Our services

September 10, 2017

I wonder if these expressions of mistrust, often called minimum requirements, contribute to a better or worse purchasing process and cooperation? And where does that distrust come from? Consider, for example, the impact of the unilateral termination of a contract by the client without a reasonable term or written substantiation. Or what to think of: "The client reserves the right at all times to stop the process with a tenderer, not to award the contract or to cease the purchase process". While reading a little further that: "Registrations [offers] that come in after the said time are not taken into consideration".

There are many other examples to mention. I have left the time of thick contracts or RfPs for a while now. On the one hand because I myself have come to the conclusion that more paper with "unreasonable" conditions and requirements does not lead to better services [rather worse]. On the other hand, because I believe that a lot more profit can be gained in simplifying [cost reduction] of the purchasing process with a focus on execution. Because what do we keep each other busy with all those requirements and conditions.

There are many other examples to mention. I have left the time of thick contracts or RfPs for a while now. On the one hand because I myself have come to the conclusion that more paper with "unreasonable" conditions and requirements does not lead to better services [rather worse]. On the other hand, because I believe that a lot more profit can be gained in simplifying [cost reduction] of the purchasing process with a focus on execution. Because what do we keep each other busy with all those requirements and conditions.

Search

Submit

Categories

Best Value Procurement

Finance

IT outsourcing

Back To Top