Public sector tendering has a somewhat mixed reputation in the industry. On one hand, it provides work and, depending on the framework or contract in question, kudos for those who are selected. But by all accounts the process can be a nightmare, with hugely complex pre-qualification questionnaires and demands for documents or mission statements that are relevant to no-one but the biggest companies.
This week's launch of a tender process for the Department for Children, Scheels and Families therefore obviously caught my eye. The department is, as we report today, looking for a consortium of printers, or a single big printer, or a print management company, to provide a full range of print for the next eight years. The department spends around £17m on print every year already - this could go up or down during the life of the contract.
None of this makes life easy for the SME printer. Few would be big enough themselves to get involved in a consortium with the scale to challenge for a tender like this. SMEs may get some work through print management companies, should one of them win this tender. But I suspect that this will be another tender process which excludes the little guy.
That said, the DCSF's thinking is logical - as a department, it wants a single access point to its print supplier, which through streamlining the procurement process will reduce costs and, presumably, increase speed of turnaround. It's interesting to note that this single point of contact is exactly what many of the big print groups, such as Adare and St Ives, have been working hard to create over the last couple of years. This is obviously what the big clients want.
It's surprising, too, that the DCSF has opted not to use the pan-government print framework that was set up last year, with some fanfare, by the Office of Government Commerce. The reason given was that the DCSF felt the OGC's framework didn't provide the necessary scope of services. This may be true, but I wonder if the point about the single contact point for the client was a more important factor.
I find it hard to imagine this work going to anyone other than a print management company, and one of the big ones at that. That's not necessarily a bad thing (although I know there are some pretty strong view points for and against in the industry). In these cut-throat times, it's hard to see a real consortium of printers coming together to bid for this work. But, as always, I'm prepared to be proved wrong. And if a group of independent print firms got together and won this contract, it would be a great positive news story for the industry.