When tenders come back, the temptation is to look straight at the bottom line. Who’s cheapest?
But in construction, the lowest price is rarely the best value. More often than not, the contractor who comes in well below the cost plan is the one who has missed the most from their bid – and that creates a serious risk of underperformance, disputes, or even insolvency.
RICS guidance is clear: tender evaluation should focus on transparency, compliance, and whole-life value – not just the initial cost. To achieve that, we need to interrogate tender returns properly as part of a rigorous process.
Single Focus on Price = Higher Risk
Bids judged only on price often lead to surprises later:
- Missing scope items surface once construction is underway.
- Risk allowances prove inadequate.
- Contractors under pressure look to claw back margin through variations.
The result? The client pays anyway – just later, with added cost and potential delays.
Why Error Checking Matters
Even the most professional contractors can make mistakes in their submissions. Without careful error checking, these can pass unnoticed until it’s too late.
We recently worked on a 50,000 sq ft shell & core refurbishment where one tender came back noticeably lower than both the cost plan and the other bids. Line-by-line checking revealed that M&E items were underpriced. On closer questioning, we discovered the pricing was incomplete. We gave the contractor the chance to amend and resubmit to confirm compliance – avoiding a situation where a non-viable bid might otherwise have been accepted.
This illustrates why robust error checking isn’t just best practice – it’s essential to protecting both the client and the contractor.
What A Good Tender Evaluation Looks Like
A best practice tender evaluation goes far beyond cost. It tests compliance, capability, and commercial clarity at every level. A balanced scoring matrix should cover:
- Rates and Scope – Are they benchmarked, realistic, and spec compliant? What’s missing? What assumptions have been made?
- Programme & Logistics – Is the programme realistic? Have site constraints been properly factored in?
- Supply Chain Strength – Which trades are proposed, and are they financially stable?
- Experience – Has the team completed this type of project before?
- Risk Management – Have risks been identified and priced? How will changes be managed?
- Sustainability & Social Value – What’s the approach to carbon, waste, and community impact?
- Financial Stability – Can the contractor withstand market pressures without undue risk of insolvency?
- Collaboration & Team Fit – Will they integrate with the client and consultants? Do they share the culture and values needed for delivery?
- Commercial Transparency – Are preliminaries, OH&P, and risk allowances clear and appropriate and have lump sums been broken down?
- References – What do their previous clients say about the team and the organisation?
When all of this is assessed together, the picture becomes clear: cost is still important, but it’s only one part of the equation.
The Takeaway
Tendering isn’t about finding the cheapest contractor. It’s about finding the right contractor at the right price – the one who can deliver on time, to specification, and with the financial resilience to see the project through.
Best-in-class tender evaluation means:
- Rigorous error checking, line by line
- Scope and compliance tested against design and benchmarks
- Programme, risk, and sustainability properly assessed
- Team, supply chain, and commercial terms scrutinised in detail
- Potential risks highlighted, with advice given on how to mitigate them
- An audit trail for how you got to the decision
Handled this way, tendering doesn’t just select a contractor – it sets up the project for success.