Proximity is now SPA LEARN MORE 
Picture this: a government agency releases a sizeable request for tender to deliver an important initiative. The catch? Respondents have just three days to respond. In this time, you will need to consult with your Executive, gather expert input, draft and price a compelling response, and clear it through internal processes. The project also has vague requirements and the timeline is tight.
Speed and adaptability are key skills in the private and public sectors. However, rushed procurement processes and unclear tender documentation leads to poor outcomes for agencies and companies. First, agencies receive generic, low-quality responses. Second, and far more concerning, the most suitable providers may opt out entirely. Not because they can’t do the work, but because the process doesn’t give them a fair shot at demonstrating their capabilities.
In 2023–24, over 83,000 contracts worth nearly $100 billion were recorded on AusTender. That’s an enormous amount of taxpayer money. Even small changes to how tenders are planned, published, and evaluated could yield massive improvements in outcomes. So why aren’t we doing better?
Let’s break it down.
Authors
Published
15/01/2026
Define what you need clearly
It sounds simple, but it’s not always done well. Agencies often go to market with tenders that lack a clear purpose. They describe activities, not outcomes. They outline processes, not problems to solve.
The solution isn’t to be overly prescriptive. It’s to be clear about your goals and environment. Let firms bring their expertise to the table, after all, that’s why you’re going to market. Tell them what you want to achieve, what constraints you face, and what success looks like. The best proposals don’t simply follow a template, they’re crafted specifically for your context. But that’s only possible if you explain it well.
Allow enough time
Procurement is not just a formality. It’s a skill and one that takes time to follow the required process. Time to develop accurate documentation, time for suppliers to respond, and time to evaluate proposals fairly and rigorously.
While some Commonwealth Procurement Rules mandate minimum response periods, many tenders fall outside those requirements. Two weeks is often cited as a “reasonable” window, but only if the tender documentation is clear and complete. If you want tailored, thoughtful responses then longer timelines are helpful and essential. Time invested upfront in planning saves time (and money) down the track. Rushed processes don’t lead to better outcomes, they lead to risk, inflated costs, and poor alignment.
Make evaluation work for you, not against you
A good evaluation process is fair, transparent, and structured. But it also needs to be realistic.
Too often, evaluations are tacked on to already-busy workloads or handed to panels that aren’t adequately trained. The result? Delays. Inconsistency. Confusion. Sometimes, the best proposal gets dismissed due to misunderstanding or lack of context. Clarification questions should be encouraged, not feared. Probity doesn’t mean silence; it means fairness. If a bid has merit but raises questions, ask. The alternative is rejecting a potentially great partner based on an avoidable ambiguity.
From the firm side: What it’s like responding
Here’s what happens inside a firm when a tender hits the inbox.
Step one is the “go/no-go” decision. Do we have the capacity? The right experience? Can we win? If the requirements are vague, if the timelines are tight, or if the opportunity feels rushed or misaligned, we may opt out, no matter how good a fit we might be.
Step two is developing a bespoke methodology, a clear delivery plan, and a realistic cost estimate. But if time is limited, we’re forced to reuse generic content. That’s not in our interest and it’s not in yours.
Worst of all, poor documentation means we must price for unknowns. A vague reference to “stakeholder engagement” could mean five interviews, or 500. The risk gets priced in. Clearer scopes lead to sharper pricing. Everyone wins.
Feedback is a gift
After submitting a bid, we wait. Timely evaluations are important for both the agency and the firm because they help to ensure key personnel remain available and that the project timeline remains on track.
Firms understand that they won’t win every bid. When we are unsuccessful, we want honest, constructive feedback. Feedback helps us to improve our next bid and builds a stronger market.
Procurement doesn’t need to be complex. It just needs to be thoughtful.
Define your needs clearly. Publish quality documentation. Allow time. Train your evaluators. Ask questions. Give feedback. Each step matters. Each step builds trust, transparency, and value for money, which, ultimately, is the whole point of public sector procurement.
Get this right, and everyone benefits: taxpayers, agencies, and firms.
In this article Andrew and Mitchell explore and summarise the insights raised in a discussion they presented at The Day Out, an annual professional development day for public sector employees hosted by SPA Australia. The topic was around Sitting on the other side of the fence: What’s it like to be a tenderer. To watch the full conversation, the webinar can be accessed here.
