Regular
posted 16 Jun 2008 in Volume 3 Issue 2
Defining the tender
The pitch doctor, PETER RUSH, examines how best to define a tender.
So what is a tender? In my book it has four attributes that are always present:
1. It is an apparently competitive process either by public advert or private invitation that requires a defined and formal written response by a certain date;
2. A small interest group with a leader will scrutinise it and choose a winner normally they already know well, trust or have done business with before or have come to like, want or need during the tender process;
3. It will be written, usually in the most turgid and inscrutable English and its structure will be labyrinthine, repetitive and soul destroying but great for insomnia as just looking at the wodge of pages will bring on instant sleep at any time. You have to find out exactly what those words mean and respond in full to win;
4. It will cost many thousands of pounds to complete and, if you go about the job seriously, soak up resources faster that a sponge in water. A little instant test. How much did your last tender cost? Bet you don’t know to within a thousand pounds. It will scare you when you find out but please do.
Much of my time ironically as a tender specialist who you would think would say yes to work and the fees that follow, is to recommend no bid because of the reality of attribute two. The hard fact is that most tenders go to the incumbents or to those who have either known business relationships already or are allied in some way to the deciders that may not be known to the rest of us. Note the word fair does not appear in the definition. I should stress here that I am not implying that the process is generally corrupt. It’s not. Although this does happen and sometimes is discovered and sometimes not. Check out the BAE and house of Saud affair currently troubling my learned friends and Inspector Knacker if you want a peep into how murky it all can get.
What I am saying though is that the decision makers do what we all do at big moments in life. Choose people like us. It’s human nature and if you want proof just look around your office now or neighbourhood when you get home. The science is also in on this one and was first spotted when kidney dialysis machines offered hope to those facing certain death in the sixties. The medical authorities keen to be seen like Caesar’s wife and beyond suspicion put rigorous and fair hoops in place and set up independent panels to choose who lived and who died. And guess what? The panel whose selection was impeccable and motives pure and who had guidelines to follow said yes more often to people like them. This trend was spotted by researchers who found that a significant number of beneficiaries of the life saving treatment matched the social and educational background almost precisely of the panels choosing them.
Can we make this work for us? Most certainly we can and it makes perfect business sense too. We need to select tender targets that match the people and products we have and targets who we need, want or would love to do business with. So your first task is a human stock take getting your teams to tell you who they have to keep on the books, those they aspire to work with and that very special business who they know just turning up to the office would be
a joy for.
I would suggest you do all the aisles in your legal supermarket one by one and identify all the products and the people you can put on display. You know if you are in Waitrose, Asda or Quick Save and what you can expect to buy and pay there. It doesn’t mean you can’t aspire to shop at Harrods food hall occasionally or every week. Then draw up a list with three columns: must haves; should haves; and would love to haves. Wow. A business development plan on one page steeped in reality but with ambition built in and you have consulted the workers. One that will lead to pitches. More on that beast next time.
Peter Rush is a freelance pitch doctor and tenders consultant. He can be contacted at thepitchdoctor@gmail.com.
denotes premium content | Jan 9 2009








