A good tendering process is in the interests of both buyers and sellers of consultancy services and we want our clients to get the most out of their tendering procedures. We therefore thought past, present and future clients might find these guidelines, based on our expertise, useful.

The most basic requirement is that the terms of reference (ToR) are clear, particularly with regard
to the overall purpose. Spell out as clearly and simply
as you can what it is you want to achieve, what your overall purpose is, what questions you want
answered and what you want to know at the end of the assignment that you don't know now.

It is better that the ToR are clear on objectives rather than on detailed method. There is a tendency to start the other way around, ie to set out rather vague objectives but to specify very precise methodologies, eg surveys of X number of companies. The method is a matter often best left to the consultants to suggest. This way, you may get the occasional innovative idea.

The ToR should describe the background and content, ie why the study is being commissioned and why now, by whom precisely it is being commissioned and what has triggered it, eg is there an important decision coming up? Is it to meet some regulatory requirement?

It is important to define the precise outputs or "deliverables" you expect, eg a report, a presentation. If a report, how long it should be, eg do you want something short or long?

If someone goes into a garage wanting to buy a car, the salesperson will understandably ask whether it is to be a little runabout or a large limousine. Unless you indicate about how much you want to spend, it is difficult for the garage to know what to offer you. Consultancy ToR are often set out in quite general terms which could be met at a wide variety of levels. Frequently clients do not give any indication of how much they wish to spend.

This reluctance is usually based on a belief (in our view debatable) that proper price competition necessitates leaving the price open. However, there are alternative ways to achieve competition while indicating the envisaged project scale. Ones that we have come across are:

• indicating the number of consultancy days envisaged but not the price. This leaves it open to consultants to compete on their daily rates

• specifying either a price or price range, leaving it open to consultants to compete in terms of the number of days and the type and amount of work they can offer within this-

We think this is an area where general public procurement procedures, designed primarily for buying products which can be very clearly specified in detailed terms, need some adjustment when it comes to procurement of consultancy services.

However, don't worry. Even if you don't do any of these things correctly, we're still happy to tender.