EFCAEuropean Federation of Engineering

Consultancy Associations FIDIC 2005

Yann LeblaisEFCA President

Quality in Procurement

Beijing Hotel, Beijing - China7 September 2005

2

EFCA on Quality Outcomes in the EU

• Former and present European Commission policies

• Elements of a quality debate

3

Former and Present European Commission policies

• Reform of EC external assistance management:– essential element = deconcentration

• Commission 1999 – 2004:– putting rules in place and horizontal

approach

• Commission 2004 – 2009:– focus on output and quality

4

Elements of a quality debate

1. Dissemination of information to tenderers

2. Evaluation criteria: too much CV-based3. Adequate project budgets4. Same rules for all?5. Validity of references6. Definition of conflict of interest

5

Dissemination of information to tenderers (1)

Problem description:

• EC prohibits contacts between tenderers and contracting authorities and EC Delegations

Consequently:

• Quality of proposals decline as the clients needs are not enough known and taken into account

• Consultants locally present are favoured

6

Dissemination of information to tenderers (2)

EFCA recommendation:

• (Optional) Site visits and clarification meetings (should be the rule for short-listed firms)

• All documents available should be at the disposal at such clarification meetings

• Minutes of clarification meetings should be sent to all tenderers

7

Evaluation criteria too much CV-based (1)

Problem description:

• EC requires a minimum of 5 years experience

Consequently:• Unbalanced age and experience structure in

consulting firms• In the long run shortage of knowledge and

skills

8

Evaluation criteria too much CV-based (2)

EFCA recommendation:

• Develop and implementation of a Junior Expert Programme

• Additional budgets for young professionals to cover costs on specific projects

9

Adequate project budgets (1)

Problem description:

• Project budgets are sometimes too tight

Consequently:

• Firms cannot commit a majority of permanent staff, including junior staff

• Therefore, company development and experience is hampered

10

Adequate project budgets (2)

EFCA recommendation:

• Project budgets should be drawn up to allow deployment of a majority of permanent staff

11

Same rules for all? (1)

Problem description:• Following deconcentration, differences in

interpretation of rules by Delegations

Consequently:• 120 interpretation centres instead of

implementation centres• Documents in various languages are not

identical• At their discretion Delegations add specific

administrative requirements to tender/award process

12

Same rules for all? (2)

EFCA recommendations:

• Establishment of clear and simple rules and guidelines

• Establishment of a central help desk in Brussels

• Improve training in EC Delegations

13

Validity of references (1)

Problem description:

• In most cases selection criteria specify that firms must have references in the last 3 years

Consequently:

• Many SMEs are excluded from tendering• Therefore, the potential of capable/qualified

companies is limited

14

Validity of references (2)

EFCA recommendation:

• Validity of references should be extended to 5 years for engineering consultancy firms

15

Definition of conflict of interest (1)

Problem description:

• Firms excluded from subsequent project phases based on involvement in earlier stages (except for ToR)

Consequently:

• Disruptive for project itself• Multiple selection procedures are expensive

and time-consuming for both contracting authority and consultants

16

Definition of conflict of interest (2)

EFCA recommendation:

• Make all preliminary investigation documents available to all participants

• Restrict that “conflict of interest” to a restricted and well defined list