Attendees identified a number of issues requiring further analysis and study. No consensus was reached on these issues over the course of the workshop.
How long will it or should it take for government to create a new set of procurement guidelines and laws that promotes rather than discourages innovation? What timeframe is reasonable, keeping in mind to balance the urgency of reform with the desire to develop well-conceived alternatives to the current
system?
What types of procedures should be built into a new system to create an environment where risk-taking and innovation is encouraged and rewarded? ? Should there be financial incentives? Insurance, guarantees, or warranties on new technologies? What will be needed to ensure that this fundamental shift in attitude toward risk-taking on all projects?
How large a role should the private sector have in procurement reform? What are the benefits and drawbacks of using contracting mechanisms common in private-sector construction?
Some suggested that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) be used in lieu of typical legal proceedings to resolve issues that may arise during a contract. Indeed, other federal agencies have used ADR. What examples of the use of ADR exist within the transportation community? Within other agencies? What were the benefits and limitations of using it? How did the cost and timeframe of resolution compare to the traditional legal system?
What method of education and outreach would be best for promoting procurement reform? An annual conference? A new trade journal focused on the topic? web sites and clearinghouses? Who should be the lead organization to provide this service to the community?
Return to Top
Next Section
