What are bad tenders
Good afternoon, dear habrovchane.
I would like to share with you some thoughts and ideas on the tender system, namely, why the hell does it prevent us from living so much.
Working in a company that constantly has to work with the tender system, one cannot help noticing the many angles that you occasionally smash your noses and knees. And - just spending 5 minutes to think, you can easily solve half of the problems.
1. Often the originator of the technical task and the person who makes the decision on the choice of the final offer are different people. Moreover, the person number 2 also often does not have the necessary knowledge to make the right choice (well, the former are not always good with this, but that is another question). As a result, almost always the tender is won by the company that offered the cheapest solution, and by no means the most optimal one. This is used by some unscrupulous companies, adjusting their equipment to TZ, which, in a good way, does not fit the object.
2. It is not uncommon for TK to be formed on the basis of a commercial offer that may be compiled with errors. As a result, it is impossible to fulfill the terms of the TZ remaining in the tender budget (and the budget framework is the main condition). Such a situation immediately rejects bona fide and competent suppliers, as a result, the customer has to deal with ... other suppliers.
As a result, as a result, the customer receives equipment that is suitable for TK only in certain conditions, or even not suitable at all. Plus, this is the cheapest equipment of the appropriate quality and specific coefficient (number of mats per minute of equipment operation).
')
1. The tender system completely destroys the possibility of delivering really high-quality equipment, respectively - the possibility of elementary pride in their work. When you know that you have to supply the cheapest option, there is nothing to be proud of.
2. For the same reason, professional growth of the technical knowledge of the product is strongly hampered Why delve into the features of the equipment and the difference between models-analogues of different manufacturers, if you still need to sell the cheapest option?
3. TK, formed on the basis of a commercial offer, contain a bunch of items of requirements that leave little choice for maneuver. For example, I have seen TK more than once, where specific dimensions (even not ranges — specific values) of equipment are indicated, although there is no point in this at all. As a result, an attempt to supply an analogue that is 2 mm taller can turn into almost a court and the listing of unscrupulous suppliers (and this is a company’s credit card).
As a result, the supplier is forced to supply cheap equipment, still in places and intimidating. At the same time, real professionalism is not even particularly required in many classes of goods.
Make a couple of changes to the system:
1. Use the services of consulting firms that will form a normal, human TK with real requirements that are really needed, and not just a copy-paste of technical characteristics from a ready-made commercial offer.
2. Make the bids received on the tender open with the possibility of commenting. This will allow suppliers to evaluate the proposals of competitors, which will lead not only to the realization of free competition within a specific offer, but also allow to detect errors in the offers (which will eliminate unfair suppliers).
3. Customer companies should provide an opportunity to make a choice of the final option for a technically savvy person, and not for girls from the purchasing department who do not quite understand the question. Well, or again use the services of consulting firms (which is done, by the way, in Europe).
4. If possible, use the point system of project selection, and not focus on the minimum price.
Of course, such decisions should be carried out where it is reasonable - when buying toothpicks, it is quite possible and only to focus on price. But, alas, now these problems dominate even in projects in the medical field, where you certainly cannot be guided only by costs.
UPD .: I ’m clarifying - this is mainly about large companies (both state-owned and not), where the end user (the chief engineer of the branch, for example) has no influence on the decisions of the procurement department. This problem is reflected in the third paragraph of the last part.
I would like to share with you some thoughts and ideas on the tender system, namely, why the hell does it prevent us from living so much.
Working in a company that constantly has to work with the tender system, one cannot help noticing the many angles that you occasionally smash your noses and knees. And - just spending 5 minutes to think, you can easily solve half of the problems.
So let's start with the minuses for the customer:
1. Often the originator of the technical task and the person who makes the decision on the choice of the final offer are different people. Moreover, the person number 2 also often does not have the necessary knowledge to make the right choice (well, the former are not always good with this, but that is another question). As a result, almost always the tender is won by the company that offered the cheapest solution, and by no means the most optimal one. This is used by some unscrupulous companies, adjusting their equipment to TZ, which, in a good way, does not fit the object.
2. It is not uncommon for TK to be formed on the basis of a commercial offer that may be compiled with errors. As a result, it is impossible to fulfill the terms of the TZ remaining in the tender budget (and the budget framework is the main condition). Such a situation immediately rejects bona fide and competent suppliers, as a result, the customer has to deal with ... other suppliers.
As a result, as a result, the customer receives equipment that is suitable for TK only in certain conditions, or even not suitable at all. Plus, this is the cheapest equipment of the appropriate quality and specific coefficient (number of mats per minute of equipment operation).
')
Cons for Supplier:
1. The tender system completely destroys the possibility of delivering really high-quality equipment, respectively - the possibility of elementary pride in their work. When you know that you have to supply the cheapest option, there is nothing to be proud of.
2. For the same reason, professional growth of the technical knowledge of the product is strongly hampered Why delve into the features of the equipment and the difference between models-analogues of different manufacturers, if you still need to sell the cheapest option?
3. TK, formed on the basis of a commercial offer, contain a bunch of items of requirements that leave little choice for maneuver. For example, I have seen TK more than once, where specific dimensions (even not ranges — specific values) of equipment are indicated, although there is no point in this at all. As a result, an attempt to supply an analogue that is 2 mm taller can turn into almost a court and the listing of unscrupulous suppliers (and this is a company’s credit card).
As a result, the supplier is forced to supply cheap equipment, still in places and intimidating. At the same time, real professionalism is not even particularly required in many classes of goods.
But you could just ...
Make a couple of changes to the system:
1. Use the services of consulting firms that will form a normal, human TK with real requirements that are really needed, and not just a copy-paste of technical characteristics from a ready-made commercial offer.
2. Make the bids received on the tender open with the possibility of commenting. This will allow suppliers to evaluate the proposals of competitors, which will lead not only to the realization of free competition within a specific offer, but also allow to detect errors in the offers (which will eliminate unfair suppliers).
3. Customer companies should provide an opportunity to make a choice of the final option for a technically savvy person, and not for girls from the purchasing department who do not quite understand the question. Well, or again use the services of consulting firms (which is done, by the way, in Europe).
4. If possible, use the point system of project selection, and not focus on the minimum price.
Of course, such decisions should be carried out where it is reasonable - when buying toothpicks, it is quite possible and only to focus on price. But, alas, now these problems dominate even in projects in the medical field, where you certainly cannot be guided only by costs.
UPD .: I ’m clarifying - this is mainly about large companies (both state-owned and not), where the end user (the chief engineer of the branch, for example) has no influence on the decisions of the procurement department. This problem is reflected in the third paragraph of the last part.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/143248/
All Articles