eBook | Bidding Opportunities | Industry Specific | Market Intelligence | Buyer Contacts Proposal Writing | Buyer Products | Vendor Database | Professional Services Referrals 1. Establish Compliance | 2. Score the Proposals | 3. Impose Upset Levels | 4. Evaluate the Cost 5. Develop a Short-list | 6. Interview Suppliers | 7. Best and Final Offers | 8. Reference Checking The Eight Building Blocks of the Evaluation Process 8. Reference Checking There are two common approaches to incorporating references into the evaluation process: award points, or simply use the references to confirm the winner's capabilities.
Proponent references are usually used to confirm the selection rather than as an evaluation criterion. In many cases, only the references of the winning proponent are checked. If several proponents are close in the final evaluation, references may be used to help choose between them. The interview should be conducted using predetermined, consistent questions, in order to receive reliable and objective information about service, support, reliability, etc. References should only be checked if the RFP requested them. Most selection procedures require the bidders to identify reference accounts. The wording in many RFPs is similar: "Proposals must include a list of references including names and telephone numbers for whom the bidder has performed similar work. These references might be contacted during the proposal evaluation phase to determine their satisfaction with the work carried out." "Provide three references, for work performed within the last two years, which you judge to be of similar scope and complexity." Massachusetts describes the ground rules for using references:
Invariably, someone from the selection team makes the calls. If this is your job, what do you say? What questions do you ask? What is the purpose of the exercise? Clearly, you want to verify that the supplier did, in fact, do a very good job at that company. But only the most naive evaluator would assume that a supplier will submit the name of a bad reference. The existence of a few solid references only demonstrates that the bidder has the potential for excellent work. Obviously, bidders will only submit the names of companies which they know will provide them with wonderful references. There is another, more aggressive tactic. Phone the reference accounts, not only to learn about the bidder, but to learn the names of other purchasers. (Alternatively, ask for an extensive list of customers in the RFP.) Once this has been accomplished, call all of the purchasers who weren't listed as references. The purpose of these calls to "non reference" accounts is to learn about the supplier from a broader range of customers. These customers will relate both good and bad stories about the bidder, and its products or services. The purpose in contacting "non reference" accounts is not simply to identify problem situations (which may have been caused by the supplier or its products, the purchaser, third parties, etc.). The purpose is to learn what the supplier did when difficulties were encountered? What did the supplier do when its project leader left? What happened when the key user became ill? What did the supplier do when the customer required more support on short-notice? Did the supplier act in the customer's best interest? Did the supplier simply disavow responsibility? Did the supplier and purchaser solve the problem by working as partners? If these conversations cause you to be concerned about the risks in dealing with a particular supplier, then discuss the information with the supplier. You may want to listen to the supplier's side before accepting the information. If you do decide to incorporate this approach to reference checking into your evaluation procedure, I suggest that you modify your RFP so that the bidders are aware of this new process. Here's how one RFP informed the bidders that the reference checking would include a broad range of customers, not just the names they provided: "Our evaluation will be made primarily via checks with the bidder provided references and other industry sources and users known to the evaluation team." In one of its RFPs, Nebraska identified the areas of concern that would be discussed with the references:
Some organizations assign a score to the references and include the points in the overall evaluation. Sometimes, there is a minimum acceptable score, say 12 out of 20. Firms receiving 12 or fewer points would be eliminated from further consideration. Typically, references are worth between 5% and 25 % of the total points. The references are contacted for the "winner" or the "finalists", the information is obtained using a checklist or questionnaire, and a score is assigned. Here is the manner is which a Washington State agency described the process in its RFP. The good news is that they provided the bidders with details of the reference information sought and the weight or score that was being assigned to references. The bad news is that this section is legalistic and difficult to understand. I expect that more than one of the bidders read this section 2 or 3 times and still didn't understand it fully.
This section contains two typical questionnaires. The first was used to get additional information about a company and its financial modelling system. The second, is the reference form for an RFP issued by the Dept. of Labor & Industries, Washington State.
|
Home
| About | Articles
| Products
| Services
| Seminars
| Site Map
| Contact |
