Print this page

Having drawn up the specifications and reply form, and determined the procedures for selecting/excluding tenderers, the entity is now in a position to undertake the comparative analysis that will result in the selection of the economically most advantageous offer.

At this stage, EFFAT and FERCO recommend that each tenderer be given an opportunity to make an oral presentation of their offer. In addition to allowing any necessary explanation and clarification, such a step provides an opportunity to enrich the tender process and better understand the written submission. It also allows the entity to meet with the catering company representatives, which is essential when considering offers with similar price points given that this is a service industry in which staffing makes all the difference.

An example of a comparative analysis of offers is provided below to illustrate the methodology recommended in this guide. This purely theoretical example covers the three stages required to select the economically most advantageous offer :

1. Comparative analysis of technical offer

The entity will now note the degree of conformity of each of the criteria, according to the points system they selected.

Note: a comparative analysis is obviously undertaken on an offer-by-offer basis (i.e. in a “vertical” manner in the tables that follow) but a second “horizontal” reading makes it possible to see show the qualitative differences between tenderers.

The example shows an overall score that varies according to the degree of conformity of the offer with the qualitative expectations of the entity:

The technical offer of tenderer B obtains the best score, with 45 of the 60 available points.

2. Comparative analysis of financial offers

This comparative analysis is undertaken using the points system and the example given.

Note: this example looks at an analysis of financial offers in relation to the overall cost of the service, including investment impact.

Table 21 : Example of points awarded to financial offers

Tenderer Number of points allocated to financial offers Price offer % difference compared with lowest offer Points awarded
to financial offer
A 40 1 000 000 € - 40
B 40 1 200 000 € 20% 32
C 40 1 300 000 € 30% 28

Tenderer A has the lowest financial offer, whereas its technical (qualitative) offer lies between those of its two competitors.

3. Consolidation of technical and financial comparative analyses to select the economically most advantageous offer

This last stage consists of combining the comparative analyses of the technical criteria with those of the financial criteria, based on the overall weighting provided to each  :

Table 22: Overall summary of analysis of technical and financial offers

  Tenderer A Tenderer B Tenderer C
Score obtained against technical criteria 34 45 32
Score obtained against financial criteria 40 32 28
Overall score : 74 77 60

In the above example tenderer B’s offer represents the best quality/cost compromise, making it the economically most advantageous offer, which would not have been the case had the authorities limited their analysis to financial criteria alone.

This example clearly shows the benefits of an approach that favours the overall merit of an offer, both in terms of price and quality, in other words, the most economically advantageous offer.

Content of this guide

With the financial support of the EU
Grant Agreement
VS/2004/0655 SI2.39852