary goals of each source. The third section connects procurement law to DoD's real-world acquisition challenges. The fourth section provides a structured pros-and-cons analysis of a specific regulatory provision (FAR 5000.02). The fifth section synthesizes government requirements derived from both sources, and a brief conclusion ties the regulatory discussion to the broader need for innovation-friendly procurement reform.
Introduction
Government contracting plays a critical role in the acquisition of innovative technology for different departments, such as the Department of Defense (DoD). Over the past few years, DoD has enhanced its development and acquisition of innovative weapon systems to improve its effectiveness and efficiency. However, the conventional government contracting process is characterized by challenges that result in delays and significant costs for taxpayers. This issue has attracted the attention of various researchers and stakeholders, including the U.S. Government Accountability Office. These stakeholders have conducted studies and research on the government contracting process and provided recommendations that could help enhance it and improve efficiencies in the operations of government agencies. This paper compares and analyzes two publications on this issue and discusses the significance of procurement law and the applicable government requirements.
Primary Goals of Each Reading
Complicated government procurement programs have generated significant attention among various stakeholders and necessitated changes to existing policies and practices. These complicated procurement programs are largely associated with the regulatory burden of conventional government contracting. As a result, numerous articles and studies have been carried out to help address the issue.
Mlinarchik and Myers (2016) published an article about circumventing the regulatory burden of conventional government contracting in the process of acquiring innovative technology and research. The article was published on the premise that the involvement of the government in cutting-edge technology and research and development (R&D) is significantly hampered by regulatory challenges, slow timelines, lack of communication with industry, and limiting intellectual property (IP) schemes. These challenges continue to persist at a time when leveraging technological advancements is essential for the successful execution of the missions of many public and defense agencies. For example, the DoD needs to maintain technological supremacy to enhance its overall science and technology strategy. The purpose of this article was to demonstrate how government agencies like DoD can overcome the stereotype of slow-moving, inflexible bureaucracy brought about by the regulatory burden of traditional government contracting. In this regard, the publication sought to demonstrate how such agencies can become more adaptive and agile in terms of innovation and R&D. The article sought to achieve these goals by introducing a flexible option with no regulatory baggage, known as other transaction authority.
Sullivan et al. (2015) published an article on the need for acquisition reform for DoD to streamline and improve its decision-making process on the acquisition of weapon systems. The publication was based on the view that DoD faces significant schedule delays and high costs in the acquisition process despite delivering the most capable weapons across the globe. These challenges stem from the agency's reliance on a bureaucratic, inefficient, and complex acquisition process. The purpose of the article was to assess the levels of review and information requirements incorporated in DoD's acquisition processes and programs. Through this assessment, the article sought to highlight inefficiencies in this program and their impact on DoD's operations. The article also sought to provide recommendations on how these processes can be streamlined for better decision-making and reduction of inefficiencies.
Importance of Procurement Law in DoD's Purchase of Primary Weapons
The purchase of primary weapon systems is one of the critical factors in the successful execution of DoD's mission. This process is governed by existing procurement law that shapes the acquisition programs and processes developed and used by this agency. As shown in the two articles, DoD's acquisition programs and processes are currently affected by the drawbacks and regulatory burden of conventional government contracting. Currently, government procurement is governed by the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) and the Contract Disputes Act. These two statutes and others form the basis of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which is regarded as the primary regulatory framework for government procurement (Mlinarchik & Myers, 2016).
Procurement law plays an important role in DoD's purchase of primary weapons since it is the foundation for FAR. It is significant in this process because it shapes the acquisition processes and programs adopted by this agency. In essence, DoD's purchase of primary weapons entails the development of an acquisition program, and the processes and practices adopted by DoD in this program are influenced by existing procurement law, particularly FAR. For example, based on the current regulatory framework, DoD's purchase of primary weapons is characterized by significant time and effort needed to complete information requirements (Sullivan et al., 2015). Therefore, procurement law defines the series of steps carried out by DoD in its acquisition process for primary weapons.
Conclusion
Government contracting is a complex process involving different regulations and stakeholders. The contracting process plays an important role in the acquisition of innovative technology for different departments such as the Department of Defense (DoD). As evident in this discussion, current policies and regulations have generated challenges in the acquisition processes of government agencies like DoD. The agency experiences regulatory burdens associated with conventional government contracting. FAR section 5 (5000.02) is an example of a regulation that affects the acquisition processes of this agency, as it generates burdensome information requirements. The application of this regulation to DoD's acquisition demonstrates that procurement law is significant because it shapes the acquisition processes and strategies adopted by government agencies. As technology advances, the government needs to enhance its involvement in science, technology, and R&D through changes in current approaches to policies, regulations, and laws governing procurement programs.
References
Mlinarchik, C., & Myers, J. (2016). Other transaction authority: Acquiring innovative technology and research by avoiding the regulatory burden of traditional government contracting. Contract Management, 56(10), 68–73.
Sullivan, M. J., et al. (2015). Acquisition reform: DOD should streamline its decision-making process for weapon systems to reduce inefficiencies (GAO-15-192). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.