Back in 2018, Dame Judith Hackitt pointed out that procurement sets the tone of an entire construction project. If a client procures with a focus on lowest price, she argued, the ensuing relationship is likely to result in mistrust, disputes and poor quality and safety outcomes.

Ask any public sector client and they will swear blind that they don’t procure on a lowest-cost basis. Their tender documents include social value objectives, net zero aspirations, end-user engagement initiatives and digitisation requirements. They will also point to evaluation weightings that prioritise quality over price (“we never go lower than 60% quality/40% price”).

Unfortunately, they are missing the point and are still likely to be creating a “race to the bottom” on price. This is because it is how price is evaluated – not how much weight it is given – that shapes bidders’ behaviour and ultimately sets the price. If the lowest price tendered will earn the highest marks available, then the only way the tender price is going is down.

But why is this an issue? Surely clients should be getting the best possible quality at the leanest possible price? It is, after all, taxpayers or leaseholders money they are spending.