Analysis of General Accounting Office, Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, and Federal Court of Claims decisions on disputes involving performance specifications

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorYoder, E. Cory
dc.contributor.advisorTudor, Ron B.
dc.contributor.authorMurphy-Sweet, Philip A.
dc.contributor.corporateGraduate School of Business & Public Policy (GSBPP)
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-22T15:30:11Z
dc.date.available2012-08-22T15:30:11Z
dc.date.issued2002-09
dc.description.abstractThis thesis analyzed rulings and court cases from the General Accounting Office, Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals and Federal Court of Claims with respect to contract protests and disputes involving Performance Specifications. Performance Specifications generally leave the contractor open to decide the best means to accomplish the work of a contract and deliver the product called for in the contract. As compared with Design Specifications, which tell the contractor exactly the processes and materials that must be used to accomplish the task, Performance Specifications only specify the final product to be delivered and the parameters it will fulfill or operate within, and thus leave the contractor open to decide the best processes and procedures to accomplish the task. The use of Performance Specifications in the Defense acquisition process has been mandated from the Secretary of Defense since 1994. The intent in using Performance Specifications was to provide incentive to the contractor to become innovative and resourceful in performing the contract and hopefully, result in cost avoidances and savings to the Federal Government. This thesis will examine protests and disputes from the above sources to evaluate the use of Performance Specifications to date and compile any patterns of success or failure that can then be passed on to today's acquisition workforce.en_US
dc.description.distributionstatementApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
dc.description.serviceLieutenant Commander, United States Navyen_US
dc.description.urihttp://archive.org/details/analysisofgenera109459803
dc.format.extentxii, 87 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10945/9803
dc.publisherMonterey, CA; Naval Postgraduate School
dc.rightsThis publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.en_US
dc.subject.authorPerformance Specificationsen_US
dc.subject.authorFederal Acquisition Processen_US
dc.subject.authorGAO Comptroller General Decisionsen_US
dc.subject.authorArmed Services Board of Contract Appeals Decisionsen_US
dc.subject.authorU.S. Court of Federal Claims Decisionsen_US
dc.subject.lcshPerformance (Law)en_US
dc.titleAnalysis of General Accounting Office, Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, and Federal Court of Claims decisions on disputes involving performance specificationsen_US
dc.typeThesis
dspace.entity.typePublication
etd.thesisdegree.disciplineManagementen_US
etd.thesisdegree.grantorNaval Postgraduate School (U.S.)en_US
etd.thesisdegree.levelMastersen_US
etd.thesisdegree.nameM.S. in Managementen_US
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication689b9e9a-8dae-40b6-b61b-bc2662e12411
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery689b9e9a-8dae-40b6-b61b-bc2662e12411
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
02Sep%5FMurphy%5FSweet.pdf
Size:
179.27 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Collections
Theses