In the government contract area, teaming agreements are in wide spread use. Yet, companies are using them like robots, which means they are not thinking through the consequences, enforceability, and details of their business and marketing bargains. For example, most people do not realize that most teaming agreements are not fully legally enforceable the way they are currently written.
In many teaming agreements, there are:
no detailed specification of work share between teammates;
no price in terms of what you will be paid for your work;
no subcontract terms and conditions;
no delivery schedule; and
no detail specifications for what each party will do.
People negotiating team agreements should read the Virginia Supreme Court decision in Schaefer v. Cordant, Inc. You will be likely surprised at what the court finds to be insufficient details in the subject of teaming agreement, which may be similar to yours.
If the teaming agreement is not fully legally enforceable, you then have basically an internal and external marketing tool in the teaming agreement. You may market to your prime. The prime may use your presence and data to market to the government. But all of these documents and discussions about them do not involve legal decisions, they are really business decisions.
What do you want to agree to with your prime and your sub in order to be in the best position for the future off the business?
Only you know that.