Sealed Bidding and Competitive Proposals: A Comparative Analysis

As seen in the cases above with castings and O-rings, even the simplest of parts can pose complications in the auction process. Potential for successful reduction in cost can be recognized with a more concentrated event and management effort. This can be true for engineered parts as well but on a less likely basis. The primary key to success to an auction of this nature would be to not have any surprises or to anticipate suppliers’ behavior. Building on this idea would be to truly know your suppliers, which can get cumbersome in a company with a lot of growth through acquisitions and locations. However, with regional procurement managers, it is not impossible. There should not have been a question “if” an incumbent was going to bid, good vendor management would have assured that a last minute entry by way of an incumbent would not have happened. Applying this thought to the engineered parts, an auction would only be effective if suppliers invited to bid have been fully vetted. An auction can speed up the process of getting time sensitive information to suppliers, but it also may open

Pricing strategy: When bidding for the government contracts, the A&D companies have to assess and anticipate how other competitors will respond to the Request for Proposal (RFP), which contains the details of the technical and non-technical requirements. In the lowest price, technically acceptable or LPTA contract, companies bid as lowest price as possible while maintaining the acceptable profit margin threshold for their operations. In order to determine the lowest price point that qualifies a company to win the contract and produces the highest profit as possible at the same time, not only does a company has to know its own profitable price point, it has to also anticipating how low other companies will bid the contract. For example, Company A has been trying to break into cybersecurity space in the past few years. However, it hasn’t been successfully in any of the previous bids. Contract XYZ is a large cybersecurity contract that will allow Company A to start gaining recognition as a prime

The United States government is the largest single purchaser of goods and services in the world. Even during times of economic hardship, the US continues to dump billions into the private sector. The federal procurement spending rate of growth has surpassed the rate of U.S. inflation every year, since 2000. With annual federal procurement budgets of more than $400 billion, it is no surprise that the competition for government contracts has increased tremendously. Consequently, more and more companies are trying to get a piece of the action. When these companies adhere to all of the required regulations and statutes, they expect their proposals to be evaluated and the contract awarded in

The Truth in Negotiations Act was passed on December 1, 1962 requiring government contractors to submit cost or pricing data if the procurement met specific requirements in order to establish that the offer is fair and reasonable. The history of The Truth in Negotiations Act will set the stage for its significance in the twenty-first century. Prior to World War II, the United States government conducted its bidding process for procurement in an open bid environment. What was required for a bid was a complete description of the requirement, two or more suppliers capable and willing to complete the requirement, a selection based on price competition and sufficient time to prepare a complete statement of the government’s needs and terms.

This paper will explore how Sealed Bidding and Competitive proposals compare against each other. In order to compare them one must understand how, when and why each topic is used. The primary source of federal procurement information and guidance is the Federal Acquisition Regulation, which consists of Parts 1-53 of Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). FAR parts 14 and 15 explains in full detail Sealed Bidding and Competitive Proposals. This paper like the federal government will rely heavily on the FAR as a source document to help explain the details of this topic.

Based on the textbook and my understanding, whenever there are negotiations between a procurer and a supplier regarding a competitive bidding, the first thing that might be favored is the scope of the project, meaning both will sit down and discuss the entire project prior the work begins. Meanwhile, during the negotiations, evaluation criteria should be clear, and stated and defined. As the evaluation is based on the criteria stated and the procurer can request or ask the supplier’s opinions on certain specifications and where things can be improved.

Part 15 of the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) “prescribes [the] policies and procedures governing competitive and noncompetitive negotiated acquisitions.” One component of negotiated acquisitions that occurs early in the acquisition process is the solicitation of proposals. FAR 15.201, titled, “Exchanges with Industry before Receipt of Proposals,” regulates the type and manner of communications, also sometimes referred to as exchanges, which can – and cannot – take place between the Government and potential suppliers prior to the receipt of a potential supplier’s proposal and the subsequent award of a contract.

The government selects contract proposals from many competitors large and small, and each proposal must be effective in scope and developed with an attitude of winning the contract. From the e-Activity, select two (2) of the suggested commandments that you feel are most important to understand in order to write a government bid proposal effectively. Provide a rationale for your selection.

a. The U.S. Federal government features a main legal requirement to purchase supplies as well as services on a competing and effective basis. Nevertheless, the U.S. Government has additionally applied via the procurement procedure particular guidelines to promote socioeconomic goals. Programs happen to be developed to supply elevated contracting possibilities to small-scale, small-disadvantaged, women-owned-and-run small-scale, HUBZone small-scale, veteran-owned small-scale, and service-disabled veteran-owned small-scale companies. Companies should also adhere to ancillary specifications arising beneath numerous laws and also Executive Orders (A/OPE, 2011).

Contract A / Contract B: Contract A or unilateral “tendering contract” – offer by Owner to many bidders to enter into Contract A and offer by tenderer to enter into bilateral Contract B - arises on submission of valid tender, with terms determined by tender documents:

Since almost past two decade the Courts of Canada, have been very firm while dealing with any case related to contracts or tenders, especially with owners and contractors, who use bidding activities unethically. In order to bring some order in the contract tendering system, the Canadian Court offered in awarding against the damages to the contractor in such unethical practices by several ways such as bid shopping and disclosure of the criteria of bidding to the bidders. The transformation in the law system came after the much popular case of Canada Law Court of Ron Engineering v/s Ontario. In the case due to the error committed in the calculation of the tender quotation, the tender went to another company and later when the

There was no formal bidding process. In addition, it appeared that not all bidders were treated equally. This can be seen when the bidding process was opened back up after the contractors were narrowed down to

The request from the contracting firm asking for corporate seal before giving out any payment

Sealed bidding is a procurement method used when the best value is expected to result from the selection of the lowest evaluated offer. Generally competitive sealed bidding are used to procure supplies and services except when price is not the determinative element in the

Strict adherence to formal procedures characterizes sealed bidding which attempts to provide a “level playing field” or as a multitude of references point out equal footing to all bidders who compete for a contract. Competitive negotiation is a more flexible process that enables the agency to conduct discussions, evaluate offers, and award the contract using price and other factors. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose origins can be traced back to the ASPA of 1947 was codified at Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations and became effective 1 April 1984. The FAR contains the uniform policies and procedures for acquisitions by all federal agencies to date. It addresses nearly every procurement related statute or executive policy; and subsequently encompasses every stage of the acquisition process. In a nutshell, FAR appears to have modernized and thus enveloped the aforementioned three acts.