Author
We recently took part in a competitive pitch for a project. Dozens of suppliers threw their hats into the ring; possibly more than a hundred.
We didn’t win. Fair enough – that’s business.
But what caught our attention was what happened next: the customer needed more than two extra months beyond their planned evaluation period just to work through the flood of proposals.
The hidden economic cost
Let’s do a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation.
Say there were 50 suppliers, each spending around four person-days preparing their submission, at an average cost of £400 per day.
That’s £80,000 in supplier effort – all competing for a project worth £90,000.
Add to that the customer’s own time:
- 25 person-days to evaluate the bids (£10,000)
- 10 person-days to prepare the tender itself (£4,000)
Total cost of the process: £94,000. For a £90,000 project.
So even before a contract is awarded, the collective system has burned more than the project’s entire value in administrative effort – with over £80,000 of supplier time effectively wasted.
Public sector procurement: the paradox
The biggest culprits in this kind of inefficiency are often public sector organisations.
As taxpayers, we all understand the need for transparency and competition. The UK’s public procurement rules rightly emphasise that:
“Effective competition and transparency are key enablers of delivering value for money and acting with integrity.”
But when “open competition” turns into open season, everyone loses.
SMEs – often described as the backbone of the economy – are asked to spend days preparing comprehensive proposals with long odds of success.
That’s not just inefficient. It’s discourteous to the very businesses government policy aims to support.
There’s a better way
Thankfully, the Procurement Act 2023 already provides the tools for a smarter approach. It explicitly allows the use of a competitive flexible procedure – where a contracting authority can limit the number of suppliers before inviting full tenders.
In other words: Start open, stay transparent – but screen first.
Use a pre-qualification questionnaire (PQQ) or similar initial stage to shortlist capable suppliers. Then invite those few to prepare detailed proposals.
In some cases, prior to the official tender being published, we’ve also been invited to meet the team behind the tender (not just the procurement people) and ask questions of them directly. Again, this can only help everyone involved.
It saves time. It saves money. And it shows basic professional courtesy.
In conclusion
Competitive tendering is essential – but thoughtful, structured competition is better.
When every supplier invests days of work with little chance of success, and when buyers drown in submissions they can’t reasonably review, nobody wins.
Let’s have better procurement etiquette. Not just fair – but efficient, respectful, and sustainable for everyone involved.