Bid Specs & Tech Specs – What’s the Difference?

  Bid specifications. The mere mention of those two words can send shudders down the spine of anyone who has ever been asked to create them. The process evokes thoughts of legalese, minimum acceptability, standards compliance and committees that...


  Bid specifications. The mere mention of those two words can send shudders down the spine of anyone who has ever been asked to create them. The process evokes thoughts of legalese, minimum acceptability, standards compliance and committees that can’t agree. And, once the pain of that...


To access the remainder of this piece of premium content, you must be registered with Firehouse. Already have an account? Login

Register in seconds by connecting with your preferred Social Network.

OR

Complete the registration form.

Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required

This trend of relying on technical specifications has its drawbacks. The fire service has unwittingly transferred some of the decision-making process to the manufacturers. In turn, manufacturers, in their zeal to print or produce a differentiable technical specification sheet, have included more technical details than anyone can hope to understand and in some cases these technical specifications are actually wrong. I am aware of several times in the past year when a fire department produced a technical specification that it did not understand and ruled a product non-compliant, but when protested, could not explain why the product was non-compliant and ultimately had to accept a product it did not want.

What if I submitted an axe that met the above specifications only, 120 ounces of the allowed weight was in the handle (leaving only eight ounces in the head) and the head was made of injection-molded plastic as was the handle (non-conductive). That would not be an axe that I want to carry; however, it would meet the spec.

A Better Way?

The trend toward technical specification has generally been driven by concerns about running a proper and responsible purchasing program. When departments began to lose the needs-and-wants arguments, they resorted to technical facts and figures. Many felt that facts and figures made for an easy evaluation and easy determination of compliance; however, the issue is coming full circle. With tight budgets, many purchasing departments are becoming intimately involved in the selection process. With fewer opportunities around, some manufacturers have gotten adept at navigating and leveraging the rules and protest processes of purchasing programs. I am even aware of a manufacturer that convinced a purchasing protest board that the fire department did not need a feature it was requesting and secured the low-bid position.

There is a better way. In the interest of full-circle, why not go back to the wants and needs, but include the “why”? Take the time, within the specification, to briefly explain why this want or need is important. What role will it play? How can it help? Tell people why it is important. A purchaser can better understand the justification and a manufacturer who might otherwise seek to exploit the bid process would have to create an argument that your “why” is unjustified. That’s a lot harder to do in advance rather than after the fact in a protest procedure. Take the time to tell anyone who reads the specification why you need that particular feature.

I had a recent request to change the molded color of a hard-sided case. Such a request can cost a manufacturer additional money since it is not a normally-purchased item. But the customer explained that it carries the thermal imager in a compartment with a lot of other equipment and wants to be able to easily and immediately tell it apart from the other cases. On the surface, the request seems difficult, time consuming and costly; however, provided a half-sentence explanation, it sounds reasonable and necessary.

A large metropolitan department recently did exactly this. It produced a specification that detailed the features, functions, wants and needs, and included the whys. When I attended the pre-bid conference, the chief in charge of the selection committee, the committee head and the purchaser all explained exactly what they wanted. The purchaser was even able to explain why a feature was necessary and exhibited an intimate level of knowledge of the department’s desires. This led to a straightforward, take-no-bull approach. They knew what they wanted and that’s what they were going to purchase. No ambiguity. It was refreshing.

Conclusion

As you think about your next bid specification, think about what you really want to do. Is that need or want best described using a technical spec or a why statement? Both have their place, but reliance on a straight technical specification can lead you astray.

How many of you remember when buying a computer meant selecting the speed and manufacturer of the processor, how much cache memory versus RAM memory versus storage memory? Today, you are more likely to purchase a PC for gaming, or for business, or for personal use, because, in the end, it always comes back to why.

Why are you making this purchase? What are you trying to fix, accomplish or avoid? Whatever the reason, you, the customer, ought to be able to get exactly what it is that you both need and want.