Public procurement - a meltdown?

Sometimes you don't know whether to laugh or cry. After meeting with the members of our Procurement Council, I felt that way. The problems just kept piling up and it feels like we are heading for some kind of procurement meltdown. And the problems seem to have almost escalated in recent years.

Here are some examples of things that were discussed at the meeting:

Example 1: In a tender for interpreters, a supplier offered interpreters in one language (because they could not supply the others) and quoted a price of 0 SEK for the languages they could not supply. The company won the tender - at a low average price - which meant that the agency could not get any delivery of the other languages. (May be a fairy tale - but there are analogies in related areas...). Thus demonstrating the importance of setting the right evaluation criteria.

Example 2: Large framework agreement procurements take time and when the procurement is completed and the call-offs are to be made, it is not certain that the products are still on the market. Is it really practical to have large framework agreements for fast-moving products?

Example 3: Public authorities have started to consider including CSR as a requirement in procurement. How will it be controlled? Do small businesses have the resources to check the whole chain of how subcontractors' products are handled and how many contracting authorities have the resources to follow up these requirements?

Example 4: Large framework contracts requiring nationwide delivery capacity exclude small businesses or effectively make them dependent on subcontracting to larger companies. Discriminatory?

Example 5: Contract monitoring - is it checked that what is promised is actually delivered? Can a rogue supplier win a contract by misrepresenting, for example, environmental requirements, and get away with it because no one is simply following up on compliance?

Example 6: Does re-competition really work? Suppliers, already selected in framework agreements, are subjected to a final "mini procurement at the call-off stage". Ambitious but ignorant purchasers at individual authorities use this as an opportunity to set completely new requirements in connection with the call-off. Which is of course completely wrong.

There are certainly more examples of things that need to be improved to ensure that public procurement does not become an even greater barrier to innovation and growth.

Thankfully, there are competent public purchasers who recognize the problems and have a strong interest in change. Hopefully, we can start a constructive collaboration and with insight into the problems from both suppliers and procurers, we can make a difference. The situation right now benefits no one.