In the fast-changing world, the contemporary manager is faced with the enormous task of learning how to manage employees outside the organizational context. Most organizations are riddled with many controversies ranging from politics to management, and technical contract issues. Organizations are also meant to develop interactions between other institutions and individuals both in the public and private domain. In order to maintain longstanding and profitable relations, the creation of a memorandum of understanding remains of the topmost priorities that ought to be adhered to. In order to resolve the many contractual issues facing the contract manager, buyer, and government, principles have to be created and maintained. Politics has played a critical role in perpetuating both the emergence and management of contractual issues. While the government can rely on in-house expertise to undertake some of its activities, it seeks to delegate by contracting a private firm. In some cases, there might be few entities with the capability to manage some of the duties passed on to them leading the price for the contracts to escalate and also presenting an opportunity for impropriety. Contracting has also become a subject of politics whereby vendors who successfully manage to get government contracts to turn up in the list of those contributing towards political campaigns ( Cohen & Eimicke, 2008 ). There is room for favoritism to prevail by ensuring that individuals allied to the government get the contracts for services that are to be outsourced, thus, creating room for mismanagement to occur. Management of contracts has been equated to a craft as opposed to a science in most domains. Through the institution of diligence, care, and imagination, it is possible for the government to manage some of the challenges that result from contracting. Through the incorporation of Hirschman`s classic design of “exit, voice, and loyalty”, a manager being held accountable for adopting a less cost-effective method can manage to successfully absolve themselves from any wrongdoing ( Cohen & Eimicke, 2008 ). Further, obsession with certain private sector providers may result in dismal results as well as distort the effort to hold those responsible, accountable for their actions. Only through a bureaucratic understanding of how the function of managers can be represented when dealing with both private and public entities. Whether or not the government should contract services offered to the military remains a subject to debate. For example, during war if a company is contracted to reconstruct destroyed infrastructure, the ongoing war is likely to offer the contractor a leeway making it easy for them to offer an excuse regarding why the service contracted was not completed as agreed upon. Corruption and intimidation tactics represent some of the most widespread contract issues. Government contracts involve colossal sums of money which is very attractive to incompetent and deceitful dealers who seek to gain access to such funds through corrupt means. The enormous temptation for government officials to be enriched by public funds is too great for some of them to resist ( Curry, 2010). The issue of corruption is present even in reputable international organizations such as the World Bank. According to ( Curry, 2010) corruption is “public enemy number one” in most developing economies. Even the United Nations (UN) is not exempt from contract issues. For instance, in 2015, a former President of the UN General Assembly was charged alongside five officials for colluding in a scheme where the former official stood to gain $1.3 million for performing certain activities by assuming his former role ( Curry, 2010). Another pertinent issue is the demonetization of whistleblowers. James Wasserstrom is one such tipster who lost his job, had his belongings searched, and was subjected to other indignities upon exposing errant officials at the UN. Intimidation tactics have, therefore, made it difficult to control fraudulent practices. To sum it up, in order to manage contractual concerns facing the contract manager, buyer, and government, principles have to be created and maintained. It is evident that contractors who benefit from government contracts end up being the same vendors who contribute significantly towards election campaigns. Preferential is, therefore, likely to persist since the authorities are sure that some of the proceeds from the outsourced contracts are likely to assist in their campaigns. The issue of management comes into play where there is a need to ensure that contracts are offered to deserving and qualified personnel. Failure to do so will likely lead deceitful dealers to benefit from huge contracts and also propagate corrupt dealings and other procurement issues.
References
Cohen, S., & Eimicke, W. (2008). The responsible contract manager: Protecting the public interest in an outsourced world. Georgetown University Press.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Curry, W. S. (2010). Government contracting: Promises and perils. Routledge.
