As an engineer, I’ll start with my definition: an activity whereby a party seems to legitimately seek offers to do or perform an act which the party offering. The party is expected to select a winning offer based on unbiased technical or commercial evaluations.
However, the activity is a sham, as the winning party has been pre-selected, and exercise has been rigged such that the wanted party is selected.
How would one go about maneuvering the tender to award the selected party?
- If the evaluation process will never ever be audited, select the favoured bidder.
- explicitly mention that equipment XXX or specialist YYY is required to be supplied or used in the exercise. Then collude with XXX or YYY so that they will supply or work exclusively with the favoured bidder. An example may be that the bid package writer states only one brand of valve is required.
- Provide insufficient time to prepare a bid, while giving the favoured bidder information beforehand. For example, allowing 3 days to prepare the Proposal while requiring the submission of datasheets and P&IDs as part of the Proposal
- Deliberately provide a vague scope of work, while demanding that bidders provide a firm lump sum price. The vaguer the better. An example would be that the work will comprise of 1-10 work packages, each of various sizes.
However, it may be difficult to distinguish whether it is a tailored tender exercise or an inexperienced, unqualified scapegoat was assigned to prepare the tender package.
Share your experiences, here or on wikileaks.