We take a lot of care in the tenders we run. It may not be the most exciting part of building management on the surface, but for many of our clients it has made a very real difference; not just in the way their maintenance contracts are run, but in the level of cost they are carrying.

The process normally begins when a client identifies an issue. This could be a change in service provider, concerns with performance, or the need to replace a system or piece of plant. From there, we work with the client to define the requirement clearly. This is then translated into a specification that reflects the actual building and its needs, alongside a detailed pricing document issued to a selection of pre-qualified contractors.

 

That pre-qualification is an important part of the process. Contractors are not simply invited on price alone. They are assessed on their experience, technical competence, insurance position, and track record on similar buildings. We also review the qualifications and structure of the team that would be responsible for delivery. The intention is to ensure that any pricing received is based on a credible and capable service provider.

 

The tender itself is managed through to completion, including clarifications, interviews, and the preparation of a summary report with a clear recommendation. The client is then in a position to make a decision based on both cost and quality, rather than one or the other, with full visibility of how each option compares.

 

One of the more significant areas of value often sits within the contract terms themselves. It is not unusual to see contracts issued by service providers which are weighted in their favour – for example, long tie-in periods or financial exposure if a client wishes to terminate early, as well as provisions that allow for additional costs outside of the agreed contract sum. These are the types of provisions we take care to avoid.

 

Where appropriate, contracts are either drafted specifically to suit the building and its operation, or aligned with recognised industry forms such as JCT, so that terms are clear and structured. Contracts should ultimately protect the client’s position and reflect a fair arrangement rather than a one-sided obligation.

The benefits of maintenance tenders

From a financial perspective, the outcome of this process can be quite noticeable. Across five tenders we have carried out so far this year, we have seen an average saving of around 32% when compared with existing contract values. This is not necessarily an indication that contractors are overcharging, but more often that the scope of maintenance has not been regularly challenged or adjusted. In some cases, clients are simply paying for more than they need, or paying for a level of service that is no longer aligned with how the building operates.

 

Our role is to step in, sense-check that scope, and ensure that the level of maintenance aligns with the building as it actually operates. When that alignment is achieved, the cost position tends to follow, and the contract becomes easier to manage on a day-to-day basis.

 

As a general guide, service contracts should be reviewed periodically. Around the three-year mark is typically where we start to see value in retendering. Equally, if equipment is becoming unreliable or there are ongoing concerns with service delivery, it is usually worth taking a step back and reassessing the position properly.