industry servey report on government ict procurement plolicy · industry survey report on...
TRANSCRIPT
Industry Surveyy Report on Government ICT Procurement Poolicy
survey was cco-organized by the Office of Mr. Sinn Chung Kai,
munications Asssociation of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Computeer Society, Hong
g Information TTechnology Federation, Hong Kong Wireleess Technology
stry Associationn, and Information and Software Industry Association. It
ed to consolidatee industry views on Government ICT procuremment policy and
ctively channel thhem to the Government.
survey was connducted during May to August in 2007, viaa questionnaire
ributed by (i) ooffice of Mr. Sin Chung Kai bi-weekly e-NNewsletter, (ii)
tation to SOA-QPPS contractors and subcontractors, (iii) invitaation emails by
nizers and ICT reelated organizations, (iv) winfax to ICT comppanies listed in
lic directories, (v)) online questionnaire.
questionnaire was divided into three sections: Sectioon A collected
kground informattion of the projects respondents’ had conduucted; Section B
cted respondentts’ general comments on Government ICT prrojects; Section
llected respondeents’ comments on possible policy suggestionns.
tal of 31 compleeted questionnaires were received. Responddents were ICT
orations who hhad been participated in Government ICCT projects as
tractors or subcoontractors. Given the limited number of GGovernment ICT
ects per year, thiss pool of respondents represents a significannt proportion of
s among the induustry.
Report on
1. The o
Com ociation of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Computer Society, Hong
Kon echnology Federation,
Indu
aim industry views on Government ICT procurement policy and
effe em to the Government.
2. The ducted during May to August in 2007, via
dist ffice of Mr. Sin Chung
invi S contractors and subcontractors
orga lated organizations
pub online
3. The was divided into three sections: Section A collected
bac ion of the projects respondents
colle s
C co nts
4. A to ted
corp ad been participated in Government ICT projects as
con ntractors
proj pool of respondents represents
view stry.
Section A – Project background information
1. Total value of the contract
Q. What was the total value of the contract
HKD$1.3-10
million
31%
>HKD$10
million
21%
Industry Surve licy
The survey was Chung Kai,
Communications As r Society, Hong
Kong Information ss Technology
Industry Associatio Association
aimed to consolidat ent policy and
effectively channel t
he survey was co
distributed by (i) ewsletter, (ii)
Q tion emails by
organizers and ICT r anies listed in
, (v
ire n A collected
background informa cted; Section B
collected responden ojects; Section
C collected respond s.
compl ents were ICT
corporations who T projects as
contractors or subc overnment ICT
year, thi t proportion of
views among the ind
Project background information
Total value of the contract
the total value of the contract?
≦HKD$1.3
million
48%10
No. of respondents: 29
1
Government ICT Procurement P
ffice of Mr. Si
Communications Association of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Comput
Wirel
y
aimed to consolidate industry views on Government ICT procure
he survey was conducted during May to August in 2007, vi
nvit
infax to ICT com
ire was divided into three sections: Secti
had cond
general comments on Government ICT p
policy suggestio
Respon
corporations who had been participated in Government I
. Given the limited number of
a significa
2
2. Types of contract
Q. What type of contract was it? Percentage
Open Tender 61%
SOA-QPS 26%
ITPSA 13%
No. of respondents: 31
SOA-QPS contract category
Q. Which category of service did this contract belong to? Percentage
Implementation & full system development life cycle
services
38%
On-going services 25%
Information security services on an as and when required
basis
25%
Pre-implementation & independent programme / project
management services
13%
No. of respondents: 8
ITPSA contract category
Q. Which category of service did this contract belong to? Percentage
General system development and maintenance services 75%
IT security services 25%
No. of respondents: 4
3. Channels to learn about the opening of this tender
Q. Through which channel(s) did you learn about the
opening of this tender?
Percentage
Invitation by the Gov’t 59%
Gov’t Logistics Department Electronic Tendering System 31%
Others 9%
No. of respondents: 32
4. Time provided to consider the tender
Q. How much time was provided for you to consider the
5. Time provided to prepare technical demonstration
Q. How much time is provided for the preparation of technical demonstration?
1-3 months
37%
3% 23%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient time was provided for you to
Strongly Disagree
2 weeks 1-3
months
7%
Demonstr
ation not
required
33%
Time provided to consider the tender
Q. How much time was provided for you to consider the tender?
provided to prepare technical demonstration
Q. How much time is provided for the preparation of technical demonstration?
1-2 weeks
27%
2 weeks- 1
month
36%
3 months
No. of respondents: 30
48% 26%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient time was provided for you to
consider the tender?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
Less than
1 week
3%1-2
weeks
23%
2 weeks -
1 month
34%
No. of respondents: 30
3
Q. How much time is provided for the preparation of technical demonstration?
26%
100%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient time was provided for you to
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
6.
7. Tender enquiries
100% respondents were provided with formal channel for
(No. of respondents: 31)
Q. Have you made any enquiries on the tender
requirement?
Yes
No
15%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient time was provided for you to
(Question only available to contracts required demonstration)
Strongly Disagree
6% 32%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that the user requirement is clear and
Strongly Disagree
100% respondents were provided with formal channel for enquiries
Q. Have you made any enquiries on the tender Percentage
70%
30%
No. of respondents: 30
30% 40%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient time was provided for you to
prepare for technical demonstration?(Question only available to contracts required demonstration)
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 20
32% 32% 23%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that the user requirement is clear and
specific?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
4
enquiries.
No. of respondents: 30
15%
100%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient time was provided for you to
(Question only available to contracts required demonstration)
No Comment
No. of respondents: 20
6%
100%
Q. Do you agree that the user requirement is clear and
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
8. Contractor’s liability
Q. Did the contract include terms that
limited contractor’s liability?
No
Yes
9. Out-of-scope task
Q. Have you been assigned with
out-of-scope task of the contract?
Yes
No
1-2 weeks
33%
1-3 months
5%
Q. What was the average turn around time for user department to
reply your enquiries on tender requirement of this project?
Total liability
except third
party loss and
damages to
intellectual
property
42%
Others
8%
Q. What kind of liability did the contract limit?(Question only available to contracts with liability limited)
Q. Did the contract include terms that
s liability?
Percentage
56%
44%
No. of respondents: 27
Q. Have you been assigned with
scope task of the contract?
Percentage
50%
50%
No. of respondents: 30
Less than 1
week
62%
the average turn around time for user department to
reply your enquiries on tender requirement of this project?
No. of respondents: 21
Indirect or
consequential
damages to
the Gov't
50%
Q. What kind of liability did the contract limit?(Question only available to contracts with liability limited)
No. of respondents: 12
5
the average turn around time for user department to
10. Resources devoted to documentation
Q. How much resources were devoted to documentation?
Contractor
initiated offer
20%
Based on rate
specified on
contract
13%
Cost absorbed
by vendor
13%
Others
Q. How was the remuneration for out
(Question only available to contracts with out
13% 16%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that the remuneration for out
Strongly Disagree
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0%
Pe
rce
nt
of
resp
on
de
nts
Man
Resources devoted to documentation
Q. How much resources were devoted to documentation?
According to
market
prevailing rate
40%
Gov't initiated
offer
7%
Contractor
initiated offer
Others
7%
Q. How was the remuneration for out-of-scope tasks
being arranged?(Question only available to contracts with out-of-scope tasks)
No. of respondents: 15
42% 6%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that the remuneration for out-of-scope task
acceptable?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents:
20% 40% 60% 80%
Percentage of total man-days of work
Man-days of work devoted to documentation
No. of respondents: 25
6
No. of respondents: 15
23%
100%
scope task
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
100%
No. of respondents: 25
11. Profit margin
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0%
Pe
rce
nt
of
resp
on
de
nts
Total operating expenses devoted to documentation
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0%
Pe
rce
nt
ofv
resp
on
de
nts
Project duration devoted to documentation
29%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that the profit margin of Government
contracts matched similar contracts in the private sector?
Strongly Disagree
20% 40% 60% 80%
Percentage of total operating expenses
Total operating expenses devoted to documentation
No. of respondents: 20
20% 40% 60% 80%
Percentage of project duration
Project duration devoted to documentation
No. of respondents:
42% 29%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that the profit margin of Government
contracts matched similar contracts in the private sector?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
7
100%
Total operating expenses devoted to documentation
No. of respondents: 20
100%
No. of respondents: 22
29%
100%
Q. Do you agree that the profit margin of Government
contracts matched similar contracts in the private sector?
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
8
12. Length of period before receiving full payment
Q. When did you obtain full payment after the
completion of project?
Percentage
Within 1 month 13%
1-3 months 47%
3-6 months 20%
6-12 months 10%
More than 18 months 10%
No. of respondents: 30
Section B – General comments on Gov
Selection criteria
1. Innovativeness for SOA
2. SOA-QPS contracts selection criteria ratio
Q. What is the ratio of different selection criteria for SOA
consider appropriate?
16%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
innovativeness for SOA
Strongly Disagree
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0%
Pe
rce
nt
of
resp
on
de
nts
Appropriate ratio of price in selection criteria
General comments on Gov’t ICT projects
for SOA-QPS
QPS contracts selection criteria ratio
Q. What is the ratio of different selection criteria for SOA-QPS contracts do you
consider appropriate?
23% 32% 29%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
innovativeness for SOA-QPS tender contracts?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
20% 40% 60% 80%
Ratio of price in selection criteria
Appropriate ratio of price in selection criteria
No. of respondents: 20
9
contracts do you
29%
100%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
100%
No. of respondents: 20
Others suggested selection criteria from respondents include technical
competency, solution quality, experience & qualification, and company profile.
3. Technical competency for open tender
4. Innovativeness for open tender
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0%
Pe
rce
nt
of
resp
on
de
nts
Appropriate ratio of innovativeness in selection criteria
10% 32%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
technical competency for open tender contracts?
Strongly Disagree
13%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
innovativeness for open tender contracts?
Strongly Disagree
Others suggested selection criteria from respondents include technical
competency, solution quality, experience & qualification, and company profile.
Technical competency for open tender
open tender
20% 40% 60% 80%
Ratio of innovativeness in selection criteria
Appropriate ratio of innovativeness in selection criteria
No. of respondents: 16
32% 26% 16%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
technical competency for open tender contracts?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
35% 32% 6%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
innovativeness for open tender contracts?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
10
Others suggested selection criteria from respondents include technical
competency, solution quality, experience & qualification, and company profile.
100%
Appropriate ratio of innovativeness in selection criteria
No. of respondents: 16
6% 10%
100%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
6% 13%
100%
Q. Do you agree that sufficient emphasis is placed on bidders'
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
11
5. Open tender contracts selection criteria ratio
Q. What is the ratio of different selection criteria for open tender contracts do
you consider appropriate?
Others suggested selection criteria from respondents include technical
competency, solution quality, experience & qualification, and company profile.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Pe
rce
nt
of
resp
on
de
nts
Ratio of price in selection criteria
Appropriate ratio of price in selection criteria
No. of respondents: 24
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Pe
rce
nt
of
resp
on
de
nts
Ratio of innovativeness in selection criteria
Appropriate ratio of innovativeness in selection criteria
No. of respondents: 19
6. Fair tendering requirement
Unlimited liability regime
7. Q. Do you agree that the current liability regime
6% 23%
0% 20%
Q. Do you agree that the tendering requirements are fair to all
Strongly Disagree
3%
23%
6%
6%
29%
35%
39%
0% 20%
Strongly Disagree
deters you from participating in Gov't
creates burden in your capital
prevents contractors from supplying innovative
Fair tendering requirements
Q. Do you agree that the current liability regime…
42% 23%
40% 60% 80%
Q. Do you agree that the tendering requirements are fair to all
bidders in Government contracts?
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
19%
29%
45%
39%
26%
35%
26%
35%
29%
29%
40% 60% 80%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree No Comment
deters you from participating in Gov't ICT contracts?
matches risk profile of Gov't ICT contracts?
creates burden in your capital provisioning?
prevents contractors from supplying innovative
solutions to the Government?
No. of respondents: 31
12
3%3%
100%
Q. Do you agree that the tendering requirements are fair to all
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
10%
29%
29%
3%
100%
No Comment
No. of respondents: 31
Section C – Policy suggestions
1. Highest priority to see a change in
Q. Which area would you like to see a change in policy the most?
2. Highest priority on reforming the liability regime
Q. Which area would you suggest on
reforming the liability regime the most?
Capping indirect and consequential
liabilities
Carrying out risk assessment exercises
before determining liabilities
Negotiations with contractors to determine
liabilities
3. Highest priority on improving the selection criteria
Q. Which area would you
improving the selection criteria the most?
Maintaining a fair and competitive
tendering environment
More emphasis on technical competency
Others
Selection
criteria
31%
Tendering
process
17%
Payment
arrangements
4%
Policy suggestions
Highest priority to see a change in policy
Which area would you like to see a change in policy the most?
Highest priority on reforming the liability regime
area would you suggest on
reforming the liability regime the most?
Percentage
Capping indirect and consequential 50%
arrying out risk assessment exercises
before determining liabilities
32%
Negotiations with contractors to determine 18%
No. of respondents: 22
Highest priority on improving the selection criteria
Q. Which area would you suggest on
improving the selection criteria the most?
Percentage
Maintaining a fair and competitive
tendering environment
54%
More emphasis on technical competency 42%
4%
No. of respondents: 23
Unlimited
liability
regime
48%
No. of respondents: 23
13
No. of respondents: 22
14
4. Highest priority on changing the payment arrangements
Q. Which area would you suggest on
changing the payment arrangements the
most?
Percentage
Satisfactory requirement should be based
on objective targets
43%
Remuneration for out-of-scope tasks
should be based on market prevailing rate
or commercial negotiations
38%
Minimizing delay in payment 10%
Others 10%
No. of respondents: 21
5. Highest priority on improving the tendering process
Q. Which area would you suggest on
improving the tendering process the most?
Percentage
Providing bidders sufficient time to prepare
technical demonstration
50%
Assertively notifying potential bidders
about new tenders
21%
To be more responsive to bidders’
enquiries
17%
Others 13%
No. of respondents: 24