Quarter-End Laptop Quotes with Hospitality Attached
You are a procurement officer at a district council. The field services team needs 60 rugged laptops before the new inspection season. The approved budget is £48,000. Three quotations arrive. Supplier A quotes £46,200, delivery in four weeks, two-year warranty, and offers a free executive hospitality day at a golf event if the purchase order is raised by 30 June. Supplier B quotes £47,800, delivery in three weeks, three-year warranty, is a local small business, and provides carbon reporting. Supplier C quotes £49,500, which exceeds budget, but includes a five-year warranty and on-site repair. Supplier A has been late on two of its last five deliveries. Finance is pressing for commitment before year-end. Council policy says hospitality over £50 must be declared and refused, value for money must consider whole-life cost and risk, and local SMEs should be considered where proportionate. The category manager is on leave and has asked you to recommend a supplier.
1. Identify the ethical and procurement-principle issues raised by the three quotations.
Read the worked answer
Reasoning:
- The hospitality offer is not a neutral gift. It is linked to a specific purchasing decision and a deadline, so it creates a conflict of interest and could breach the council's anti-bribery and gifts policy. It must be declared and refused, and the offer should not be scored in Supplier A's favour.
- The policy does not require lowest price. It requires value for money, which means comparing whole-life cost, delivery risk, warranty, support and sustainability. Price alone would favour A, but A's two late deliveries in five show performance risk.
- Fair treatment means all suppliers should be assessed against the same published criteria. Supplier B's local SME status and carbon reporting can be considered only if the council's procurement strategy allows it and it is proportionate and documented.
- Finance's year-end pressure is a commercial pressure, not a reason to skip due diligence or accept an inducement.
2. Evaluate the three quotations against value for money and risk, not just price.
Read the worked answer
Evaluation:
- Supplier A: lowest capital cost at £46,200, but only a two-year warranty and a poor delivery record. A late laptop rollout could cost field-team productivity. The hospitality offer must be excluded from evaluation. If A is chosen, require a delivery plan and consider liquidated damages.
- Supplier B: £1,600 more than A, but delivers a week earlier, gives a three-year warranty, is local and provides carbon data. The extra cost may be offset by lower delivery risk and longer cover. This is a strong value-for-money case if the specification is met.
- Supplier C: £49,500 is over budget by £1,500. It has the strongest warranty and repair support, but the council cannot assume the budget can be exceeded. First clarify whether the budget is fixed and whether C can sharpen its price or remove non-essential options.
- A weighted score should be used, for example price 40%, delivery 20%, warranty 15%, sustainability 15%, risk 10%. The weights must reflect the requirement, not be chosen after seeing the bids.
3. Recommend a course of action and explain what you would document before raising a PO.
Read the worked answer
Recommendation:
- Declare and decline the hospitality offer in writing; record it in the gifts register and inform the supplier that it will not affect evaluation.
- Seek confirmation that £48,000 is a hard budget. If it is, ask Supplier C for a compliant best and final offer within budget, and ask Supplier B to confirm the three-week delivery and warranty terms.
- On current evidence, recommend Supplier B, subject to a satisfactory specification check and reference on delivery performance. It offers the best balance of price, delivery, warranty, local economic benefit and lower performance risk. If C can meet budget, compare C and B on whole-life cost before deciding.
- Document the evaluation criteria, scores, the hospitality declaration, the budget constraint and the reason for rejecting A despite its lower price. Give unsuccessful suppliers a factual debrief. Do not raise a PO until the budget holder has approved the recommendation.