Defence Procurement

A closed loop feedback system for ensuring the quality of the Army equipment exists. Notwithstanding this, a number of Army equipment show a high failure rate at crucial times and are, therefore, a matter of great concern. These failed equipment have resulted in a number of avoidable casualties as well as restricted operational planning by tactical commanders in the field due to the non-availability of equipment for deployment, which results from their low reliability or high rates of failure.

• Mahendra Prasad
• July 2013
• Journal of Defence Studies

Over the past decade, defence capital acquisition reforms have enhanced standardization, transparency and bigger acquisition budgets. Yet the system grapples with delays, cost escalations and gaps in operational preparedness. This article explores the structure, process and cultural dimensions of the acquisition system, unpacking the underlying linkages between policy, planning, budgeting, strategic direction, and outcomefocused analytical decision-making—factors that influence effectiveness of the procurement system.

• Vandana Kumar
• July 2013
• Journal of Defence Studies

Buy (Indian)’ the most important policy decision introduced through DPP 2013 suggests that it should be the first option or the most preferred category. It, however, gives rise to many questions.

• Amit Cowshish
• June 11, 2013
• Issue Brief

On April 20th, the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) of the Ministry of Defence announced 15 major amendments to the defence procurement and production policies, with the hope to incentivise indigenous defence manufacturing while promoting transparency and efficiency in the procurement process.

• Laxman Kumar Behera
• May 06, 2013
• Issue Brief

Parameters, dimensions and operational requirements specified by the user must be evaluated exclusively by the user trial team, while DGQA must concentrate only on the testing of quality encompassing the product design, the material used and the manufacturing process in addition to the environmental testing of the product under simulated conditions.

• Mahendra Prasad
• March 20, 2013
• IDSA Comments

By now making software development ineligible for discharge of offsets we might be depriving ourselves of what was considered necessary only a couple of months ago. This could also prove to be a setback for the Indian software industry.

• Amit Cowshish
• March 13, 2013
• IDSA Comments

The systems and procedures for capital acquisitions, introduced by the MoD in 2001-02, provide a decisive, if not the final, say to the Services, including the Indian Coast Guard.

• Amit Cowshish
• February 22, 2013
• IDSA Comments

It is time that India’s offset regulations and defence procurement procedures are weeded for provisions formalising differential treatment against Indian bidders.

• Sandeep Verma
• January 15, 2013
• IDSA Comments

This article gives an overview of the evolution of Quality Assurance (QA) in army procurements as also various shortcomings in the contemporary principles and practices that cause delays in procurements and their possible solutions. The list of shortcomings is not exhaustive; however, due care has been taken to bring out the most important ones which need immediate attention. The causal factors of these shortcomings have been analysed and recommendations to overcome them have also been listed to make the QA practice more efficient and minimize delays due to QA.

• Mahendra Prasad
• January 2013
• Journal of Defence Studies

Some of the provisions in the DOG do not seem to be well thought out, provide greater leeway to the foreign companies, and have a potentially negative potential on eligible manufacturing sector, particularly defence manufacturing.

• Laxman Kumar Behera
• September 03, 2012
• Policy Brief