Friend, enemy, or simply misguided? The Pentagon's assault on Pratt and Whitney

Is the Pentagon shooting itself in the foot, again?

Back in November of 2012, Ash Carter – then the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics – gave a public briefing on Better Buying Power, the current DoD initiative to try to improve acquisition performance,

Dr. Carter spoke to an industry concern, saying “there was some concern expressed by industry that we were trying to cut profits.  That was not our intent.  It's never been our intent to cut profits.  And what is our intent is to pay profits for better performance and higher profits for better performance.”

Arguably one of the best programs over the course of the past decade has been the Pratt and Whitney support program for the C-17 engine.   One of the reasons it has been so successful is that the military’s engine is essentially the same one Pratt and Whitney sells for the Boeing 757.  The military bought a commercial design, and that always saves a lot of money.

Don’t take my word for it.  On February 10, the Air Force named UTC’s Pratt and Whitney unit as one of its Tier 1 Superior Suppliers.

So, will somebody please explain to me why on February 20 we see a story in Bloomberg – quoting an unreleased audit – disclosed that the Pentagon Inspector General has launched subpoenas to get at cost data?

If the Pentagon isn’t interested in attacking private sector profits, why is it smearing one of the most successful programs in the portfolio? 

If the Pentagon isn’t interested in attacking private sector profits, why is it seeking cost data for what is a commercial item?

If the Pentagon isn’t interested in attacking private sector profits, why are they going after a company who is supposedly a valued and trusted supplier?

The Pentagon is getting superior performance at a competitive price, precisely what Ash Carter says he wants, and the Inspector General is still attacking.

Now, I am not familiar with all of the facts, because I don't have the "For Official Use Only" somebody apparently leaked to Bloomberg, but I do know a thing or two about this program.  It is effective, they are good people at P&W, and they are trying like hell to get the IG what it wants.

So, why is a valued and trusted supplier being abused in the media?

Ash Carter is now the Secretary of Defense.  Perhaps he should have a conversation with the Inspector General and try to explain that an adversarial relationship with a Tier 1 supplier is not an approach to be eagerly embraced.

BTW, Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute has a great piece on this situation at Forbes.  Worth a read.