Ambiguous, incomplete and conflicting requirements are major sources of queries and request for clarifications in a tender process.
PURCHASING & SUPPLY: NYASHA CHIZU
Such errors may arise as a genuine mistake and, in some instances, are a deliberate ploy to mislead participants to submit non-compliant bids.
Risk in handling queries and clarifications emanates from the possible failure to address the query in situations where the ambiguity, incompleteness or conflicting requirement is as a result of an error.
Where the circumstances are manufactured, there is risk of favouritism in providing information.
Tender processes require some level of confidentiality with respect to the details of the participants and handling queries recklessly can breach confidentiality.
Failure to adequately address enquiries from tenderers gives rise to claims of unfair practices.
Many procuring entities consider just merely responding to queries without addressing the queries, this affects the integrity of the process.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
Of late, with the introduction of pre-shipment inspections to reduce dumping, many tenderers are querying minimum delivery periods requested in tenders.
Responses related to the demands of the new statutory requirement expose buying organisation’s illegal and corrupt prior-tender arrangements that might have existed when a valid request is ignored on the basis of arguments around urgency.
It clearly indicates that the buyer had made prior arrangements with one supplier with the capacity to meet tight deadlines and the tender process is mere smoke-screening competition.
If queries are not appropriately addressed, suppliers are left with no option, but to qualify their tenders, which results in disqualification in public procurement.
The worst case is that bidders can withdraw their offers is queries are not addressed appropriately where the process involves some negotiation.
In cases where there is actual or perceived favouritism in providing information, responses to queries are followed up with complaints from tenders at the detriment of the integrity of the process.
In the private sector, it is the discretion of the buyer to decide to share a clarification issued to all interested parties in light of the principles of “privity of contract” that limit benefit and detriment to the engaging partners.
The requirement in the public sector is that all queries and requests for clarification and their responses must be communicated to all participants without disclosing the source of the query and the details of other participants.
The use of emails to address queries and clarifications have exposed procuring entities to breach of confidentiality.
This promotes collusion in some markets and may develop mistrust by other tenderers in other markets.
Failure to adequately address queries and requests for clarification inevitably reduces responses received or the number of compliant bids.
Both scenarios have the same effect of reducing the potential market for the procuring entity at the detriment of value for money procurement.
Many at times wonder when they receive bids from unknown suppliers when reputable suppliers withdraw from a competition because of ambiguity in the tender process.
This may lead to the organisation considering a re-tender or concluding an award at an increased cost.
The customer is the ultimate loser in the process as a result of delayed delivery or inefficient solutions.
The remedy to the solution is to ensure the organisation employs professional procurement staff to limit issues associated with deliberate breach of integrity.
Non-deliberate breaches are avoided by investing in training of staff to capacitate them to appropriately assess tender specifications and requirements.
An effective procurement specialist is a lawyer, engineer, quantity surveyor, or any other profession related to their employment by association. Other mitigating measures shall be discussed in future articles.
Nyasha Chizu is a fellow of the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply writing in his personal capacity. Feedback: [email protected] Skype: Nyasha.chizu
