Z
No, it suggests that a tender was rigged.
Having called a few of my ex colleagues since this post first appeared, it appears this practice is still alive and well in this country.
I see your logic. It rained yesterday, therefore it rains everyday. Except on those days where it doesn't rain.So I conclude, that potential candidates should be aware that the tendering system is indeed rigged. However, it might not be rigged in all cases.
You played your part in creating an environment of corruption in your industry, so don't be surprised when it comes back to bite you on the ass.
I see your logic. It rained yesterday, therefore it rains everyday. Except on those days where it doesn't rain.
Keep it simple. The tender recipients may not have latest versions of the MS products. I would stick with Word or pdf, but if in doubt (and the tender document does not specify what format is required), ask the question beforehand.
I see PWC and E&Y have been awarded the NAMA contract for "Appointment to a panel for Loan and Associated Valuation Services to NAMA"...
PWC have also been awarded the contract for Tax Advisory Services.
So that the tenderers can come in with a high-ball price? This would completely defeat the purpose of competitive tendering!If it was to be transparent as possible a full list of tenderers and their price quoted should be available to all other tenderers, even before they submit in order to avoid waste of time money and costs as we know "..all costs, time etc for this tender shall be covered by the tenderer..."
Many, many reputable businesses are quite willing to tender within the current system - imperfect as it may be.Huge waste of time, money and effort for the majority of reputable businesses trying to win a tender.
I stay clear of them
No system is perfect, but works aren't given to anyone 'all the time'. This just isn't happening on a widespread basis. If you believe that it is happening, then you need to address this by raising the issue with the CEO or Shane Ross or Joe Duffy or whoever it takes to get it sorted.In the end it is a flawed system whereby works are given to preferred parties all the time under the guise of a fair and equitable system. I've even heard of the preferred party having a major role in outlining the text of the Tender!
This is just meaningless.The words 'competitive' and 'competition' are thrown around way to much. The more you hear it , the less there actually is once you get past the 'process'.
The size requirement is controversial, and I don't always agree with it, but it has some basis. The small guys are less likely to be still around at the end of the project than the big guys.The tendering process is just not equal. Website projects are looking for accounts for companies turning 500k in a year. There are many software development houses who would run rings around the big consultancies for half the price but are automatically excluded by an unfair requirements, designed to do this on purpose.
I have evaluated tender replies for about 10 years now where the value of the contract would be in around €100k (ICT) or less each time. The various comments over the past 3 pages about predetermined winners is b*s* in 100% of the tenders that I have seen.
The winner of a tender is scored based on the tender reply received. I can’t rely on information regarding a company (no matter how formal) if that information is not placed in the tender reply. I’ve seen plenty of smaller companies fail to feature in the final 3 because they just didn’t take the time to present a decent reply or displayed a total lack of understanding of the requirements.
Tips
- If you are asked for CVs – attach them.
- Reproduce the tender document in Word and comment on each requirement, but do not write AGREED or NOTED where you could in fact write some interesting fact about yourself/your company.
- warning to docx users - convert your documents into PDF before submitting. Check that your pdfs open on another machine before sending.
- Usually there is no problem ringing the publisher for a quick chat before submitting the reply to introduce yourself.
- Answer every single question in the response instructions. If you omit to answer a question you will drop scores.
This is exactly the attitude that is a root cause of the problem. There is absolutely no basis to it either. Big companies go bust, and so do small companies. Indeed, it might be better to go with a small company, because they might devote more to it than their larger competitors.The size requirement is controversial, and I don't always agree with it, but it has some basis. The small guys are less likely to be still around at the end of the project than the big guys.
The size requirement is controversial, and I don't always agree with it, but it has some basis. The small guys are less likely to be still around at the end of the project than the big guys.
The small guys will never get to be the big guys when people think like this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?