Prequal Duplication

The intent of completing a contractor prequalification, is to simplify the vetting process. Should a subcontractor have a current prequalification, via a reputable scheme, we should be able to place a level of reliance on this to support that they have a useful health and safety framework.

We are very clear that prequals are a desktop audit where businesses will only ever provide the best evidence to answer a question. No one will submit evidence knowingly that does not pass, so a prequal should be the start of the process. Once vetted, the actual work begins with contractors.

Today’s blog is not about what happens next, it questions those requiring prequals who ignore the intent of the prequal. Scenarios I am sure that will resonate include:

• Resubmit again and again

You have Tōtika ‘performing’ or even ISO45001, but you are still required to submit lots of Health and Safety related evidence via a tender…even though it asks if you have a prequal.

• Tender documents that still ask for the ACC WSMP.

This framework stopped accepting new audits from 1 April 2017 and finished up on 31 March 2019. Not only that but it does not exist under the ACC self-insurance model either.

• Tender documents that ask for ACC certificates.

This typically comes from Australia companies who require WorkersComp certificates which we do not have in NZ. ACC is automatic in that ACC gets the relevant information direct from the IRD. In Australia, it is provided by the employer.

• Preferential treatment

Where tenders or clients push a particular prequal platform ignoring that there are better suited solutions i.e. ask for Sitewise when you have Tōtika; or ask for SHE or Impac when you have Tōtika.

No doubt you can add your own experiences to this list; however, my concern is that in all these situations these factors make a mockery of the prequal process. To be fair, it is often due to innocent enough means where the client (tier 1 contractor, large corporate / government agency) perhaps does not fully understand or know what they need to do. We can argue that all of these organisations should know, however, let’s not make that assumption. Size does not mean competence.

Rather, it tends to mean there is a tick box framework where various parts must be satisfied, regardless of relevance (aka asking for WSMP information). 

As a consultancy, we spend quite a bit of time supporting our clients in managing the prequal requirements with their clients. And yes, we do push back regarding the above bullet points. Push back doesn't always constitute an aggressive approach, rather it tends to be more educational.

Typically, if our client has already achieved Tōtika, we do not end up submitting a substantial quantity of more evidence. Rather, through educating on the relevance of Tōtika, we subsequently achieve acceptance of this prequal without needing to submit any more information.

It does have to be said that the level of pushback does depend on the level of the prequal. For instance, with Sitewise we do not tend to push back as the credibility factor of a prequal is not the same as that for Tōtika or ISO45001. Mind you, we typically do not use or encourage Sitewise unless our client specifically wants it.

We provide our clients with a Tender Pack that asks for the typical information required for tenders. We set out what prequal is in place (provide the certificate to support); share the methodology of how risk, competency, contractors, incidents, etc. are managed; share the typical and somewhat meaningless stats around LTI's, TRIFR, etc. that are asked for; and provide copies of the insurance certificates. A simple yet powerful 4-page document that gets attached to the tender. In the tender, we outright state 'Refer to attached Tender Pack'. This is a simple and effective way to have a consistent response.

Our collective duty is to consult, cooperate and coordinate (the 3 C’s). To date, we have not met any great resistance to this and in most cases, it has been met with positive response.  In conclusion, the tender pack works. It is ok to push back. It is ok to ask for clarification.