submitting a proposal on e-tenders

SILVAMAN

Hi I'd like to invite tenders in E Tenders for a feasibility study, but the site is not exactly user friendly.
I guess I'm a buyer? If anyone has been through the process of posting a proposal you might give me a little advice. Thanks

antoinolachtnai

You are talking about tenders.gov.ie? Unless you are a government department or state body, I think you have misunderstood the nature and purpose of this site. The purpose of it is to advertise tenders for the government and state bodies.

SILVAMAN

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

You are talking about tenders.gov.ie? Unless you are a government department or state body, I think you have misunderstood the nature and purpose of this site. The purpose of it is to advertise tenders for the government and state bodies.

ok......have to get back to Leader guys-told me to go to that site


thanks

whatnext

Are you intending to pitch for govt contracts via e-tenders? If so you are indeed a buyer.
First you need to register for alerts.
Then you will receive alerts of invitations to tender.
Some have quite rigorous pre qualification requirements / processes. They can be very time consuming to complete and also tend to have overly demanding experience, turnover and insurance requirements. Specifically with regard to previous specific experience on govt contracts.

But what I will say once you have the nut cracked it gets a lot easier.

I found setting up a prequalification library on my laptop saved me hours of time . Most look for the same info so a lot of the donkey work was done on the first pre qual.

zig

Sorry to hog the thread but I felt there was no point starting a new one as its the same topic.

We have a web development business and have for the most part avoided etenders. We went for a few alright and got some feedback on their failure which was helpful to be fair.

But there seems to be a general consensus amongst some people we've talked to that the contracts are already half unofficially sewn up and the tenders are put out just to tick boxes.

But Im not so sure. That could be just some bitter/fed up business people who gave up on them.

But even having this in the back of our minds seems to demotivate us from putting in the effort to do an application.

We know we are well able to deliver whats required. We dont expect to get it at the first few attempts by any means but we'd love to know if its worth the effort to keep pushing on with them.

Can I ask have others felt this way only to eventually break through.

beauf

If your feedback was fair did you correct it on your next tender.

I've had some involvement in tenders from the other side and given feedback on them. My limited experience was about 2/3 don't submit the required information correctly for the tender. Mainly they submit generic information that they think will do or is close enough and fail at the first jump. Obviously those who have been successful in the past realize this and their submissions, are usually correct in every tiny detail. Which is why they get further in every tender. its not about being the cheapest either as you don't want a company to go bust in the middle of a project. So there can be some weighting to avoid companies operating on a shoestring, or put in a unrealistic budget, costings.

dudara

Public procurement follows strict assessment criteria. If your tender response meets the criteria, you will get the points and proceed to the next stage. You have to make sure that you tick all the boxes and provide the right responses.

pedroeibar1

dudara wrote: »

Public procurement follows strict assessment criteria. If your tender response meets the criteria, you will get the points and proceed to the next stage. You have to make sure that you tick all the boxes and provide the right responses.

I disagree based on personal experience. Many outcomes are pre-agreed and the tenders appear for ‘form’. When that is not the case Govt wants one from a set few applicants. Also, they often want a particular outcome, which is not necessarily the correct one. The last eTender I was ready to apply for (with another highly respected foreign consultant – we had done similar jobs together at international level for much bigger countries) introduced a condition that the consultant should have a minimum turnover of €4 million. That limited the job to the Big 4 firms, one of which won and immediately contacted me for information – they had only a superficial knowledge of the sector. Their report was appalling in quality and they received a high five-figure sum for it.

State Board appointments are the very same. What’s the point of applying when a minister or taoiseach has final say? To use just one example, Enda’s driver was appointed to the board of Irish Water: how many suitable applicants were interviewed and rejected? Just look at who has been appointed to what and you'll see. :rolleyes::rolleyes::D:D

dudara

They are free to set whatever criteria they want (be they pre-designed with a goal in mind or not), but once the criteria are set, applicants need to meet those criteria. Some criteria are just a tick box (ie turnover, TCC) while others are less defined. Attention needs to be paid to those criteria to ensure that you interpret them accurately and respond appropriately. It can be incredibly fustrating at times trying to figure out what they want to hear back.

beauf

Your experience was exactly as we said. You didn't meet the criteria.

The eventual outcome is immaterial to getting the tender.

Anything public or private sector can be written to narrow the selection. That's just life. Its not the sole preserve of public tenders.

beauf

Often jobs and promotions are so specifically written you know who will get the job, promotion before they are even interviewed.

pedroeibar1

dudara wrote: »

They are free to set whatever criteria they want (be they pre-designed with a goal in mind or not), but once the criteria are set, applicants need to meet those criteria. Some criteria are just a tick box (ie turnover, TCC) while others are less defined. Attention needs to be paid to those criteria to ensure that you interpret them accurately and respond appropriately. It can be incredibly fustrating at times trying to figure out what they want to hear back.

Of course ‘they’ can do what they want, they write the cheque. There are two issues - fairness and meeting criteria, both not mutually exclusive.

As a taxpayer I also expect there to be professionalism which includes a basic knowledge of the topic and the market. My experiences are in the services sector. Setting a turnover level at a €4 million level will automatically exclude 99% of consultancies, most of which would be niche sector players, operating internationally because of the limited size of market - and thus have greater awareness and greater knowledge of 'best practice' than the Big 4.

Personally I accept a politician appointing a consultant to do a report or a crony to a board provided the appointee has the skills. What bugs me is expecting an answer that is far from the truth and disguising all behind a false veil of ‘fairness & independence’. Like, how could anyone decide that the best location for the HQ of the Free Legal Aid should be Cahersiveen?
Or confirm the trouble-free state of the Irish economy 2003-2007?

beauf

Decentralisation is kinda well beyond the remit of this thread.

It's quite common for private sector to take advantage of public contacts. That as old as the hills. Some put more effort into that than it would take to actual do the work properly in the first place.

You should make a complaint if you feel the work done was sub standard. Make it a political issue. That always gets their attention.