As a former public sector procurement professional, my view regarding unsolicited proposal policy was that of protecting the integrity of the organization. That is, to ensure the organization couldn't be accused of 1) awarding contracts that didn't comply with trade agreements or 2) having someone's idea released to a competitor based upon Freedom of Information requests or 3) creating a competition using someone's unsolicited idea (just for the sake of complying with policy).
Background to the policy
Most jurisdictions (in North America) created policy based on Model Procurement Code and Regulations 1980 by the American Bar Association which had minimal procedural aspect to the requirements. Over time, public sector interest grew in obtaining innovative solutions, so some jurisdictions opened up the scope of unsolicited proposals (Nova Scotia, City of Toronto), while others limit to specific sectors (IM/IT projects only - British Columbia) or deny all unsolicited proposals (VANOC). Numerous articles and studies have been published regarding the status of policies, obviously due to the controversy over losing out on innovation vs policy compliance(City of Toronto report published in 2003; Province of Ontario published in 2004, Summit Magazine). Articles report that private sector organizations benefit from innovation by partnering with vendors, where public sector does not - The difference appears to be the non-disclosure aspect of the idea. (background based upon 2003 article by Michael Asner in Summit Magazine with updated links/jurisdictions)
Issues for Public Sector Governance:
In the absence of policy specific to unsolicited proposals or if policy only applies to one 'type' of procurement, there are a mix of processes occurring:
1) contract managers attempt to refuse the unsolicited proposal;
2) vendors discuss ideas with public sector managers but refuse to submit anything in writing; or
3) contract managers deem the item a ‘sole source’ and follow sole source procedures.
Issues for Vendors:
"A familiar comment from those that oppose unsolicited proposals is that Canada's major trade agreements...allow for competitive bidding only" Denis Chamberlain So those vendors with innovative idea may be discouraged to find no-one wants to hear their idea, or the person they shared the idea with will use the information to create a competitive process, which may 'leak' the competitive advantage to others.
Vendors unfamiliar with the Freedom of Information Act may attempt to protect their commercial interests with a non-disclosure statement to protect ideas from FOI or via a competitive process (i.e. Notice of Intent). It is not clear whether these ideas are actually protected. As noted in a number of these policies, once these ideas/proposals are submitted they become the property of the jurisdiction in receipt, and therefore is bound to the relevant FOI legislation. With recent rulings allowing for unit price disclosures (Stenotran Services v. Canada (Minister of Public Works and Government Services) (T-1281-99) (Trial Division)), leaving onus of proving confidentiality on the vendor, it is unclear what language would actually protect an idea from disclosure.
What happens if there is a policy?
Where there is policy, understand the 'rules' before submitting. Some jurisdictions leave the ‘approval’ process to higher levels (i.e. City Council) who are responsible to public more directly than civil servants. Others might prequalify or ‘trial’ a product/service (no contract) before deeming it to be of merit to pursue. There could be costs associated with submitting an idea which may never be recouped.
No comments:
Post a Comment