Being Good at the Work Isn't Always Enough
Why I started TERVELL, and what 20+ years on both sides of procurement taught me.
I started my career at the Department of Public Works and Services in Sydney. That's where I first noticed something that's stayed with me ever since: there were some incredibly capable trade businesses out there. They knew their trades and they knew how to get the job done. But the admin and contract side of running a business? That was a different story.
Watching businesses come in on the back foot
Later in my career I moved to Canberra to work on major projects, and the lessons I'd learnt at DPWS played out again in project control meetings. On one side of the table sat experienced government advisers and project managers who knew the processes, the reporting and the contract obligations inside out. On the other sat the trade business owner and their office administrator, who knew their trade inside out but were often out of their depth on the contract side.
I remember thinking how hard that must be when you're also running a business, managing people and keeping jobs moving.
I saw the same thing again and again in the years that followed, in subcontract and procurement roles at Spotless and Downer, and in regulated environments including ANU, Airservices and several Commonwealth agencies. Businesses were trying to do good work while juggling layers of requirements, from government, through the head contract, down into their subcontracts. Even large companies with proper systems and experienced people found it hard. For a smaller business without those resources, it's harder still.
The other side of the table
So I've spent a big part of my career on the buyer's side. I've helped write the criteria businesses are assessed against. I've chaired panels, scored submissions and helped determine which suppliers should be recommended for contract award.
And I've seen what happens when a response doesn't give the panel what it needs.
The part that's always bothered me
I've had to reject submissions because they simply didn't meet the requirements or follow the instructions.
And that's a shitty position to be in. Especially when you know the business could do the job.
I've had plenty of hard conversations with small business owners who'd done things a certain way for years. Maybe they hadn't provided everything asked for. Maybe they hadn't followed the instructions. Maybe they'd relied on the buyer already knowing them. In the past that had been let slide, so they thought that's just how it works.
Then they hit a process where the rules are properly applied, and every decision has to be documented and justified. Suddenly what they've always done isn't good enough. They're set aside, and the work they depended on is gone.
I get how frustrating that is. But here's the thing.
Government is spending Australian tax payers money, and procurement has to stand up to scrutiny. Every decision has to be fair, transparent, defensible and backed by evidence, and the procurement officer is accountable for it.
A government tender evaluator can't overlook a mandatory requirement because you know them and you think they'd do a good job and neither should they. Other businesses are competing for the same work and followed the instructions - they deserve to be treated fairly too.
Integrity, honesty, fairness and respect have always mattered to me.
I want good businesses to succeed, and I hate seeing someone miss out because they didn't understand what was needed. But fairness means applying the rules consistently, not making exceptions for people you know.
Knowing you've made the right call doesn't make it an easy one, though. Or those conversations any less uncomfortable.
Being capable and proving it are two different things
I've seen it over and over. A business can have the right experience, people, equipment and track record but if the response doesn't address the criteria and back it up with evidence, the panel can't give them credit for it. If a mandatory requirement is missed, the submission might not even make it past the first stage.
That doesn't make them a less capable business. It means their submission didn't show what the process required.
A panel can't award marks for information that isn't there. It can't assume anything based on what it happens to know about your business. Your response has to stand on its own.
Why I started TERVELL
I've worked with big organisations that have dedicated procurement teams and documented processes. And I've worked with smaller trade businesses that have nothing like that. They're running the business, managing staff, dealing with clients, delivering jobs, and somehow finding time to write tenders that meet demanding requirements.
Over the years I've realised something.
The best way I can help isn't necessarily by writing every tender for them. It's by helping them build the knowledge, structure and process to do it properly themselves, consistently, without starting from scratch every time.
That's why I started TERVELL.
We look at how a business prepares tenders now, including reviewing past submissions through an evaluator's eyes. We work out what's working, where responses could be stronger, and where they're making it harder for themselves than it needs to be.
Then we put a better approach in place. We organise their evidence, build response content from their real projects, set up a repeatable process and train their people to use it.
Not a generic template pack. Not another tender written by someone who walks away once it's submitted.
Something built around their business, owned by their business and used by their own people.
I don't want businesses learning these lessons the hard way, by missing out on work for reasons that, with the right guidance and information, could have been avoided. I want them to know what's expected, how to show what they can do, and to feel confident they've put in the strongest submission they can.
Not because they've found a way around the rules but because they understand the rules and know how to compete properly within them.
That's why being exceptional at what you do shouldn't leave you on the back foot when you're competing for the work. If I can help close that gap, that's work worth doing.
If you've ever wondered what happens to your tender after you submit it, I'm running a free webinar: Inside the Government Tender Evaluation. I'll walk through how tenders are assessed, where capable trade businesses can lose marks, and what makes a stronger response.
Comments