Much has changed in the world since 1988, and much has stayed the same. For me, 1988 was the beginning of my journey in federal contracting. I was in my early twenties and still searching to find myself, in life and in business. My first job in federal contracting was the jumping off point for the achievements, experiences, knowledge, and relationships that have forged the perspectives guiding me today. Recently, I was speaking with someone who urged me to share this particular perspective because they believed it needs to be heard. Let me know if they were right.

In light of the recent Constitutional challenge to the SBA 8(a) Business Development Program, specifically the “rebuttable presumption” that previously permitted some to enter the program without the need to submit evidence of social disadvantage, there is much anxiety and confusion for both Government and Industry. The federal sector is currently in a state of discovery related to the ruling, and trying to understand the impact of the ruling, and how much of the impact will be harmful to the individuals and groups affected by the ruling. While I am convinced it, and the ensuing actions being taken by the plaintiff will be harmful, that’s not the point of this article. I want to help my community focus on the positives versus the negatives.

Since cause and effect is about the relationships between actions and the resulting events, intentional or otherwise, I want to highlight a long-running cause whose effect has and continues to do more harm than good. The cause is the overreaching narrative by Government and others, related to the utilization of socioeconomic programs. The purpose of the narrative is increasing interest in the programs and targets federal buyers, small business concerns, the general public and elected officials who have a stake based on their constituents. The intent is noble but a key outcome is a dependency that rivals even the most illicit drugs. Generations of fantastically talented business leaders and entrepreneurs have been lulled into a false sense of achievement and security and have forsaken their experience and achievements for a socioeconomic designation. Instead of leading conversations with facts and instances to convey how they will help a federal agency achieve its strategic goals through improved organizational performance, they focus on how the agency is doing in meeting its socioeconomic goals. They effectively cheat themselves out of opportunities by diminishing their abilities and accomplishments.

I have the honor and privilege of working with business leaders committed to making a difference for the government, their companies, their people, and their communities. I like to think I was one of these leaders during my time on the sell-side of federal contracting. These leaders who come from all walks of life, strive to understand the mission, and do the right thing to support positive outcomes with far-reaching benefits. This cause and effect is one that empowers success for our Government, and for each community these companies are a part of. Conversely, I speak to quite a few leaders who approach federal contracting from the perspective the only advantage they need is a socioeconomic designation. They enter conversations as if that set-aside status is a functional capability. Because of the many different spins of the narrative, a completely opportunistic faction of business leaders exists. They have no real interest in understanding or bringing value to federal agency requirements, and their belief system sounds a lot like “you owe me those dollars because…” It is the former versus the latter leaders and companies we bring into our community, and programs.

Chasing set-asides for the sake of them being set-asides creates tunnel vision. Companies who employ this strategy are less likely to find work before an RFI or RFP is released because their strategies are entirely reactive. Instead of searching for work aligned to their abilities, they search for contract opportunities that fall under the size standard associated with the many NAICS Codes on their SAM.gov profile.

As I eluded to in my article Baking the Grade, the tally Uncle Sam claims as having awarded to Small Business because they are small business, is fiction. So much fiction, in fact that $30 billion of the $163B claimed in the FY 2022 Small Business Procurement Scorecard, can be erased for the simplest reasons. Not being prime contracts at all for $7B of the spend, and for not having been set-aside or sole sourced based on socioeconomic justifications for $23B. This deduction does not include the double and triple counting the Government is allowed to do, based on the current rules.

Changing the cause and effect for small business leaders and their companies in federal contracting is needed. That change is a part of our mission in helping them thrive versus just survive. We achieve this by guiding them to know HOW, WHEN, and to WHOM to tell their stories, WHY it matters, WHERE in the buying journey to place their messaging, and WHAT to include in the messaging that emphasizes their abilities and understanding of federal agency objectives. We do this to help them exchange the commonly misused practice of positioning small business designations first, for the practice of initiating informed discussions about outcomes, with customers and requirement owners.

Peace, Health, and Thriving in FY 2024,

Go-To-Guy Timberlake

For a PDF of this blog, click here.