Abstract

Contingencies such as peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, domestic or international disaster relief missions, and regional conflicts mandate that military forces are deployed immediately. This immediate deployment of military assets and military agents requires that supporting assets, including Contingency Contracting Officers (CCOs), are concurrently deployed on such missions. As an aspect of effective contract management, a clear understanding of the contracting authority and structure, to a large extent, lowers any risk that might be accrued and uncertainties. This paper seeks to distinguish between command authority and the contracting officers authority, as well as the contracting structure. This paper further merges the two and establishes why their understanding of the CCOs is essential. The introduction part of this paper provides the background to the research topic and demonstrates why the discussion of the identified issue is necessary and who is affected. The papers literature review analyzes various works that have been done before and about what the authors say about the topic under discussion. Different authors seem to agree that understanding contracting structure and authority is a practical contract method with several benefits, including limitation of conflict, enabling accountability and transparency, and ensuring a smooth running of operations. The research results are discussed in the findings section, where command authority and the contracting officers authority are distinguished, and their importance is further discussed. This paper concludes with a conclusion section in which a summary of the topic under study is done and a few recommendations made to increase efficiency further.

Establishing Contingency Contracting Authorities and Structure as an Effective Contract Management Practice

Introduction and Background

Contingency contracting refers to obtaining services, construction, and supplies through contracting means to support contingency operations. It is a significant component and a force multiplier in achieving Operational Contract Support (OCS) of the objectives laid down. The OCS is primarily responsible for planning for and obtaining construction, services, and supplies to support the combatant commander. This means operations through the necessary support integration, contractor management functions, and contracting support. Contingency contracting is carried out by contracting officers who have the legal authority to administer, terminate, enter into, or modify contracts under the authority given to the services, functional combatant commands, and combat support agencies (CSAs). This is following the guidelines and principles established in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), THE Service FAR supplements, applicable contingency contracting Acquisition Instructions (AIs), and the Defense Federal Acquisitions Regulations Supplement (DFARS) (Travieso et al., 2010). Additionally, contingencies like domestic or international disaster relief, peacekeeping, humanitarian missions, and regional conflicts mandate that military forces are deployed immediately.

This service deployment of military assets and members necessitates supporting assets like the Contingency Contracting Officers (CCOs) (Kirstein, 105). Therefore, understanding the contingency contracting authority, including both contracting authority and command authority, as well as the contingency contracting structure, is an essential aspect of effective contract management that, in the long run, helps to promote operational efficiency and also lowers the accrual of risk and other uncertainties. The department of defense (DoD) has, over the years, made some significant steps in ensuring the improvement of contingency contracting operations. For example, contingency contracting operations started maturing during the Korean War, and the CCOs had the role of leveraging the local Korean and Japanese vendors to offer support to the war, that is, by providing local procurement (Russell, 2010). This would help reduce the need for flying shipments from the United States, which was a long way. In addition, during the Cold War, the DoD developed and implemented logistics reductions and significant support personnel, resulting in increased contractor support reliance.

Unfortunately, contractor support alone is never sufficient...

Despite being critical, contractor support is mainly conducted in an ad hoc manner and is inadequately incorporated into the doctrine and culture of the United States military. There has been an identified need for the DoD to ensure that contingency contracting structures and command or authority are clearly defined in light of this event. Each party understands the extent and the nature of control. The contingency contracting officers (CCOs) must be aware of and understand the organizational construct they work for and their mandated contracting authority. This paper discusses the legal authorities of the CCO and also differentiates between contracting authority and command authority. It also offers insight into the contracting structure, organizational support options, joint staff, and JTSCC staffing. This paper will further establish why understanding contracting structure and command authority is important for effective contract management. The findings of this paper can be additionally used in disaster relief situations and humanitarian situations (Russell, 2012).

Literature Review

As mentioned earlier, when military members and other military assets are deployed on a mission such as peacekeeping missions and regional conflict missions, supporting assets like the CCOs must also be concurrently deployed. However, contingency contractor support aloe is never enough. Different researchers have carried out studies to determine the best and most effective contract management practices. An example of such practice is ensuring that the CCOs are made aware and understand the legal authorities and the organizational structure. According to the Defense Contingency Contracting Student Handbook by Travieso et al. (2010), clear command and contracting authority are essential components of success as far as contingency contracting is concerned. According to this handbook, the CCOs have mandated understanding their legal authority and organizational structure. This would help them discharge their duties appropriately and efficiently in support of the military combatants. A study conducted by the RAND Corporation analyzed how effective the United States Air Force contingency was contracting supports the handbooks idea (OFarrell, 2019). According to the report, establishing clear guidelines regarding the authority and structure and ensuring they are clearly understood is critical since it allows contingency contracting operations to run smoothly.

Another literature review by OFarrell (2019) indicates the crucial need for the contracting officers to know, understand and accept the stipulated contract structure and command authority. He also provides evidence that shows that doing this, on top of increasing efficiency, helps ensure accountability, lowers the risk of any fraudulent activity, and ensures transparency. The role of the Contingency Contracting Officers is planning for and obtaining construction, services, and supplies to support the combatant commander. This means operations through the necessary support integration, contractor management functions, and contracting support. According to Russell (2012), establishing and understanding contingency contracting authority and structure is crucial for the success of a mission. This is because it allows for creating clear stipulations about what the contracting officers are expected to do. Such policies have guidelines of what they should buy, how they should purchase the products and services, and the instruments of the contract that must be used for any purchase, including vendor contracts, agreements of blanket purchases, and purchase orders, among others. Russell (2012) further supports the idea put forward by OFarrell (2019) and the Defense Contingency Contracting Student Handbook by Travieso et al. (2020). He writes that with positive interactions between the Department of Defense (DoD) and the CCOs, the DoD should ensure that contracting structures and command authority are stipulated to help the CCOs adequately understand their legal authority and limits. He also writes that a well stipulated command authority and structure can, to a large extent, lower or remove conflicts that might occur between the contingency contracting officers and their partners and other stakeholders, thereby enhancing or creating positive interactions.

It can additionally be used as a conflict resolution policy should the need arise since there are clearly stated acquisitions and purchases. The above literature reviews are further supported by McMillon (2017), who goes an extra step to put down the nature of the dealings of the CCOs as far as their responsibility is concerned, and how this is affected by clearly stipulated contracting authority and structure and the policies or requirements laid down. According to him, the request for supplies and services during a contingency is usually of urgency.…