Quo Vadis Ada Market?(was Re: Vendor bashing? Sort of.)

[willett@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (david.c.willett)]

From article <SRCTRAN.94Sep16091638@world.std.com>, by srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian):
> 
>	{Greg responds to Mike Feldman's "Where to from here?"}

	Greg, this is a cogent and thoughtful post.  It might provoke
	some real change.  I consider it much more effective that 
	the tantrums you have visited upon us in the past.
 
>     Simple.  Change DoD procurement regulations to give contractors incentives
> to be as cost effective as possible.  Hard to sell (and build an Ada business)
> to contractors who make the same amount of money as long as their performance
> is not completely attrocious.  I would be happy to live with every idiotic
> Ada policy out there if the DoD would just change its procurement regulations
> to be more compatible with market practices.

Since WWII, the DoD procurement regulations have been based on the patronage
model, not the free market one.  The principal reason was the Cold War need
to "push the technical envelope" in the arms race, as well as preserve a 
rapidly expandable industrial base which the civilian market could not 
be relied upon to support.  Recall that the US had considerable difficulty
gearing up a wartime economy in 1941, despite the fact that we had 
been producing war materiel for the British since (approximately) 1936.
Until 1991, the geo-political climate suggested that the US could be 
fighting a major land war in Europe on a week's notice.

>     Example.  I once had a chance to help save a DoD contractor a few hundred
> thousand dollars on a project they were working on by providing them with 
> existing Ada code (instead of them having to write it from scratch).  My
> charge would have been a few tens of thousands of dollars.  So the DoD saves
> money, the contractor completes the contract quicker, and I make some more
> money to live and invest in my Ada business.
>     Unfortunately, the managers there weren't interested for two reasons.
> First they wouldn't give their workers a charge number for one hour of time
> for me to come in and make a presentation.  I don't mind being rejected after
> you have heard my pitch, but at least let me make it.  Second, their bonuses
> and company profits were fixed to a percentage of the contract size, so my
> offer to save money translated in their heads to less bonus and profits, an
> instant sales killer.

Uh-huh.  This experience is the direct economic result of the industrial 
base considerations I mentioned above.  The ability to produce lots of 
<insert weapon here> should we need to was just as valuable as reducing
the cost of producing a few <insert weapon here>.

>     All this talk about commercializing Ada is utterly pointless, like the
> current DualUse plan, as long as these conditions prevail.  For the only way
> new companies are goign to find the money to commercialize Ada in the
> non-Mandated world (where the market is miniscule) is from the profits made
> in the Mandated world.  But for ten years, other than for compiler sales,
> this is been impossible.

Ahh, but the fudamental rules are changing.  The US no longer faces the 
threat of global war, but instead faces the threat of many mini-wars.
This brings the DoD market more in line with its civilian counterpart.
The cost-effectiveness of small batches of <insert weapon here> becomes
important.  Maybe if one views the situation as *one* Ada market of some 
particular size rather than two (one Mandated of appreciable size; one 
much smaller, non-Mandated market) one can market more effectively.
As I see it, we are currently in a period of transition between the 
two regimes and the principal impediment we face is the inertia of 
the old guard.

> 
>     In fact, here is another statistic to be collected:  what is the annual
> sales of reusable Ada components from businesses into the Mandated world,
> as a fraction of DoD software procurement expenditures?
> 
> Greg AHaronian
>
 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Dave Willett          AT&T Advanced Technology Systems
                      Greensboro, NC USA

When short, simple questions have long, complex answers -- your 
organization's in trouble.

	Adapted from "In Search of Excellence"