Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.


Architects blast council over tender’s 70:30 weighting of cost over experience


Picking up on Robert Guy's comment, while the 70:30 price/quality balance sends a message as to the purchaser's expectations it is never the case that that ratio reflects the actual significance of one factor over another. As Robert Guy's comment highlights the real question is what is the expected range of marks that will be given for each of the different factors. Given that in most evaluation systems the quality marks will only very rarely go anywhere near zero, and given that the price formula used nearly always creates a very narrow range of scores, it is usually the case that the actual relative impact of price and quality is radically different from the notional maximum value for each factor.

Posted date

9 July, 2018

Posted time

10:11 am