The Art of Strategic Teaming Agreements: A Fresh Perspective

Today, we're diving into a topic more of an art than a science: strategic, creative Teaming Agreements (TAs). We've all been there, we've all done that—or more likely your contracts person has done that. But it's time to shake things up and take control of your TAs, making them both creative and strategic. Want to operate from a templated document—save it for the NDA!

Author’s note: For this article the you really depends on the company size and I realize that for large businesses the process might already be so baked any deviation might not be possible. Typically, for all of my blogs, you will refer to executive BD/Capture functions or even Small Business owners.

TL; DR: don’t leave the Teaming Agreement up to your Contracts person. Make creative teaming part of your blue team discussions EARLY. Bring the potential team together and discuss what the solution is going to look like, then back into a suitable teaming agreement and THEN back into pricing.

This article is technical (read: potential to be boring for those that don’t KNOW the industry). For a primer on Teaming Agreements, visit our friends at Deltek’s helpful knowledge article: https://www.deltek.com/en/government-contracting/guide/teaming-agreements

The Current State of Teaming Agreements

A teaming agreement in government contracting is a formal arrangement between two or more companies to collaborate on a specific government contract opportunity. These agreements are crucial in the federal contracting landscape, allowing companies to combine their strengths, resources, and expertise to pursue and potentially win government contracts.

The primary purposes of a teaming agreement include:

Enhancing competitiveness: By combining capabilities, companies can offer a more comprehensive solution to the government.
Overcoming limitations: Smaller companies can team with larger ones to meet past performance or capability requirements they couldn't meet alone.
Expanding market reach: Companies can access new markets or customer bases through their partners' established relationships.
Taking competition off the street: Oftentimes approaching your biggest competitor and seeing if they will join forces is a big flex. If they are on your team, you don’t have to worry about losing to them.
Compliance with regulations: Teaming can help meet small business subcontracting goals or other government requirements. Just make sure if you are the small that you write-in what you will do if the large doesn’t follow the Teaming Agreement. (If workshare conditions are not met, Prime contractor agrees to allow the Small Business to lead the recompete against them down the road—this is just an example, do not try this one at home, but you get my point)

A couple of thoughts:

To be exclusive or not to be exclusive—THIS is the question. The answer is it depends on many thing, it always does.

Remember: having a subcontractor with over 20% of the designated workshare usually means the government will consider this company a “significant subcontractor.” This becomes important during an orals interview, pricing, and for other evaluation factors.

Always be sure to add language around proposal support in your Teaming Agreement, make this super clear (in exchange for ….subcontractor will get ….)

It's important to note that while teaming agreements are binding between the parties, they are contingent upon winning the contract. The government typically requires that any teaming arrangements be disclosed in the proposal, and they could become part of the contract if the team wins the award. I remember one super fun Agency-Wide BPA where we had to mother-may-I ask the CO every single time we wanted to add a subcontractor. It was painful, but it allowed the government to maintain line of sight into everyone’s team at all times.

Teaming agreements are distinct from joint ventures or mentor-protégé agreements, which are other forms of collaboration in government contracting, each with its own legal and regulatory implications.

Let's face it: for many of us in the #GovCom world, Teaming Agreements have become a routine part of the process. We often leave them to our contracts team, treating them as just another box to check off. But here's the truth: this approach is a missed opportunity. What if your Exhibit A encapsulated your strategy and told the win path story? What if you were able to align your Teaming Agreements to the solution you are building? This would inspire negotiation and help foster a collaborative vibe with your teaming partners. Also, it would spark a ton of discussion around your strategy with your subcontractors—which honestly, is more than half the battle.

Taking Control of Your Teaming Agreement

So, why should YOU be involved in crafting TAs? Simple: because they're at the very heart of your deal. That's right—TAs are a capture function: the nucleus around which your entire proposal orbits. And let's not forget the ultimate goal: aligning with the customer (agency) mission. By taking an active role in shaping your TAs, you ensure that alignment from the ground up. It’s easy to lose our focus and back straight into green team (pricing). However, if the solution is not fully baked before you try to back into pricing, it’s like cooking a complicated dish without gathering your mise en place (gotta love the French).

The Art of Creative and Strategic Teaming Agreements

Instead of best athlete: Best Athlete usually means best resume wins. This means that subcontractors are being incentivized to act as a staffing firm. While we all know government contracting can be viewed as staffing—no one, not one person likes to be treated like a staffing firm, unless they are in fact, a staffing firm. Resume competition is the least effort teaming tactic.

What to do instead: Incentivize your subs to aim for longevity. For example: Once the work is won and the SubK signed, in your TA include language that says for every year someone stays, they get an additional FTE, and it’s theirs to keep. Remember, the sub will want to fill it as much as you do—it’s money on the table, but by putting the incentive on retention rather than speed and quantity, the sub’s focus will be on building a strong team and one that will want to stay.

Instead of Swim Lanes: This type of teaming is for partnering on work where you might need expertise that you don’t already have in-house. For example, part of the work includes HelpDesk Support and you don’t do that, so you go looking for it. The trouble is, if you bring on teaming partners to be in charge of particular swim lanes, they will feel disconnected from your solution. They will really only be involved in one part—this leads to your teams feeling disconnected when they are deployed on the ground—like who is that guy, does he even go here?

What to do instead: If you are bringing on teammates to only fill one need you are missing out on presenting an “integrated team” as one of the benefits of your solution. Trust me, I’ve read enough and more Source Selection Statements (thank you, NASA—here is one for you to read: https://app.g2xchange.com/fedciv/posts/nasa-awards-consolidated-applications-and-platform-services-ncaps-contract) to understand this can be looked at as a significant strength in a proposal.

Instead of FTE splitting: This always feels awkward—like here, you get 9.4 FTEs…I’ve had a lot of musings about how weird this is. FTE stands for FULL TIME EMPLOYEE, if you are splitting hairs (or any other part of the body) doesn’t it negate the FT part of the E? This also leaves no room for the project to evolve over time. What if it’s descoped (sub left out in the rain, hat in hand) or up-scoped, does this mean an awkward convo of the sub asking for more work?? There are lots of reasons why this approach is not the best way.

This is The Way: Develop your solution FIRST. Bring the conceptual team together and talk it out (Oooooo scary, talk about the solution with teaming partners before Teaming Agreements…yikes!). I promise if you approach teaming this way the following will happen:

You’ll be more different than 90% of the companies out there
Your subs will find this open arrangement and communication VERY refreshing
You’ll find yourself at the top of everyone’s TOP teaming list (trust me, you want to live here)

What do we talk about in this Strategic Meeting (pre-solutioning):

Clear roles and responsibilities: Everyone should know exactly what they're bringing to the table. Everyone should know who else is on the team…I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again—don’t be shady!
Flexibility: Government requirements can change. Your TA should be adaptable. Work from a draft as long as humanly possible.
Risk and reward sharing: A true partnership means sharing both the ups and the downs. Cost Plus-Fixed Fee?? Award Incentive contract—talk about what this means for delivery. (hint: it’s not all house parties and keg-stands)
Conflict resolution mechanisms: Hope for the best, but plan for bumps in the road. This is especially true about pricing. I had a CEO once who was cool-man Jack, never ruffled. I only ever saw him lose his temper over one thing—when our teaming partner (actually mentor) hung-up on him over pricing. Talk about it early!! If I had a dollar for every time someone said, “0% of $0 is $0.” Thanks genius, I am bad at math, but not that bad.

Instead of pricing > team > solution…aim for team/solution > pricing.

Best Practices for Crafting Strategic TAs

Ready to take your Teaming Agreements to the next level? Here are some best practices:

Start early: Don't wait until the last minute. Make TA crafting part of your initial capture strategy. I would start thinking about this during the blue team meetings. Once you wrap your arms around the solution, start backing that into your whole teaming strategy. Get the conceptual team together early on and start conversations.
Involve key stakeholders: This isn't just a job for contracts. Get your technical leads, BD team, and executives involved! More brains are better than one. Get your most creative thinker in on it. For companies, consider the Contracts person the same as the Contracting Officers in the government: they work best when you give the whole story and enough time to execute.
Focus on win-win scenarios: The best partnerships are those where everyone comes out ahead and when you WIN.
Regularly review and update: As your understanding of the opportunity evolves, so should your TA. (hint: even if it’s signed)
If you are a sub to a big business, remember: get the TA in draft and craft your own adventure. See if it flies. Use Claude AI (https://claude.ai/) to help. Also, don’t be on their timeline. If they want you bad enough, they will wait (ask me how I know).

Conclusion

Teaming Agreements aren't just legal documents—they're strategic tools that can make or break your teaming strategy efforts. By taking control of your TAs, infusing them with creativity, and aligning them closely with the mission, you set yourself up for success from the very beginning.

So, #GovCom community, I challenge you: Take a fresh look at your Teaming Agreements. Are they truly strategic? Are they aligned with your mission? Did you think about pricing last?? Your capture success may depend on it.

Remember, in the world of government contracting, success often comes down to the strength of your partnerships. Make sure your Teaming Agreements are setting you up for victory.

So what books can I recommend to improve your strategic thinking around teaming?

Finite and Infinite Games

Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work