Debate: Dare to ask and dare to answer!

There is much to be gained by having greater transparency during procurement and advertising. Despite this, too little is communicated, writes Niklas Fyhr, business policy expert at IT&Telekomföretagen, in a debate article on upphandling24.se.

Everyone says they want more dialogue, but so far it's mostly talk. Now it is high time to move from words to action.

In 2011, there was a particular focus on increased dialog and better communication between suppliers and purchasers. For example, the annual conference of the Swedish Association of Public Purchasers (SOI) was held under the heading: "Mission good business" with the subheading "Communication - Dialogue - Understanding". Both buyers and suppliers seem to agree that more and better communication leads to better results in public procurement. But so far, the dialog is mostly about discussing the need for more dialog - the question is when to move from words to action?

The benefits of greater transparency are many. By increasing dialogue before a procurement is advertised, there will be fewer changes to the tender documents during the advertising period and purchasers will avoid the problems of assessing whether the changes are significant or not. Better communication also increases trust between the parties, which we are convinced will lead to fewer reviews.

Today, in many cases, the desired dialogue is lacking and it is only during the advertising period that questions and comments can be asked. One problem that our member companies experience is that when they ask questions they do not receive clear and explanatory answers. One example is the State Purchasing Center at Kammarkollegiet, which has a standing text in its tender documents that reads "Questions about why a certain requirement has been set will not be answered." The supplier is forced to interpret what is meant and if it is misinterpreted, it risks leading to a lost deal.

Unfortunately, the unwillingness to provide reasons for certain requirements seems to persist even after the procurement process has been completed. The only way to get an answer is to request a review, which could have been avoided with more open communication.

We believe, as previously stated in the debate section of this magazine, that questions and dialog are positive and a natural part of the supplier's sales work to really understand the buyer's needs.

The SOI was right to choose the subtitle for the 2011 annual conference. Increased dialog before advertising, for example through reply to public consultation of preliminary tender documents, and better communication with clear answers during the tender period lead to understanding and thus better business with less risk of review. A win-win situation that requires us to move from words to action. Now.

Niklas Fyhr, Industry Policy Expert IT&Telecom