YOU HAVE IN TERMS OF INCREASING
ACQUISITION EFFICIENCY AT THE IRS?
One of the areas we are focusing on is finding ways to look at
technology acquisitions from a portfolio approach and providing
opportunities to scale on day one. This allows us to open up
the aperture to various firms, technologies, and approaches to
solving our problems, but it does require a different conversation
around risk. The team’s work around Pilot IRS exemplifies this
approach. Under the project, we asked for proposals to improve
data on government contracts in roughly 90 days, leaving the
approach and technology up to the bidders. We funded five
firms at a relatively low dollar amount ($25K for 30 days),
reassessed based on their progress towards our stated goals, and
then continued with two firms for another 90 days. If the firms
continue to show promise, funding can scale relatively quickly
to the millions. It’s important to note that this was not a lengthy,
cumbersome procurement. The Pilot IRS team went from
solicitation release to award in under 25 days and made decisions
on what projects to fund into Phase II in only three days. This
approach required us to engage with our industry partners on an
ongoing basis, and it also required us to understand that “failing
fast” was not actually failing at all. It just meant that we could
focus more resources on the approaches that showed the most
promise. This is an approach that is familiar in the research and
development area but not necessarily the technology space.
federal government focused on the ability to move from
capital expenses into operating expenses. Unfortunately, this
approach didn’t take into account the fact that within the
federal government, it was all the same ex—appropriations for
information technology acquisitions were all one-year funds.
This issue becomes particularly problematic with “pay by the
drink” offerings, because if the government ends up saving
funds, it cannot easily (if at all) use those savings elsewhere. The
Modernizing Government Technology Act has fundamentally
changed the nature of this conversation by allowing agencies
to borrow from a central fund and pay it back or create their
own fund which allows for greater budget flexibilities when
pursuing modernization projects. For me, this agency-specific
working capital fund has the potential to fundamentally
change how we communicate our long-term goals to industry,
thereby driving down barriers to competition and the cost of
capital to the firms who want to support our missions.
WHAT ROLES DO TECHNOLOGIES OF
BLOCKCHAIN, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE,
AND ADVANCED ANALYTICS PLAY IN YOUR
ACQUISITION PROCESSES AND STRATEGY?
It’s an interesting byproduct of focusing on the problems you
have and the end state that you are trying to achieve. As long as
they fit within your current state and support the user, the specific
solutions become less important. That being said, our ability to
take advantage of the speed and agility of current technologies
like blockchain, AI, and the like is very important. Procurement
is frequently a very manual process which occurs across multiple
systems that have inconsistent data fields and processes. These
issues inherently lead to problems that can be addressed and
mitigated by robotic process automation, machine learning, and
the like. When we’re asked what technology we want, we can
jokingly say at times, “I don’t care. Does it solve our problem?”
INCREASINGLY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
ARE BEING ACQUIRED AS SERVICES. DOES
THIS TREND COMPLICATE ACQUISITION AND
BUDGETING—CAPITAL SPENDING TO O&M?
For a long time, firms pitching technology solutions to the
MEET HARRISON SMITH
Harrison Smith is the Chief Procurement Officer
at the Internal Revenue Service within the U.S.
Department of the Treasury. He is responsible for all
acquisition programs and contractual commitments
for equipment, supplies, and services for IRS and
Treasury Departmental Offices (approximately
$2.4 billion annually). Prior to joining the IRS,
Harrison served in various roles at the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) and Naval Sea Systems
Command. As the Industry Liaison for DHS, he was
responsible for providing leadership and direction
for DHS offices and outside officials for all aspects
of the DHS industry engagement program. He
also promoted rapid and innovative approaches
to solving complex problems, and served as a
principal advisor to the Chief Procurement Officer
on matters relating to all aspects of procurement.
CESGovernment.com • 39