Acquisition Mythbusters 2025-01: You Can Trust the Contracting Officer (Most of the Time)

I brought up the original Acquisition Mythbusters series in a conversation earlier this week, and I haven’t been able to shake the idea: maybe it's time for a revival. A lot has changed since that campaign first launched, but what hasn’t changed is the number of persistent myths still floating around in federal procurement. So in an effort to purge a few of those lingering misconceptions, here’s my first contribution to a modern edition:

Federal Acquisition Myth: “You can’t take the Contracting Officer (CO) at their word, there’s too much going on behind the scenes in Federal Procurement right now.”
 

Reality: In 2025? You usually can … and you should.

Before I crossed over to the industry side, I spent enough time talking with small businesses at conferences and matchmaking events to notice a troubling pattern. Many vendors—especially small and emerging ones—don’t believe they stand a real chance on a full and open, competitive requirement. They think the government only wants a large, the incumbent, or some dark horse who’s been whispering in their ear.

I’ll provide an example from experience where the agency I was working at issued an RFP for a $300M IDIQ where five awards were anticipated, and two were reserved for small business. There was industry days, long lead times for response, multiple Q&As, and just about everything a small government contracting shop with limited resources could do to get the word out. The end result? One small business responded. There wasn’t even enough to meet the reserve. When we spoke to companies we knew were capable/interested after, we were told that most hadn’t believed we’d award IDIQ spots to smalls. 

While this is just one example of many, I’ve seen firsthand that Contracting Officers don’t build acquisition strategies like this lightly. In fact, in the past five years, the focus on transparency and accountability has tightened considerably. Ethics guidance around “say what you mean, do what you say” isn’t just emphasized but actively enforced.

So if a solicitation states that two awards will go to small businesses, two awards will go to small businesses.

Despite that, I’ve watched agencies struggle to get enough qualified small business responses to even meet the minimum threshold in reserves, set-asides, and a number of solicitations where the market research was solid (ex: RFI responses from smalls interested and capable) but post-award surveys found they didn’t believe they had a chance. 

That’s a problem—and one I believe comes down to misplaced skepticism rather than strategy. There’s a lot one can be skeptical about in the world right now, but this shouldn’t be one of those things. 

A Few More Thoughts on Believing the CO

• If the solicitation is listed as competitive, it’s almost always competitive (with the exceptions normally due to poor management vs intent).
  Sure, incumbents always have an advantage. But if the government were truly determined to stick with the incumbent, they’d have sole sourced the need. While the burden is on the outsider to make the case for the change, there’s normally a realistic shot. Competitions, especially full and open ones, are time-consuming. Nobody in the government wants to go through a "fake" competition just to get the same result.
  
  

• Direct awards exist for a reason.
  If there is a highly preferred vendor for the need, and someone at the agency can make the case that company offers something truly unique, they’ll use one of the available flexibilities to make a direct award. Ethics rules aside (which are real and enforced), agencies don’t have time to play games. Contracting Officers don’t enjoy paperwork for sport. That direct award will happen, but again that doesn’t mean the competitive one you see isn’t competitive.
  
  

• Contracting Officers today are compliance stewards.
  While I have my own opinions about the long-term impacts of reduced CO training criteria, I’ll give credit where it’s due: the ethics and competition frameworks have been drilled in well. COs are more than buyers—they’re the front-line enforcers of fair and open competition. Personally, I’ve gone so far as to redact or blind quotes and proposals when I feared preferences were creeping in. In most cases, the structure is sound, and the intent is fair.
  
  

So yes, based on my time as a fed working across some of the government’s largest agencies, I think it’s safe to say: you can trust your CO.

The caveat? Cancellation justifications.

That’s a conversation for another day. But over the years I’ve seen those turn into creative writing exercises like no other.

Thoughts? Arguments? Procurement survival stories? Let me know.