Why is the pen still mightier?

Only 7% of QSs are both sending and receiving tender documents purely electronically, the RICS has found.

A survey from the RICS' QS and construction faculty found poor take-up of e-tendering within the profession, despite an understanding by practitioners that using it improves the tendering process.

Of the 300 QS directors and partners quizzed by the BCIS, the RICS' costing arm, only 19% sent and received electronic documents in addition to paper copies and the vast majority of respondents, around two thirds, still used paper only.

Some estimators still cannot operate a computer

Survey respondent

The survey found little evidence that clients were pushing for a move to e-tendering, with only 10% of respondents saying they were required to tender electronically, a further 38% said they had been asked rarely and 52% said they had never been asked.

Those surveyed did agree that e-tendering would create more efficient tendering. Nearly 90% agreed that going digital would lower administration costs by cutting down on printing, copying and distribution. Three quarters felt e-tendering would reduce the effort to analyse tenders and two thirds that it could reduce the time needed for tendering.

The survey did show a worrying reliance on email as a means of distribution of tender documents. Nearly two-thirds (64%) used the medium, despite the fact that RICS guidance on e-tendering advises against it. In the guide, published last October, the RICS lists seven disadvantages to e-tendering by email, which include: potential security issues; lack of inherent version and revision control; the limits to the sizes of files that can be sent; and legal ambiguity concerning receipt of documents.

I hope QS/PMs and their client organisations embrace this aspect of project procurement as it will improve their bottom line

Survey respondent

The BCIS survey found 29% of respondents used a disk for sending documents and only 7% sent documents via a web portal. Respondents blamed the lack of use of industry portals down to the costs involved and to contractors lacking computer technology/knowledge. One respondent claimed that "some estimators still cannot operate a computer", while another said they were "too close to retirement and have only just stopped using a quill pen". Concerns were also raised about the security of portals.

BCIS director Joe Martin pointed to positive results from the survey, such as the degree of interest in the subject. Nearly a third quizzed had read the guidance document and 64% said they would be prepared to use a tendering portal if the costs were similar to the cost of preparing and distributing hard copy tenders.

The survey was summed up by the comment: "The e-tendering Guidance Note is a point in the right direction for implementing the e-initiative. I hope QS/PMs and their client organisations embrace this aspect of project procurement as it will improve their bottom line."