I really wonder about the economic impact government tenders have on the local economy. A friend of mine has responsibility for these in a large Irish Government Dept, and admitted that its the cheapest quote that wins normally. This may seem a good deal for the tax payer, but is it?
Is the race to the bottom a good way of achieving value for money? I don`t think so.
Some questions have to be answered, is the Tender asking for the right criteria to be met?
What is the reputation/experience of the cheapest tenderee?
Will this tender create wealth, or actually depress it?
What will the local effect of the Tender have on local competition?
When I acted as part of the Tender grant board we gave the Tender to the best service provider, who was not the cheapest by a long shot. We took a lot of criticism, but it proved the right thing to do.
Just some thoughts....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My personal experience would be slightly at variance with the notion that the lowest tender always wins. Having worked within government organizations for nearly 14 years, and been involved in tenders for services (as opposed to goods), some of very significant value, it is my experience that in most cases the outcome is already decided in advance and that the process is followed but not adhered to. Two regular occurrences were the appointment of management consultants via a tender process which was carried out AFTER the appointees had commenced work (and had often agreed what the outcome of their 'independent' study would be), and the appointment of architects or building contractors on the basis of 'its their turn'. No-one objects to this method because if they did 'their turn' might not come around for a while!!
ReplyDelete