Our Capability Statement

Download a Copy of Our Gov Slick

Five Government Acquisition Sites That Separate Strategy From Guesswork

Five Government Acquisition Sites That Separate Strategy From Guesswork

Jan 6, 2026

Recent Posts

Cover image for Three professionals converse at a government and defense industry conference. Two uniformed military service members speak with a civilian attendee holding a coffee, surrounded by other attendees and exhibitor booths in the background.

Contract Management

When Sales Experience Becomes a Liability in GovCon

Jan 2, 2026

Federal missions rarely fail because people are not trying hard enough. They fail because expectations were misaligned long before execution began.Operational teams see this pattern repeatedly. A solution is well presented. The vendor is confident. The proposal checks every box. Then delivery begins, and reality intrudes. Timelines collapse under operational tempo. Assumptions unravel. The solution technically meets the requirement, but it does not hold up in the mission environment.When that happens, the problem is rarely bad intent or weak engineering. It is something more fundamental.The industry partner never truly understood the mission.The Gap Few People Want to NameAcross government programs, a quiet frustration surfaces again and again. Many industry partners know how to sell, but not how missions actually operate.This gap is often attributed to vague requirements or communication breakdowns. In practice, it is an experience gap.Sales experience teaches professionals how to frame value, manage pipelines, and advance opportunities. Those skills matter. But they do not teach what it feels like to operate under constant pressure, limited resources, shifting priorities, and real consequences.Mission experience does.Operational teams work in environments where tradeoffs are unavoidable. Systems must function under stress. Processes must adapt in real time. Decisions are shaped as much by constraints as by objectives. When industry partners have not lived in those conditions, they tend to design for an idealized version of the mission. Solutions become optimized for proposals and compliance rather than survivability and usefulness.That is where misalignment begins.What Mission Experience ChangesProfessionals who have spent time on the mission side approach industry engagement differently, even when they later move into sales or capture roles.They ask different questions. Instead of starting with what is theoretically possible, they start with what is operationally realistic. They listen for constraints that never appear in requirements documents. They understand that staffing gaps, competing priorities, and organizational friction are not exceptions. They are the baseline.Mission experience also sharpens judgment. When timelines sound too optimistic or architectures too clean, experienced operators recognize the risk immediately. This is not cynicism. It is precision born from having watched plans break under real conditions.Most importantly, mission experience creates credibility. Operational teams can tell when an industry partner understands their environment. Conversations move faster. Explanations become clearer. Trust builds because understanding is demonstrated, not claimed.Where Sales-First Engagement Breaks DownSales-driven engagement prioritizes momentum. That can be useful. But without mission grounding, momentum often works against mission success.The same patterns repeat across programs. Solutions are scoped without accounting for operational handoffs. Timelines assume ideal staffing and uninterrupted progress. Requirements are interpreted literally rather than contextually. Risk is minimized early and absorbed later by government teams.When this happens, operational teams compensate. They clarify. They adjust. They fill gaps. The mission moves forward, but not because the partnership is strong. It moves forward because government teams absorb the friction.Mission experience changes that dynamic by aligning expectations earlier and more honestly, before commitments are locked in.What Mission-Aligned Industry Engagement Actually Looks LikePointing out the problem is not enough. Industry has to change how it shows up.Mission-aligned engagement does not require everyone in industry to have worn a uniform or worked on the operational side. It does require intentional shifts in behavior.Partners who consistently earn trust from operational teams slow down early. They treat initial conversations as discovery rather than persuasion. They ask how work actually flows, where friction lives, and what failure looks like in practice.They pressure-test their own ideas. They invite pushback. They acknowledge tradeoffs instead of hiding them. And they translate technical decisions into operational impact rather than overwhelming teams with features or frameworks.Most importantly, they stay grounded in execution reality. They plan for staffing gaps, shifting priorities, and external dependencies instead of assuming them away.This approach does not slow programs down. It prevents rework, frustration, and erosion of trust later.The Shift Industry Can No Longer AvoidThis shift from sales-first engagement to mission-aligned partnership is already underway across the GovCon ecosystem. Professionals with lived mission experience are reshaping how industry engages — not through louder messaging, but through deeper understanding of how missions actually operate.Capture Management professionals like Shawn Cressman reflect a growing group of industry leaders who bring lived mission experience into sales, capture, and delivery roles. Their credibility does not come from polished pitches. It comes from having operated inside real mission environments and carrying those lessons forward.In a recent episode of Unsolicited, Shawn described how his unconventional path — from running a small business to operating Air Force cyber defense systems to working in capture — fundamentally shaped how he engages with government missions today. His perspective reinforces a reality operational teams have long understood.Understanding the mission changes everything.The future of effective government partnerships will not be driven by louder sales efforts. It will be driven by professionals who take the time to understand how missions actually work and design solutions that respect that reality.Because in federal missions, understanding the mission is not optional. It is the difference between a solution that looks good and one that actually works.

Contract Management

Before OASIS+ Phase II Opens, GSA Is Sending a Clear Message to Industry

Dec 22, 2025

For months, OASIS+ Phase II existed in a familiar government limbo: announced, anticipated, and quietly debated across industry. That ambiguity is now giving way to structure.In mid-December, the General Services Administration released a series of materials that move Phase II decisively toward execution, including draft evaluation scorecards, confirmation of expanded service domains, and clearer signals about timing and process. Together, these updates suggest that GSA is less focused on broad announcements and more intent on operational readiness across the OASIS+ ecosystem.This is not a formal opening. But it is an unmistakable cue to prepare.Draft Scorecards Offer a Preview of How Phase II Will Be EvaluatedGSA has published draft Domain Qualification Matrices and scorecards for all 13 OASIS+ domains, providing industry with early visibility into how Phase II submissions are expected to be assessed.While explicitly labeled as draft, these materials outline the core evaluation framework GSA intends to use, including how experience, organizational maturity, and supporting documentation may be reviewed. The release aligns with GSA’s broader OASIS+ program documentation, which emphasizes consistency, transparency, and readiness across contract holders and prospective vendors.The practical implication is straightforward: this is an opportunity to validate assumptions now, not after formal amendments are issued.Five New Domains Expand Scope While Narrowing ExpectationsPhase II formally expands OASIS+ to 13 total domains, adding five new service areas:Business AdministrationFinancial ServicesHuman CapitalMarketing and Public RelationsSocial ServicesEach domain introduces its own scope definitions, CLIN structures, and NAICS alignments, all detailed within GSA’s program materials and supported by updates shared through the OASIS+ Interact community.This expansion broadens access to the vehicle, but it also sharpens expectations. As GSA has noted in program guidance, domain participation is intended to reflect demonstrable service delivery capability, not generalized positioning. Domain selection, therefore, becomes less about coverage and more about credibility.Existing Contract Holders Face a Near-Term Administrative RequirementFor current OASIS+ contract holders, Phase II preparation includes an immediate procedural step.GSA has issued a bilateral contract modification incorporating Phase II scope expansion and regulatory updates. According to official notices posted to SAM.gov, this modification must be executed before contractors can submit requests to add new domains under Phase II.Although administrative in nature, the modification functions as a gate. Contractors that delay execution may find themselves operationally sidelined once Phase II activity accelerates.Continuous Open Does Not Eliminate the Importance of TimingPhase II will continue OASIS+’s continuous open solicitation model, a structure designed to reduce artificial deadlines and allow for ongoing participation. However, GSA communications make clear that requests tied to Phase II cannot proceed until the formal amendment is released, which is currently anticipated in early 2026 (U.S. General Services Administration, OASIS+ Program Documentation).In practice, continuous open solicitations reward preparation, not procrastination. Organizations that enter Phase II with documentation aligned, domain decisions finalized, and internal reviews complete will be positioned to act deliberately rather than reactively.GSA Is Signaling a Readiness-Driven ApproachAcross program documentation, SAM.gov notices, and OASIS+ Interact announcements, GSA has consistently emphasized a common set of preparatory actions:Review updated contract languageAnalyze domain scope and NAICS applicabilityAssess alignment against draft scorecardsMonitor official updates through SAM.gov and the OASIS+ Interact communityThis level of clarity reflects a broader shift in how GSA is managing large, multi-award vehicles. The focus is increasingly on transparency, standardization, and sustained readiness rather than one-time competitive events.What Industry Should Be Watching NextWhile final Phase II language has yet to be released, several directional indicators are already visible:Draft scorecards are likely to evolve, but the underlying evaluation structure is expected to remain intact, making early alignment work durable.Domain expansion will increase opportunity while also increasing scrutiny, particularly around how experience maps to defined scope.Continuous open participation will favor organizations that treat readiness as an operating posture rather than a periodic exercise.Your next steps:Rather than rushing toward submission, contractors may benefit from:Reassessing domain selections with an emphasis on provable depth rather than aspirational breadthInventorying and pressure-testing supporting documentation well ahead of formal Phase II activityTreating early 2026 as a readiness checkpoint, not a starting linePhase II is no longer theoretical. The structure is emerging, expectations are clearer, and the signal from GSA is consistent: preparation will matter. 

Title	Category	Published Date