14 Tips for Attending a Government Expo or Trade Show
April 14, 2012 by cs
Federal, state and local government agencies frequently host trade shows or expos to publicize their contract opportunities and attract new vendors. Wonder whether you should attend a government-sponsored business expo? What should you expect if you go? How should you prepare? Are you disappointed in the last trade show you attended?
These are the kinds of questions often posed by clients of the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (GTPAC). Fundamentally, businesses want to know how they can gain a competitive advantage by attending an event sponsored by a government agency. The answer lies as much in preparation and follow-up as it does in actual attendance.
GTPAC Counselors believe these kinds of events are what you make them. If you go to just listen, you may come away disappointed. If, on the other hand, you go to make something happen, you can come away with some good contacts,valuable insights, and solid business leads.
Here are a few tips …
- Establish some objectives for yourself – what do you hope to accomplish by attending? State this in concrete, quantifiable terms.
- Think about the specific kinds of opportunities you want to go after and be prepared to explain how you represent the solution to the government’s contracting objectives.
- Identify who is going to be in attendance and research in advance as much as you can about who will be there and those persons you want to meet. Think about why they are going to the show and what they want to accomplish there – align yourself with their objectives.
- Familiarize yourself with all details of the show so that you can envision how you are going to use the structure of the show to accomplish your objectives.
- Be prepared with marketing materials, including business cards, brochures and/or product/service fact sheets, product samples/portfolio, and a detailed capabilities statement. (Don’t have a capabilities statement? See our article on this subject here.) Tailor at least one of your handouts to the expo or show itself.
- Be prepared to talk about pricing. You may not need to, but be prepared just in case someone asks.
- Begin to envision how your competitors at the show can be potential partners as a result of the show.
- Develop and be prepared to deliver a 30-second “elevator speech” which explains in layman’s terms exactly what you are an expert at doing. Don’t be shy to explain what’s special about your company and why your products/services are the best. (If you need help constructing an elevator speech, see our article at http://gtpac.org/2010/07/whats-an-elevator-pitch-and-why-you-need-one.)
- Remember that buyers don’t have time to waste. Buyers want specific information, and buyers want to know what’s special about you (that’s your competitive advantage).
- Preparation is essential. It’s better not to go than to go unprepared – you never have a second chance to make a good first impression.
- Dress to impress. And wear comfortable shoes!
- At the show, listen to how your competitors are selling themselves and learn as much about their marketing as possible. Also learn from their mistakes.
- Understand that follow-up after the show is critical. Gather all the business cards you collected, write follow-up notes or emails – promptly. Set-up follow-up meetings/conference calls, if possible and appropriate. Send more marketing materials.
- Write yourself a report on lessons-learned. Review this report before planning to participate in another event.
Your GTPAC Counselor will be glad to elaborate on this topic and provide you with additional advice. You can find our contact information right here.
© 2010 Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center – All Rights Reserved.
Are auditors to blame for poor contractor-customer relationships?
March 5, 2012 by cs
The relationship between government contractors and federal acquisition officials has been on the decline for several years now, according to a new Grant Thornton survey, but companies say their relationships with contracting officers have deteriorated more in the last year than in the past.
Grant Thornton surveyed more than 100 government contractors in 2011 for its 17th annual Grant Thornton Government Contractor Industry Survey, which was released Feb. 20. Of those contractors, 78 percent of them said the government is inefficient. But half of that 78 percent put the primary blame on the contracting officers, while 28 percent blame the auditors.
In an analysis of the responses, Grant Thornton said it’s a shift in blame from prior surveys in which most respondents blamed the Defense Contract Audit Agency for inefficiencies in resolving contract issues.
“It appears that respondents have come to expect delays from the DCAA, and are becoming more and more frustrated by the unwillingness of contracting officers to assert the decision-making authority granted to them in the procurement regulations,” according to the survey.
Grant Thornton said in practice, the auditors have been granted greater influence on contracting officers in recent years. They now exert more pressure on the officers regarding the resolution of a contracting issue involving contract costs or a contractor’s business systems. However, auditors are only advisors to the contracting officers.
“Predictably, the impact of this structural infighting has been to slow down the resolution of routine issues, with the government often paying a far higher cost than would have been paid had the auditor been limited to an advisory role as defined in the regulations,” Grant Thornton said.
Despite the shifts, auditors and contractors have had a not-so-good relationship, although the better relationship with contracting officers is hurting too.
The relationship with auditors was rated as “fair or poor” by 19 percent of the more than 100 surveyed companies, compared with 11 percent in the 16th annual survey.
The relationship with contracting officers was rated as “fair or poor” by 10 percent of the participants in the 17th annual survey, compared with 5 percent in the prior survey.
About the Author: Matthew Weigelt is a senior writer covering acquisition and procurement for Federal Computer Week. This article was published on Feb. 28, 2012 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2012/02/28/relationships-contracting-officer-auditor-contractor.aspx?s=wtdaily_290212.
Signs of friction in contractor-government relations
March 1, 2012 by cs
Contractor relationships with federal auditors and contracting officers
deteriorated somewhat during the past year as government agencies scaled back
programs in an effort to reduce the budget deficit, according to a recent
survey.
A separate study released Thursday found that large companies were securing a
high percentage of federal contracts set aside for small businesses. In the 17th Annual Government Contractor Industry Survey released Monday by Grant Thornton LLP, contractor relationships with auditors were rated
either fair or poor by 19 percent of surveyed companies, up from 11 percent the
previous year. Relationships with contracting officers were rated fair or poor
by 10 percent of respondents, double the previous year’s total.
Only 22 percent of respondents said the government resolved contract disputes
efficiently, a drop from previous surveys.
Revenue from government contracts during the past year grew for 50 percent of
the companies, was flat for 21 percent and declined for 29 percent, the survey
found. “The fact that the highest percentage of companies experienced revenue
growth continues a long-term trend reported in previous surveys, indicating that
government contractors are far less vulnerable than commercial companies to
recessions or slow growth in the overall economy,” Grant Thornton analysts
said.
“However, the 29 percent of companies experiencing revenue reductions is the
highest percentage reported in several surveys, indicating that government
efforts to reduce deficits are adversely impacting government contractor
revenue.”
The survey went out to an unspecified number of companies, in 24 states, that
depend primarily on federal contracts; most of them are for-profit and
two-thirds provide services to the Defense Department. Forty-six percent are
small businesses.
The survey also found that profits improved slightly from the previous year.
The biggest cost factor within these firms was executive compensation, and
survey analysts said they disagreed with the methods the Defense Contract Audit
Agency uses in determining whether to allow such costs.
“While government contracting has never been a model of efficiency, it is our
view that the decline in efficiency and business relationships during the past
few years can be traced directly to changes in DCAA policy adopted after
[Government Accountability Office] reports were issued in July 2008 and
September 2009,” they wrote.
“Unfortunately, the GAO criticized the DCAA for having a management and
agency culture that focused on a production-oriented mission, emphasizing the
need for timeliness in supporting the needs of contracting officers in the
procurement process,” the survey said.
Regarding the average time for contractors to collect accounts receivable
from the government, results showed the period was less than 30 days for 21
percent of survey participants, while 60 percent reported receivables were
collected within 30 to 60 days. The remaining 19 percent reported waiting more
than 60 days.
The average win rate on proposals submitted in a competitive environment was
30 percent.
On the topic of revenue by type of contract, the companies said, on average,
45 percent of revenue was from cost-reimbursable contracts and 35 percent was
from time-and-materials contracts. The remaining 20 percent was from firm
fixed-price contracts.
When asked how often they were required to perform out-of-scope work without
a contract modification, 81 percent said frequently or occasionally. Only 16
percent said they refused such requests.
A separate contracting study by the Petaluma, Calif.-based American Small Business
League found that of the top 100 companies receiving federal small business
contracts, 72 were large companies that “significantly exceed” the Small
Business Administration’s small business size standards; only 24 were
“legitimate small business,” the league said.
The large companies — among them Lockheed Martin Corp., Rolls-Royce, Boeing
Co., General Dynamics and Blue Cross Blue Shield — accounted for $16 billion of
the $21 billion total for the top 100, the study found.
http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2012/02/signs-friction-contractor-government-relations/41283
Learn ‘soup to nuts’ of government contracting November 7-18
September 15, 2011 by cs
Serious about learning everything about government contracting? Interested in learning about contracting from a federal contracting officer’s point-of-view? Looking for an opportunity to learn government contracting in a comprehensive and interactive way?
If you answered “yes” to these three questions, then “Mission-Focused Contracting” – a two-week course offered by The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech — is the place to be.
This very comprehensive course is being offered on the Georgia Tech campus over a two-week period, November 7 through 18, 2011. (Please note that there will be no class on Friday, November 11 in observance of Veterans’ Day.)
Mission-Focused Contracting is the capstone course for Level I contracting professionals and all non-contracting personnel who play a role in the acquisition process. This class is applicable to both government and industry purchasing and engages participants in the entire government acquisition process, from meeting with the government customer to completing the contract close-out process. Throughout this course, participants have the opportunity to learn and apply problem-solving and negotiation skills.
The Contracting Education Academy at Georgia Tech (The Academy) is an approved equivalency training provider to the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) and provides continuing education training to acquisition and government contracting professionals as well as to business professionals working for government contractors or pursuing opportunities in federal contracting.
How You Will Benefit:
By attending this course, participants will learn how to:
- Complete market research to identify procurement sources
- Develop a bid or proposal package
- Evaluate proposals and award contracts
- Monitor contractor performance, apply remedies, and make proper contract payments
- Modify contracts, exercise options, and complete the contract closeout process
Business people taking this course have the unprecedented opportunity to sit side-by-side with government contracting personnel to learn the ins and outs of federal contracting. In addition, many of the principles of federal contracting apply to state and local government procurement.
To learn more about this course — and to register– please visit: http://www.pe.gatech.edu/courses/con-120-mission-focused-contracting.
Georgia DOT commissioner resigns
September 8, 2011 by cs
The state’s top transportation official, responsible for building and repairing highways and bridges across the state, has resigned under pressure from his board. Vance Smith, commissioner of the state Department of Transportation, resigned effective Dec. 31 and will only serve in an advisory capacity until then.
– by Ariel Hart – The Atlanta Journal-Constitution – 9:31 p.m. Wednesday, September 7, 2011 – at http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/dot-commissioner-resigns-1161646.html
How one small business found its niche and doubled in size
August 15, 2011 by cs
Nearly doubling your revenue in one year is remarkable in itself. That 5 AM Solutions Inc. did it in an uncertain economy and with less government contracting dollars is one of the reasons the Reston, Va.-based company holds the No. 41 spot on this year’s Washington Technology Fast 50 list.
Between 2009 and 2010, 5 AM’s revenue rocketed from $7.2 million to $13.9 million, and its compounded annual growth rate over the past five years is 140.29 percent.
“We bring some really unique talent to the field where there’s a lot of opportunity,” said Brent Gendleman, president and CEO of 5 AM. The company develops software for life science and health professionals, and health information technology is a burgeoning field.
“I think our brand of transparent process and high-quality folks and team players has some resonance,” he added. “There’s just a huge opportunity for our government clients to take advantage.”
Good workers are great, but only if there’s work for them to do. Contract wins that put the company in the thick of two of the country’s biggest health IT initiatives have ensured that the 5 AM team stays busy. Since July 2006, the company has been handling software engineering for the National Cancer Institute’s caArray open-source Web-based array data management system, under a $9.25 million contract. The system helps translational cancer research by acquiring, disseminating and aggregating information that can be shared via the cancer Biomedical Informatics Grid.
In April, 5AM won a $5.1 million contract to provide software engineering for the National Health Information Network’s CONNECT open-source software, which enables secure electronic health data exchange among health care providers, insurers, government agencies and consumer services.
With those customers and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the Office of the Surgeon General established, Gendleman said he is setting his sights on the Veterans Administration and the National Institutes of Health.
“We are hopeful that some of the things that we have learned at the other agencies can be applied there to a very important and direct population that we would love to get engaged with directly,” he said of VA.
Some of those lessons include being transparent to establish trust. “That trust is between not just two individuals but between the company and the client that they’re serving. There’s a partnership – and it really is a partnership – that they’re trying to achieve,” Gendleman said.
Knowing when to quit is also crucial. “You want to fail as quickly as possible,” he added. “The longer you wait, the more expensive it gets and who wants that? Nobody. It’s not everybody’s instinct but failing as fast as possible is absolutely the most important thing to do. When you’re talking about medicine, you want to know if something’s not working now so you can try something different and don’t hurt someone. On the science side, it’s the same thing.”
Besides adding to its workload, 5 AM plans to add to its employee roster. The company, which has lost only three workers in the past four years, started with two employees in 2003, now has 48 and aims for 70 employees by next summer. Most of the hires will be in the engineering department.
Going forward, federal budget concerns will be the company’s main challenge, Gendleman said.
“People are very reluctant to say ‘Let’s do this initiative or that initiative’ when they don’t know if they’re going to get the funding or not,” he said.
But even that could be an opportunity, Gendleman added. “Sometimes the cuts really do allow for people to take a breath and reevaluate and reprioritize, and sometimes you’re in the plus part of that.”
About the Author: Stephanie Kanowitz is a contributing writer to Washington Technology. Published Aug. 11, 2011 at http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2011/08/01/fast-50-5am-solutions.aspx?s=wtdaily_120811.
Project management consultants expand business with help from Georgia Tech
August 12, 2011 by cs
Project Success, Inc. (PSI), an Atlanta-based project management training and
consulting firm, recently utilized the services of Georgia Tech’s Procurement
Assistance Center (GTPAC) to expand its business into the government sector.
GTPAC is a program that assists companies with all aspects of government
procurement processes.
“We’ve been in business for almost 28 years now, and we teach the practical
aspects of project management. We work in all industry sectors, in
manufacturing, energy, marketing, software and IT,” said David Halm, a senior
consultant at the company. “With the downturn in the economy in late 2008, we
recognized that the manufacturing sector was going to continue to decline, so we
took a suggestion from one of our consultants to get on the U.S. General
Services Administration schedule.”
The General Services Administration (GSA) oversees the business of the U.S.
federal government. According to its website, GSA supplies federal purchasers
with “cost-effective, high-quality products and services from commercial
vendors.” Halm was referred to GTPAC after attending a GSA-sponsored event in
Atlanta.
“We learned about the educational and classroom offerings through GTPAC, and
I took several classes, including Introduction to Government Contracting,
Understanding the GSA Schedules Process and Using the Computer to Win Government
Contracts,” Halm recalled. “Those classes allowed me to get connected to Chuck
Schadl, director of GTPAC, and Joe Beaulieu, a procurement counselor. As we
researched the GSA requirements, we jotted down ideas about the best way to
structure our proposal.”
Beaulieu helped PSI structure a proposal under GSA’s Mission Oriented
Business Integrated Services, or MOBIS. Under the MOBIS schedule, PSI may
provide mission oriented business integrated services and products to U.S.
Government agencies. The MOBIS objective is to enable federal agencies to
improve performance, quality, timeliness and efficiencies throughout their
organizations.
“Getting a GSA contract basically means that all the negotiating points – the
pricing, the delivery – all those terms have already been negotiated. So a
government agency can purchase from Project Success through the GSA process. It
opens a lot of doors,” Halm noted. “In the GSA seminar, the speaker said that
more than 90 percent of companies that set out to get a GSA contract never get
there. Having this contract offers great marketing potential and has helped us
maintain and generate business in this downturn.”
GTPAC, part of the Georgia Tech Enterprise Innovation Institute, provides
no-cost assistance with government procurement to any company licensed to do
business in Georgia. Each year, GTPAC conducts seminars in Albany, Athens,
Atlanta, Augusta, Carrollton, Columbus, Gainesville, Rockmart, Savannah and
Warner Robins. The center assists companies with all aspects of federal, state
and local government procurement processes, including solicitation analysis,
proposal preparation, pre- and post-award counseling, and quality and accounting
systems. Procurement counselors also analyze whether companies have the
potential for participating in the government procurement process.
“It’s very useful to be able to use GTPAC as a sounding board, because the
counselors understand the specific requirements,” Halm said. “In dealing with
us, Joe helped us maintain the confidence we needed to stay on track. GTPAC
provided tangible, direct guidance, as well as the more intangible, but equally
important, encouragement.”
About Enterprise Innovation Institute:
The Georgia Tech Enterprise Innovation Institute helps companies,
entrepreneurs, economic developers and communities improve their competitiveness
through the application of science, technology and innovation. It is one of the
most comprehensive university-based programs of business and industry
assistance, technology commercialization and economic development in the
nation.
Enterprise Innovation Institute
Georgia Institute of Technology
75 Fifth Street, N.W., Suite 314
Atlanta, Georgia 30308 USA
Media Relations Contact: John Toon (404-894-6986); E-mail: JohnToon@innovate.gatech.edu
Writer: Nancy Fullbright, published Aug. 9, 2011
“Fast 50″ small business winners have cause for celebration, concern
August 5, 2011 by cs
This year is no exception. The companies making Washington Technology’s top 50 list of small businesses (“The Fast 50″) have had extraordinary growth, starting with No. 1 company, SAVA Workforce Solutions, which achieved a five-year compound annual growth rate of 326.05 percent.
The small businesses on this list have shown an ability to adapt and change with the market. Many are taking advantage of various small business programs to build businesses that will stand the test of time.
The types of companies that populate the Fast 50 range from resellers to consultants and IT services providers to research and development firms. The list is entrepreneur heavy with most companies having a founder or team of founders at the helm.
The aggregate value of 2010 revenue for the Fast 50 is $1.4 billion. The No. 50 company NextPoint Group, came in with a five-year compound annual growth rate of 62.49 percent. Not too shabby.
So there is plenty for these companies to celebrate, but as you read the profiles of the Fast 50 we are highlighting here, you’ll quickly realize that these companies, despite their growth, also are facing a tough market and they know it.
Just like their larger brethren in the government market, their customers are facing austere budgets with dim prospects for the rampant growth of the past decade.
The response from these companies comes in several shapes. First, there is a push to control costs because government agencies are putting more and more emphasis on price in the contract bids they evaluate.
That in turn puts pressure on contractors to control their own costs if they want to remain profitable.
“If your overhead rates are low, you’ll stand a better chance of winning,” said SAVA’s general manager David Poirier.
The key is to balance bidding the best people with controlling costs. For Poirier that is the key to success.
In the current budget environment customers are reticent to move on new projects.
“People are very reluctant to say ‘Let’s do this initiative or that initiative’ when they don’t know if they’re going to get the funding or not,” said Brent Gendleman, president and CEO of 5AM Solutions, No. 41 with a 75.17 percent compound annual growth rate.
Another impact of the tighter budgets is increasing competition.
As we see funding streams shift around and priorities shift and certain programs being defunded, companies that can be flexible and agile really gain a sustaining advantage in their ability to compete,” said Dawn Halfaker, president and CEO of Halfaker and Associates, No. 11 with 153.32 percent five-year growth rate.
But the problems of tight purse strings and program at risk of losing funding can create opportunities as agencies scramble to perform their missions with fewer resources.
“Sometimes we’re able to help with that process and perhaps achieve savings,” said Nicole Geller, CEO of GCS Inc., No. 35 with 82.45 percent compound annual growth rate.
“Sometimes the cuts really do allow for people to take a breath and reevaluate and reprioritize, and sometimes you’re in the plus part of that,” Gendleman said.
A paramount focus for these companies is performance, making sure they are delivering value to their customers.
“Regardless of company size, political climate or the budget battle, if you’re good at what you do and have happy customers, I think you’re well-positioned for success,” said Christopher Romani, president and CEO of Integrity Management Consulting, No. 7 with a 188.18 percent compound annual growth rate.
The theme of a customer focus and a dedication to the customers mission is repeated often by the Fast 50 companies. It is both a passion for the market and a survival instinct.
“You have to make sure you’re keeping an eye on what the government is buying and where [government buyers] are spending their money,” said Frank Blair, managing partner of Edaptive Systems, No. 19 with a 105.2 percent growth rate. “Because if you’re not flexible enough to change direction, you’re going to get mauled.”
MORE FAST 50
– About the Author: Nick Wakeman is the editor-in-chief of Washington Technology. This article was published 8/1/2011 at http://washingtontechnology.com/Articles/2011/08/01/FAST-50-intro.aspx?s=wtdaily_020811&p=1.
IRS delays contractor tax withholding
May 12, 2011 by cs
The Internal Revenue Service is pushing off an unpopular requirement that the government withhold a percentage of its payments to most contractors for tax purposes.
The final rule, published in Monday’s (5/9/2011) Federal Register, delays a mandate that federal, state and local governments with expenditures of more than $100 million withhold 3 percent of payments for products and services worth more than $10,000, including nonconfidential or classified contracts, grants to for-profit companies, and farm and Medicare payments. The requirement, scheduled to take effect on Jan. 1, 2012, now will be delayed to apply to payments on new contracts made after Dec. 31, 2012. The rule will affect all contracts starting Dec. 31, 2013.
The requirement, included in the 2005 Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act to ensure that individuals and companies with outstanding tax debts do not receive new payments from the federal government, would closely mirror the withholding system on individual salaries and wages. The government would set aside 3 percent of the gross payments and the information and funds would then be transmitted to the IRS. At the end of the year, the amount withheld would be credited toward taxes owed.
Lawmakers earlier this year proposed repealing the controversial provision, and Obama administration officials in March expressed support for delaying the requirement while agencies prepare to implement the change.
Critics have suggested that the provision is unnecessarily burdensome during an economic downturn, noting that other measures exist to ensure contractor tax compliance.
“This is an 11th-hour quasi-reprieve from a temporary tax increase that would have eliminated jobs and helped only the IRS,” said Phil Bond, president and chief executive officer of TechAmerica, a technology-based trade association. “It is a scheme to force companies to pay taxes in advance and then wait for the IRS to send them a refund a year later. A one-year extension of the withholding and reporting requirements is a significant, positive development but far from a solution.”
Roger Jordan, vice president of government relations at the Professional Services Council, a contractor trade group, on Monday also applauded the delay but called the requirement itself “bad policy.”
“The withholding requirement would significantly reduce companies’ cash flow at a time when the current economic environment is already squeezing their ability to meet operating expenses,” he said. “While it’s appropriate to focus on how to ensure that any tax liabilities government contractors and other organizations owe are properly collected, other regulations have been implemented in recent years that effectively ensure contractors are meeting their tax obligations.”
– by Emily Long – GovExec.com – May 9, 2011 – at http://www.govexec.com/story_page_pf.cfm?articleid=47769&printerfriendlyvers=1
GTPAC director named education vice president for national organization
May 6, 2011 by cs
At the spring training conference of the Association of Procurement Technical Assistance Centers (APTAC) last week, Chuck Schadl was named Vice President of Education for this national organization.
Schadl is the program director of the Georgia Tech Procurement Assistance Center (GTPAC). GTPAC is one of 93 procurement technical assistance centers (PTACs) that operate across the country. PTACs assist businesses in identifying, competing for, and winning government contracts. APTAC is the trade association that represents and supports PTACs.
As Vice President of Education for APTAC, Schadl is one of six officers of the organization who make up the executive committee. As VP, he is responsible for overseeing APTAC’s Education Committee as well as the organization’s Professional Review Board. His appointment became effective on March 24, 2011 when he took the oath of office with other board members.
APTAC’s Education Committee determines the type and content of – and arranges for – the training courses to be presented at national training conferences, including the training courses that fulfill the certification requirements of the Professional Review Board (PRB). The PRB is responsible for managing and administering APTAC’s certification program, including developing and maintaining a method of recognizing the professional qualifications of procurement technical assistance specialists, promoting the value of APTAC’s certification and upholding the integrity of the certification process.
“I’ve been active in APTAC ever since I joined GTPAC in 2003,” commented Schadl. “In my new role, I’m looking forward to making an even more meaningful contribution to the organization and its membership. In turn, this should translate into better service to the businesses that PTACs serve nationwide.”