I have been repeatedly impressed in putting this paper together by how often unexpected and great discoveries and progress came about during or as the result of prototype competitions. Paper competitions assume that people can get smart by studying. Prototype competitions add that very great increment of smartness which can be learned only by doing…
The economists and political leaders of Western Europe have been very busy during the last twenty years deciding that each of the countries of Western Europe cannot afford competition even by prototypes. They have been promoting mergers in their industry and concurrently have been restricting their defense departments and government-owned airlines to buy from chosen sources. There has been a strong tendency toward directed single source procurement and many forms of restraint on trade…
This desire to restrict competition is not limited to Western Europe. This disease can also be found thriving in Washington D.C. Many economists and politicians will stand up and make strong speeches about how America is great because of its freedom of enterprise and competition. Many of these same economists, bureaucrats, and politicians will return to their daily work and engage in actions which are highly in restraint of competition, and usually on the assumption that a competition costs money—and lots of money—and that we can no longer afford competition. It seems to me that in most circumstances they could not be further from the real truth.
That was George Schairer, chief engineer and VP at Boeing, in his 1969 testimony, “Competition in Defense Procurement.” Hearing before the subcommittee on antitrust and monopoly of the committee on the judiciary. United States Senate, Pursuant S. Res. 40. July 14, 1969.
Leave a Reply