A Critique of Defense Contracting and Negotiation

Author

Thomas James Ronollo, Fontbonne College

Year of Award

1986

Degree

Master of Business Administration (MBA)

College

College of Business & Professional Studies

Degree Program

Business

Department

Business Administration

Keywords

Deficit, Federal Government, Government Spending, Research and Development

Abstract

Everyone from leading political figures to the person who runs the small corner bakery is concerned about deficit spending. One major portion of deficit spending is defense spending. But what does this spending represent?

For our present mode of production defense spending can be viewed as a form of capital investment. As Keynesians learned after the Great Depression, private saving and investing are not the only forms of capital needed to pump the economy. The automatic safety switch Keynes wrote about does not necessarily exist.

The purpose of this paper is to review the details of how to contract with the Federal Government. This is covered in a descriptive sense. The legal perspectives are considered, along with the types of contracts, negotiations and some examples of waste in defense contracting.

But more important, is the author's description of how defense spending functions. Two of these functions concern the capitalization for research and development and the "pump" effect these dollars provide. This interpretation proves an interesting analysis.

The subject of defense spending by itself is extremely complex. The author has begun by narrowing the subject to just defense contracting and negotiation (with emphasis on the selling and legal aspects). But, in addition to this, the mere description of these functions is enriched with a unique interpretation of how defense contracting functions as a part of the production process in the U.S. economy.

In this analysis technology is considered as extremely important. Without technology a company cannot compete, and more importantly, a nation cannot compete. The price of technology is not a small one. Research and development are needed and the government provides much of the capital for this in grants through contracts.

In addition to this defense contracting provides jobs. No one would argue that $150 billion in contracts will not do this. All in all the author raises many issues that may leave the reader with new questions not considered before.

Document Type

Restricted Thesis

Recommended Citation

Ronollo, Thomas James, "A Critique of Defense Contracting and Negotiation" (1986). All Theses, Dissertations, and Capstone Projects. 643.
https://griffinshare.fontbonne.edu/all-etds/643