An appropriately implemented QBS procurement process would ensure that there is the opportunity for both parties to appraise and assess potential incompatibilities. An appropriately designed and executed QBS process provides the platform and the opportunity for both the client and the consultant to work together to investigate, define and address the complexities of the project. They can then define the services that are necessary and the information that both parties will require in order to equitably negotiate costs, and risks.
Many current procurement processes advertise that QBS is being followed. But, in reality, elements of QBS are being applied only as a mechanism for the prequalification to respond to often poorly developed and ambiguous terms of reference. This is followed by a skewed evaluation points system which, when applied, results in a selection that is really only based on price. Selection based on price may follow with an opportunity for “negotiation”, which does little more than reinforce and initiate the start of an adversarial relationship.
Unfortunately, the wide misapplication of QBS in the procurement process does not rest only with the client. Consultants also feel the need to play the game according to the rules that are dictated. So, just as professional athletes continually attempt to maximize the rules to their advantage, consultants make similar attempts – to their disadvantage. Unfortunately, any advantage that is perceived is only in the short term and ultimately to both the consultant and the client’s detriment.
In the more extreme cases, a poorly developed procurement document that is followed by an ill-advised consultant response are the first and second steps to what often becomes a failed project or a lawsuit. Enormous amounts of non-recoverable time are spent by engineers and consultants trying to resolve it; and there are financial losses for both parties.
Subscribe to our Newsletter!
The latest environmental engineering news direct to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time.
One would speculate and hope that with experience and lessons learned, this dynamic would be improving. More clients appear to be adopting procurement processes that are in keeping with the true spirit of QBS as the mechanism for the selection of the consultant.
This should result in a collaborative relationship on their projects. Also, more consultants are making informed and sound “no go decisions” on “opportunities” and intentionally passing up on prospective clients and assignments that it is best to avoid.
Discussion could extend in future to a more thorough review of successful and other innovative procurement methodologies beyond QBS. For now, however, I remain optimistic that in time, and with the active collaboration of client and consulting industry associations, the dynamic will continue to improve. But, we do indeed still have a long way to go!
Rui DeCarvalho, M. Eng., P. Eng., BCEE is Senior Vice President of R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited. This article appears in ES&E’s November/December issue, as part of the Consultants’ Forum.
