招投标外文文献

-1-外文文献：TheSignificanceoftheTenderingContractonTheOpportunitiesforClientstoEncourageContractor-ledInnovationABSTRACTDuringthetenderingprocessformostmajorconstructioncontractsthereistheopportunityforbidderstosuggestalternativeinnovativesolutions.Clearlyclientsarekeentotakeadvantageoftheseopportunities,andequallycontractorswanttousetheirexpertisetoestablishcompetitiveadvantage.Bothpartiesmayverywellbenefitfromtheencouragementofsuchinnovationandtheavailabilityofcheapermethodsofconstructionthanhavebeencontemplatedbythetenderingauthority.Howeverrecentdevelopmentsincommonlawhaveraiseddoubtsabouttheabilityofownerstoseekalternativetenderswithoutplacingthemselvesatriskoflitigation.Thiscommonlawhasrecognisedtheexistenceoftheso-called‘tenderingcontract’or‘processcontract’.Sincethetenderingprocessisinherentlypricecompetitive,theapplicationofthetenderingcontractconceptislikelytoseverelyinhibittheopportunityforalternativetenders.Thispaperisprimarilybasedontheliteraturereview.Theaimofthispaperistohighlighttheproblemswiththecompetitivetenderingprocessinrelationtocontractor-ledinnovationandexplorewaysinwhichownerscandevelopprocurementproceduresthatwillallowandencourageinnovationfromcontractors.PROBLEMSWITHCOMPETITIVETENDERINGThetraditionaltenderingprocesswasdesignedtoproducedirectpricecompetitionforaspecifiedproduct.Evaluationoftenderscouldonlybeconfinedtopricealonebycreatingasysteminwhichpriceistheonlycriterionthatcouldvarywhiledesignandtechnicalcontentarethesameforeachcompetingtender.Albeitthecontractperiodisstipulatedasconstant,ownersoftenencouragetendererstosubmitasecondtenderwhichoffersanalternativepriceforanalternativetimeperformance.Tendererswouldachievethisbyreworkingtheirtenderprogramme,findingtheoptimumcontractperiod,andadjustingthetenderpriceaccordingly.Eachtendererwouldcompetetofindnovelwaysoforganisingtheworkmethodthatwouldallownotonlytheminimumconstructioncostbutalsomaximumprofitmarginwithinthepriceproposed.However,-2-thisprocessisalwaysconfinedbytheboundaryoftheowner’sdesign.Inthisway,thesuccessfultenderer’sscopetobeinnovativeisverylimited.Whenevaluatingalternativetenders,theownerisconfrontedwiththedutyofequaltreatmentandfairnesstoalltenderers.Ifoneistobepreferredonanalternativetender,whichisnotaconformingtenderintermsoftheoriginalinvitation,howcanalltenderersbetreatedequallyandfairly?Anyindividualismexhibitedonthepartofatendereroutsidethepermittedscopeofpriceandtimemustdisqualifythattenderfromtheowner’sconsiderationbecauseitdoesnotconformtotheinvitation.Therefore,thetraditionaltenderingprocessprevents,restrictsorevendiscouragescontractor-ledinnovation.SongerandIbbsbelievedthattheuseofdesign-and-buildprocurementmethodwouldencourageinnovationinthebuildingprocess.Thisprocurementmethodimposessinglepointresponsibilityoncontractorforthecompletebuildinganditstenderingprocessdifferfromthatofthetraditionalprocurementmethodinthatitmustbecapableofevaluatingdesignaswellasproductioncapability,timeandprice,allonacompetitivebasis.Thisisnoteasy.Competitivedesignisnoteasytoevaluateinthecontextoftendering.Theobjectivityappearstobereplacedbysubjectivityinpickingthewinner,andtheapparentintegrityofthebiddingprocessislost,unlessveryclearcriteriaareestablishedattheoutsetforevaluationofcompetingdesigns.Thisalsomeanstosaythatthetenderprocessrulesmustbedesignedassuchthatitencouragescontractor-ledinnovation,yetatthesametimeplacessomelimitonthescopeforsuchinnovation.Thelimitsmustbesuchthattheprojectdeliveredisstilltheprojectforwhichtenderswereinvited.SongerandIbbs,withrespecttothisaspect,assertedthatoneconcernofpublicagenciesishowtoallowforinnovationwhilemaintainingappropriatecontrolofcertaindesignaspectsoftheproject.Determininganappropriatebalanceofinnovationandcontrolindesignandadequatelycommunicatingthedesiredbalancetopotentialdesign-and-buildtenderersprovidesasignificantchallengetopublicsectoragencies.THE‘TENDERINGCONTRACT’Developmentsinthelawrelatingtotenderstraditionallytreatedan‘invitationtotender’ora‘requestfortenders’asnomorethananinvitationtotreat,anindicationthattheownerwasreadytodobusiness–somethingpriortoandshortofanoffer.Inotherwords,aninvitationtotreatwasnotanoffertomakeacontractwithanypersonwhomightactontheinvitation,but-3-merelyafirststepinnegotiationwhichmay,ormaynot,leadtoacontract.Wheneachtenderersubmitteditstenderintheprescribedform,itamountedtoanofferwhichcouldberegardedasanoffertomakeacontract.Iftheoffermetwithunequivocalacceptance,contractualobligationarosebetweentheownerandthesuccessfultenderer.Recently,themodernviewturnsthistheoryupsidedown.Thereexistswhatisknownasthe‘twocontract’analysisinvolvingtheemergenceofthe‘tenderingcontract’.Theinvitationtotenderisnowinsomecircumstancestobetreatedasanoffertomakeacontractwhichatendereracceptswhenitsubmitsaconformingtender.Theownermakesanoffertoeachtendererwhichmightbewordedasfollows:“Ifyousubmitatenderinresponsetomyinvitationandwhichcomplieswiththestipulationsmade,Iwillconsiderthattender…”.Thereisnoobligationatallatthispointonthesideofthetenderers,butifaconformingtender