Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
After reviewing the details of the Sweeping Over-billing Under the Rug article, I would make the following three recommendations to prevent a similar situation:
1. Implement Formalized Progress Reviews and Site Inspections: Establish a schedule of regular meetings between the vendor and the contract management team to review performance feedback. These check-ins must include physical site inspections to verify that completed work meets the technical specifications of the contract. By consistently confirming that work is performed ‘properly’ before payment, the organization creates accountability that deters fraudulent billing.
2. Standardize Work Flow: Formalize the process for how work is triggered and accepted. This should include a master schedule of priority locations and the mandatory issuing of floor plans at the beginning to help understand what is expected for costs. Once work is finished, the OCHC must perform a formal sign-off. This reconciliation process—matching the actual work completed against the invoice issued—is extremely important to catching inflated invoices before they are paid.
3. Establish a Contract Renewal Review: The option to renew the contract should include a formal performance review and should be conducted before any extension is granted. This review should evaluate communication, quality of work concerns, and billing accuracy throughout the contract so far. The extension should not be seen as automatic – the extension is only awarded if the vendor has met the targets of work and quality, and the invoicing equals the actual progress to date, as has been agreed upon.Instructor Note
Standardizing Work Flow is a great example of how procurement has the critical thinking and knowledge about HOW to improve systems and accountability.
Taking a strategic approach and examining the broader picture of process flow for work required is KEY to effectively managing this subject long term.
Use visual flow charts for process flow to augment detail instructions. Use TEMPLATES to ensure consistency of process and data collection.I agree that this model could work in this situation. Especially around the maintenance aspect of a building. This may also lead to innovation within the building as the vendor (the expert) is not just in for a ‘quick-fix’ but on an ongoing basis. They may be able to understand the inner workings and provide more innovative upgrades to maximize the functionality of the building.
One question, though, is given the degree of costs associated with certain repairs to buildings – especially older buildings, would there need to be built-in provisions for repairs that are above the scope of the contract? For example, a roof repair or another large and expensive unexpected repair? Could there be thresholds established at certain price points that would trigger an additional fee?
I also find it interesting that the RFP included such broad ‘Privilege Clauses.’ One clause, in particular, allows the organization to terminate negotiations with a proponent and negotiate directly with a non-participating vendor. Combined with the right to cancel or suspend the RFP at any time, these provisions could certainly discourage potential bidders. After investing significant time and resources into a complex proposal, vendors want some understanding that the process is predictable. These clauses, while protecting the government’s flexibility, may inadvertently undermine market confidence and discourage the most qualified vendors from participating.
That is a great point regarding how upfront work reduces expensive change orders post-award. The extra time and effort invested during the early stages of the process clearly is beneficial for the long-term.
However, a potential concern with such an intensive, stakeholder-led process is the significant commitment required from the vendors. While this approach offers many benefits, only the successful proponent will ultimately realize them. The unsuccessful vendors will have made a substantial financial and resource investment with no return. This ‘high cost of bidding’ can sometimes discourage smaller, innovative firms from participating.
I agree with your assessment of the upfront work E-COMM invested in this process. I also liked how they refined their specifications at every step before the RFP. By learning and adapting throughout the RFI and RFQ phases, they ensured that the final RFP accurately reflected their needs. This clarity is vital because it encourages the market to provide much stronger and more accurate vendor responses.
I completely agree regarding the need for a thorough governance framework. A significant risk in these models is that a vendor might seek to maximize profit by under-investing in the service and essentially cutting corners rather than innovating. We need clear method to ensure that cost reductions don’t impact the outcomes.
I also agree that client satisfaction can be dangerously subjective. By rooting outcomes in measurable, data-driven metrics and reviewing quality standards, we can remove bias and ensure the partnership stays focused on actual performance.
This sounds like a very good example of how Vested Outsourcing could benefit your organization. It would free up internal resources by shifting the responsibility for supply availability directly to the supplier. This ensures that stock items aren’t sitting for extended periods, but are instead used and replaced efficiently—committing resources only when and where they are truly needed. It’s a clear win-win for everyone.
One clear example of where vested outsourcing could benefit the education sector is in school cafeterias. While we have historically contracted this service out, a vested contract would likely secure much greater ‘buy-in’ from the vendor. Currently, many providers do the bare minimum; however, if there were incentives to exceed the minimum, we would see real improvements.
Even within strict government health regulations, vested outsourcing encourages vendors to be more creative. Instead of just the basics, they could provide more desirable, healthy alternatives. This change would likely increase student demand and make the cafeteria more profitable while reducing the growing issue of food waste. Also, because these incentives are often passed on directly to employees, this would help address the high turnover rates we currently have. Maintaining a stable, reliable cafeteria is very important, especially for those students who rely on school meals as their primary source of nutrition for economic reasonsOne thing that stood out to me most about this process is the number of resources, both on the part of potential vendors and the company itself (E-COMM), committed to this undertaking. The process started in 2013, and the first installation went live in 2017.
Another interesting thing was E-COMMs use of additional resources to ensure that they were conducting this procurement process as best and as fair as possible. They employed ‘External Fairness Advisors’ to assist and provide oversight on the procurement process at each stage. This is also another large commitment of resources on their behalf to ensure that the contracting process was completed properly.
E-COMM also used the various steps along the way (RFI, RFQ) to continue to build the details and specifications for the final RFP.
This is a very large project, and it is hard to say what I would do any differently. One of the things I would try to do differently is to try and limit the resources that were required for both the company (E-COMM) and the potential vendors. This would be a deterrent to some potential bidders. The return would be a very large contract, but the upfront resources may be too costly for some.You mentioned that limited provider options make outcome-based commissioning difficult. Would one way around this is to narrow the scope of the contract? For example, when dealing with mental health, could the scope be made to be a small part rather than a large encompassing scope This would assist with making sure more players offer this service. By commissioning a very specific, specialized service rather than a large, all-encompassing system, you make it easier to find multiple vendors. This allows smaller, specialized clinics to compete, which builds the contestability aspect.
Does it make more sense to define a very narrow scope and specific outcomes for this? If the service is specialized and doesn’t require massive resources, it’s easier for new competitors to step in. This prevents a ‘strong incumbent advantage’ and makes it much simpler to maintain contestability once the contract expires.
One conflict that immediately comes to mind is indeed the ‘best value’ approach to procurement. There are many people who associate ‘best value’ with the most cost effective or bottom-line cost of the product. Many of the Fair-Trade products come at a premium when compared to their non-Fair-Trade equivalents. While I don’t believe that it is as straightforward as that, I can see where this ‘best value’ approach can be seen as conflicting when it comes to procurement.
As a side note: I live just 5 minutes from Canada’s first Free-Trade Town, Wolfville. It’s a thriving, lively destination, especially in the summer. While I’d need more research to prove a direct correlation between its success and the Fair Trade designation, the town’s identity is certainly tied to these values.I think that another benefit that goes along with the ‘social welfare’ aspect of the Fair-Trade products and organizations is that, while there is more equity throughout the supply chain, they are also more aware of how they treat their employees. Often, they provide above the minimum requirements for pay and benefits. Therefore, in a Fair-Trade town, those living and working in the community have access to a stronger employment base, which in turn is of benefit to members in the community.
This sounds like a good example of a service that this could apply to. Similarly to the Sydney Ferry example, the province could lease out equipment/facilities if available to maintain future contestability at the end of the contract. The output of the new organization would be able to be measured in several ways. That would allow the government the ability to assess the success of the contract and what they may want to achieve in future contracts for this service.
When we discuss the benefits of Fair Trade, this includes more equitable compensation for producers, environmental sustainability, and improved labor standards as has been highlighted. However, there is something we often overlook in our local communities.
While the ethical impact is significant, the primary financial benefits of Fair Trade are mainly felt at the source of production, often in places a great distance away. For the location where the sale happens, the local benefit is often limited to social awareness rather than local economic growth. While the Fair-Trade Town may attract additional consumers, is it enough to offset the costs associated with the designation?
