Page 68 - FCW, March/April 2018

bit too much, will reveal information the listener can exploit for competi- tive advantage.
“In the traditional space,” Rasmus- sen said, “people are bartering infor- mation, stealing and using information, or hoarding information. ‘Capture management’ has a hostile ring. The \\\[business development\\\] culture is can- nibalistic.”
The Digital Services Coalition is based on a very different cultural mind- set — one that believes new rms in the government IT space should cooper- ate more than compete and create an environment in which, in Rasmussen’s words, “other member rms have your back, so you don’t need to be so care- ful about watching your back.” They seek information sharing, not informa- tion hoarding.
Coalition membership is by invita- tion only; members are either people Rasmussen knows and trusts or people who have been recommended by an existing member.
The criteria for membership are an innovative ethos (“question the status quo”) and public advocacy for the prin- ciples in the USDS playbook. The ani- mating idea is to have a group of people who really trust one another. “We need to protect hatchlings from the sharks,” Rasmussen said.
Many of Agile Six’s current partners are not in the Digital Services Coalition, he added. “They are cautious. They’ve gotten the same advice from other rms in the Beltway. But that’s not the future I want to build.”
Information sharing, not hoarding
The element of information sharing that is closest to interactions among tradi- tional contractors — and probably the most important collaborative work the coalition members do — is using the organization to locate possible team- ing partners. The main difference is that this approach saves on the costs of partnering. The coalition provides a pre-vetted group of contractors with
similar values, which is a more ef cient way to identify partners.
Rasmussen also has a fascinating take on prime/sub relationships. “We aim to team with partners (as subs or primes) that understand our values and respect the role of autonomy and agil- ity,” he said. “A prime does not need to be a controlling in uence in a technical project. Sometimes a sub brings the real talent, in which case a prime needs to trust that and let them lead from the backseat.”
There’s more to this group than just helping with teaming, however. The aim is for members to share informa- tion and insights that might help other rms in dealing with the government market.
Having people willing to help in this way is harder, and hence less common, than connecting as possible teaming partners. Members did offer examples of such sharing, however.
“We had one of the members who mentioned they were trying to reimag- ine their capabilities deck and asked if anyone was willing to share what they have for inspiration,” one coalition par- ticipant told me. “We along with at least one other rm responded and passed along our working copy.”
Another member said: “Every year, veteran-owned small businesses are invited to the National Veterans Small Business Engagement conference. My rst two years, I didn’t know anyone and had no idea how to start. This year, as a prime contractor, we knew hun- dreds of people, and dozens of rms sought us out. We were able to share that exposure with a member who knew nobody and make sure they shared our access. I asked my senior vice president to make sure this com- pany got invited to all the important social events and introduced to key government folks.”
‘Plenty of work to go around’
Why are members willing to do this? One reason is that they believe bring-
ing more nontraditional IT contrac- tors into the government ecosystem helps all of them. Some of them also remember that their companies have a mission to help the government, and one way to contribute is to help new entrants.
One member CEO told me his company “has a passion for solving civic issues by providing better tech. Yes, we’ll compete on some engage- ments, but...we want the ‘good guys’ to all win, and there is plenty of work to go around.”
Members note that sharing has its limits, however. Proprietary informa- tion must be protected, and there is the risk of free riding — gaining the bene ts of collaboration but not contributing to the effort.
That will be the challenge for the Digital Services Coalition. If free rid- ing spreads, the win-win collabora- tions could continue, but the mutual assistance might wither away. I sug- gested to Rasmussen that one way his group might avoid that situation would be for members to have a way to recognize others who have given useful advice — an approach often used to help maintain communities of practice in companies and govern- ment agencies.
“At this point, 5 percent or less of government is looking at us,” Ras- mussen said, “but it’s growing and it’s the future. That’s why the bigs are interested in us.”
The existence of the Digital Ser- vices Coalition is a sign of success for the new nontraditional vendors, but as those companies grow, Ras- mussen doesn’t want them to lose their souls. n
Steve Kelman is a professor of public management at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and former admin- istrator of the Of ce of Federal Procurement Policy. His blog can be found at fcw.com/thelectern.
64 March/April 2018 FCW.COM