PGO’s, Aphorisms, and a View

What is the purpose?

What is the goal?

What is the outcome sought?

These are the three questions my colleagues at NASA are likely tired of hearing me ask.  They are the same 3 questions asked for over 6 years now when taking on the biggest task or smallest action.  It is a disciplined framework through which I think, act, and operate.  It is a good shorthand that focuses strategies, focuses actions, focuses meetings, focuses communications, and focuses time.  I drink my own champaign. It applies to what I write and how I communicate.  Each of the pieces I write has a purpose.  Each of the pieces I write has a goal.  Each of the pieces I write has an outcome sought.  The outcome I seek has not been achieved quite yet, but it will be. So I keep being purposeful.

Three governing aphorisms:

Time Illuminates – Given time people will see better what is happening (if you are paying attention). 

People are their patterns – This is why time illuminates.  People will fall into the patterns of their natures that you can identify (if you are paying attention).

Sunshine is the best disinfectant – Shining light into areas that people don’t see allows for illumination that, although uncomfortable, see a situation with greater clarity.  You see what hides in the shadows.

It is with this in mind that I now offer you exactly what I see concerning NASA’s program and GWAC consolidation.  What was the purpose of this initiative?  How did it come about?  For what reasons?  Why?  It is clear to me now, and it should be clear to you.

********************* 

Let's look at the lead characters in this wrestling ring who have been leading the charge and put things into context. These are the experienced people who have been advising the administration, and their political appointees, on what should be done in reference to NASA's program and contract consolidation. We know what they are doing now, but what were they doing in 2005-2007 and what role did they have?

Player	2005 Role	2025 Role
Emily Murphy	Chief Acquisition Officer - GSA	Former Political Appointee, Consultant
Roger Waldron	Senior Procurement Executive/Deputy Chief Acquisitions Officer – GSA	President of The Coalition for Common Sense in Federal Procurement
Bill Gormley	Retired GSA Asst. Commissioner, Architect of the 1993 Schedules Reform, Chair of The Coalition for Government Procurement	Owner of The Gormley Group specializing in Schedule Consulting, Chairman of The Coalition for Common Sense in Federal Procurement
Larry Allen	President of The Coalition for Federal Procurement	Political Appointee to the GSA Office of Government-Wide Policy
Alan Thomas	Associate, Booz Allen Hamilton	Former Political Appointee, Consultant

Other than Mr. Thomas what do all four of these people have in common?  They were all part of the initiatives in 2005-2007 that were advanced on behalf of Lorita Doan that sought to eliminate NASA’s role in the federal marketplace. 

They were not successful in having OMB remove what they perceived as their agency birthright and resented NASA’s program’s existence.  So, if at first you don’t succeed, they try again.

Time illuminates, people are their patters, and sunshine is the best disinfectant.  This group have not hidden their past relationships (they advertise it).  They will obfuscate their real intentions and then spin a narrative that suggests what is being done is for the Administration, but is that entirely true? It certainly would not be consistent with their historical context viewed this way. 

No…rather their pattern is an insider’s game of influence and control over certain features and functions of public administration. They specialize with a focus on GSA.  The Trump Administration vowed to “Drain the Swamp” in his first term in office and rid government of these kinds of circular influences. It proved harder to do, so he needed to swim with some of the gators, pythons, and snapping turtles along the way – all creatures that can bite you and drag you in unknowingly, but that he appears to manage as best he can. After all, time illuminates, even for the President and his Administration.

How Things Work

When an administration prepares to transition into the Executive role, they designate individuals to proposed pathways that advance his administration’s agenda. GSA and its function were not stump speeches issues during the campaign. GSA's function was a feature of Project 2025; advocating for folding in functions of the executive branch under the purview of OMB. So, they ask those who helped them previously to come up with something.

It was clear to these insiders that they had a perfect opportunity to enact ‘Lorita’s Revenge’ under the guise of an administrative initiative to ‘eliminate the competition’.  They failed to eliminate the program in 2005-2007, but now see an opportunity, and so like any good opportunist...they took it.

These outside-insiders have been the biggest advocates of this push to rid this program, justifying it publicly, gaslighting and mischaracterizing NASA’s role in the marketplace and their program’s performance and capabilities along the way, singing and dancing their way to achieving the outcome they seek…and doing very well for themselves personally along the way.  The insiders' game is, if anything, proven to be very profitable.

Fatal Flaw - Agency Hubris

If there is a fatal flaw through which this collection of GSA-centric interests has had over the last 8 months, it would likely be hubris.  They set the stage early on, convinced the Executive Office of the President of the wisdom of the effort, had them release an executive order of their behalf, then spent the next 9 months on a federal power grab as they try to take things from others holding a policy over the head of others, saying they are acting on behalf of the Administration, knowing that instead knowing that they are acting one behalf of 'other' interest.   Some civil servants inside of GSA are doing this with relish, while others are looking at this with reluctance and reservations. 

Federal agencies know what I just said to be true.  Former federal personnel know what I just said to be true.  Contractors know what I just said to be true. And Industry knows what I just said to be true. 

Rather than taking a deep breath saying to themselves “Whoa!  OK, this is pretty big.  We have to be a buying agency again.  We must provide agencies what they need to execute their mission and functions, and we have to work with Industry to institute some reforms associated with how the exchange occurs between government and industry.  We have to reform our operations, business rules, and operations to become more efficient, eliminating make work and focusing on do work consistent with the Administration’s philosophies, while also streamlining and simplifying the rules and regulations that govern the exchange between government and industry.” 

That's what a humble federal agency would do, however that has not been the case with those working with some GSA Executives and GSA program leadership. When interacting with federal agencies or industry GSA has bullied their way through conversations holding a policy cudgel over people’s head.  Instead, they should have been saying all along “We want to have a functioning role that meets your needs. We have some obligations that we now must meet, and it is going to be hard. What do you need from us?  How can we help?”  Instead, they have been grabbing programs, grabbing contracts, grabbing money along the way not with humility but rather with hubris through the rollout.

Companies who have delt with their 'demands', and agencies who own and operate programs, know what I say above to be true.  Unfortunately, I can only conclude the Architects of Inefficiency and their Coalition of Self-Interests have misguided the inexperienced. It is no wonder why the people at Project 2025 thought that this function should be properly managed under OMB. I can certainly see the logic.

OMB's Choice

Once again, OMB will have a decision to make.  Knowing the motivations of those involved in advancing this initiative it will be interesting what decision OMB will arrive at.  They should not be fooled into thinking that moving the program under GSA’s stewardship will result in anything other than the inevitable.  GSA internally will isolate it, strip the resources from it, and then will let it die on the vine.  This is true in no uncertain terms.

So, what decision should OMB (and GSA) make to advance what the administration seeks?  I guess I have one more piece of writing to do. And the outcome I seek should be clear: "Empowering OMB to make an informed decision based on merit and results over press releases and promises." If they do, then the result of that outcome should be clear.