Tendering process - good or bad experiences?
Discussion
I've been approached to write an article about the tendering process for Local Government. This is specifically for the marketing services and related industries.
I'd appreciate any stories - good or bad - about people's experiences of going through this process.
The article is likely to be syndicated to a couple of publications aims at LAs so it s good chance to vent your spleen "anonymously"!!
I'd appreciate any stories - good or bad - about people's experiences of going through this process.
The article is likely to be syndicated to a couple of publications aims at LAs so it s good chance to vent your spleen "anonymously"!!
One of the most ridiculous things about government tenders is the amount of information they request. We submitted a tender for a local government which took a week to complete and our submission was over 250 pages. What I always find ironic is that as part of the submission is always an environmental policy. So they have asked 8 companies to tender each submitting 250 pages and as part of that they want to know how you preserve the world’s resources!
We did one recently which was much better for a University. All we had to submit was a 3 page document which was basically the pricing. Then they will pick a couple of companies that are in the right price bracket and then look at all the other information. That is a much better idea as a contractor as it only took an afternoon to put together and if we are not competitive we don’t have to waste time and effort for the rest of the information. And if we are in the right bracket supplying the information is fine because we know we are no longer competing on price but on service.
Commercial tenders are always more straight forward than government ones. I think they have a much better understanding of the commercial aspects of putting a tender together. They know everyone has better things to do than compile and read 8 250 page documents. i.e. they live in the real world with commercial pressures. It really is indicative of the waste in the public sector I’m afraid.
We did one recently which was much better for a University. All we had to submit was a 3 page document which was basically the pricing. Then they will pick a couple of companies that are in the right price bracket and then look at all the other information. That is a much better idea as a contractor as it only took an afternoon to put together and if we are not competitive we don’t have to waste time and effort for the rest of the information. And if we are in the right bracket supplying the information is fine because we know we are no longer competing on price but on service.
Commercial tenders are always more straight forward than government ones. I think they have a much better understanding of the commercial aspects of putting a tender together. They know everyone has better things to do than compile and read 8 250 page documents. i.e. they live in the real world with commercial pressures. It really is indicative of the waste in the public sector I’m afraid.
My brother used to be a builder and told me that people often call for a quote on an extension, just to pick your brains on what they could do with the space.
The surprise for me was when large government departments do the same! They put out a half baked tender document left open enough to get your grey matter whizzing. You spend 2 solid weeks on the tender and then they withdraw it after the closing date and do it internally with your ideas! Cost to them bugger all. Cost to you around £5000. Mutiply that up by the 34 companies you know asked for the EOI from the reference numbers and then wonder why it is hard to compete when you have wasted 4% of your time for that year on that one tender.
Some departments do this time and time again . I no longer bother with their tenders. last time they did it to us I nearly wrote to my MP, but then again perhaps not.
My other favourite is when they ask for copies of your policies on Equal Ops, Health and Safety, Environment, Training etc etc etc. They have no need to read them as they have all come from the same Google search! They also want 3 years of accounts for a 2 bob contract, and details of any tribunals or investigations you have had. Add to that the CV of every staff member, including the tea lady and the summer student you intend to have inputting data, oh and the costing schedules broken down by year (chronolohical and fiscal) cross cut with costs by staff member and an invoicing schedule.
Unless I am sleeping with the minister's daughter/son/pet and have been told the job is mine it al sounds a bit like to much work for an off chance.
I stick with departments where know that an ITT means I am in with a shout and they have a short short list for full tender. Trick is knowing which ones they are!
The surprise for me was when large government departments do the same! They put out a half baked tender document left open enough to get your grey matter whizzing. You spend 2 solid weeks on the tender and then they withdraw it after the closing date and do it internally with your ideas! Cost to them bugger all. Cost to you around £5000. Mutiply that up by the 34 companies you know asked for the EOI from the reference numbers and then wonder why it is hard to compete when you have wasted 4% of your time for that year on that one tender.
Some departments do this time and time again . I no longer bother with their tenders. last time they did it to us I nearly wrote to my MP, but then again perhaps not.
My other favourite is when they ask for copies of your policies on Equal Ops, Health and Safety, Environment, Training etc etc etc. They have no need to read them as they have all come from the same Google search! They also want 3 years of accounts for a 2 bob contract, and details of any tribunals or investigations you have had. Add to that the CV of every staff member, including the tea lady and the summer student you intend to have inputting data, oh and the costing schedules broken down by year (chronolohical and fiscal) cross cut with costs by staff member and an invoicing schedule.
Unless I am sleeping with the minister's daughter/son/pet and have been told the job is mine it al sounds a bit like to much work for an off chance.
I stick with departments where know that an ITT means I am in with a shout and they have a short short list for full tender. Trick is knowing which ones they are!
I'd agree with most of what has been written so far. Short timescales being the single most annoying factor. To have little time to pull together something that reasonably shows we can work effectively together just indicates to me the likely timescales to be imposed whent the contract is won.
Another annoying trait I've seen a few times relates to government agencies asking for significant detail in the ITT which is basically a way of trawling for ideas that they then use themselves to do the work.
Another annoying trait I've seen a few times relates to government agencies asking for significant detail in the ITT which is basically a way of trawling for ideas that they then use themselves to do the work.
Agree with everything.
We no longer do business with Government. Simply wouldn't consider it.
1) They buy from the lowest bidder - not the supplier with the most suitable solution.
2) They pay as slowly as you would believe possible - but its not malice - its sheer "corporate incompetence" - understandable - but not acceptable.
3) They pay the lowest price - but expect the best service. In fact - its cultural to expect suppliers to provide non-commercial levels of service.
If a job goes to tender as a matter of principle we believe it not to be worth bidding. We will not win and we will waste money trying.
If we can help a client achieve a vision of what a solution could do for them - and then go on to provide that solution we've found we win the business.
If we try to help government achieve a vision then we succeed at that...and then the job goes to tender for someone else to win.
that.
We no longer do business with Government. Simply wouldn't consider it.
1) They buy from the lowest bidder - not the supplier with the most suitable solution.
2) They pay as slowly as you would believe possible - but its not malice - its sheer "corporate incompetence" - understandable - but not acceptable.
3) They pay the lowest price - but expect the best service. In fact - its cultural to expect suppliers to provide non-commercial levels of service.
If a job goes to tender as a matter of principle we believe it not to be worth bidding. We will not win and we will waste money trying.
If we can help a client achieve a vision of what a solution could do for them - and then go on to provide that solution we've found we win the business.
If we try to help government achieve a vision then we succeed at that...and then the job goes to tender for someone else to win.
that. Oh I forgot: no matter how many meetings with the client you schedule in and how much of a hard time they give you to reduce this cost it will never be enough, as they then call you in at the drop of a hat: to meet the new secretary, deliver reports that the post office can do for £18.50p overnight and have 'project' meetings for no apparent purpose. I always double what i think I'll need and always end up out of pocket.
The company I work for have lost the chance to tender for construction contracts because we don't employ enough ethnic minorities.
We're certainly not racist. We just employ from those who actually apply. We can't force black, disbled lesbians to apply just so we can tick a few boxes.
We're certainly not racist. We just employ from those who actually apply. We can't force black, disbled lesbians to apply just so we can tick a few boxes.
poorcardealer said:
Is it me or are business people in this country sick and fed up of all this PC shit..........the latest maternity rules are a bloody joke.........I sometimes wonder is it all worth it!
Yes they are sick of it. But what can you do? Vote. Sure. And I will. I just hope enough other business people do too. And even then - business people are a tiny minority. Yes we're discriminated against - but its not politically correct to see it that way...
Agree with the above.
I'd just like to add that any government department, whether central or local, will field a room full of people to look in on a company presentation, most of whom seem to have no interest apart from getting a couple of hours off from the office and some fresh coffee and biscuits and free pens.
You'll also have a hell of a job finding out who is the decision-maker, largely because there isn't one.
To cover their ar5es, they'll have many "decision-makers", so they can't be pinned down.
They seem to run their jobs on a daily basis in that way.
I'd just like to add that any government department, whether central or local, will field a room full of people to look in on a company presentation, most of whom seem to have no interest apart from getting a couple of hours off from the office and some fresh coffee and biscuits and free pens.
You'll also have a hell of a job finding out who is the decision-maker, largely because there isn't one.
To cover their ar5es, they'll have many "decision-makers", so they can't be pinned down.
They seem to run their jobs on a daily basis in that way.
james_j said:
Agree with the above.
I'd just like to add that any government department, whether central or local, will field a room full of people to look in on a company presentation, most of whom seem to have no interest apart from getting a couple of hours off from the office and some fresh coffee and biscuits and free pens.
And if anyone wonders why 42% of this nation's GDP goes to the government there is your answer-waste. Perhaps we ought to put a tender in to run the country. I'll bid 15% of GDP-anyone beat that?Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff