Success means becoming in effect an approved supplier. Actually gaining business depends on whether subscribers to the framework require their staff to use it, whether one is successful in ‘mini-compete’ tendering exercises held within it, and whether a company can effectively market itself to the individual framework members.

The advantage is that, once on a framework, there should be a steady flow of business without the need continually to undertake costly tendering.

There is also, for the larger frameworks such as that operated by Buying Solutions for central government, an undoubted increase in reputation and brand awareness for a travel management company in being an approved supplier.

But why use frameworks at all? If a government department knows its travel requirement, why not appoint one TMC to handle it rather than go through the hoops of a framework?

A Buying Solutions spokesman explains: “Overall, framework agreements provide much easier and quicker access to public sector contracts for common goods and services.

“They provide the public sector with a convenient procurement vehicle that offers value for money, a choice of suppliers and compliance with UK and EU procurement legislation.

“By aggregating buying power and managing the procurement process we save our customers time and money.”

Buying Solutions’ frameworks are awarded after a tender process that seeks the most advantageous outcome taking into account price, quality, capacity and track record.

It admits there is no guarantee of any business, but believes there are also advantages to suppliers including removal of the need to respond to multiple OJEU advertisements, customer confidence that a framework supplier has already demonstrated value for money and quality, and standard contracting terms including for prompt payment.

All this may be true, but suppliers must bid when they have no idea how much, if any, business they will get, yet that quantity will determine costs and prices.

Buying Solutions’ spokesman says: “The indicative spend featured in the OJEU notice [for the framework] is based on extensive research and customer consultation to establish expected spend during the life of the framework agreement. However, this can be influenced by political and economic factors.”

There are clearly advantages and disadvantages for both clients and suppliers, and success with frameworks depends on seeking a judicious balance.

Nigel Turner, director of programme management for the UK and Ireland, at Carlson Wagonlit, says: “It is a lot of work to bid for these with no guarantee of business. There are pros and cons, but I do expect to see their use increase, as there will clearly be more moves towards central procurement.

“The challenge is that you are bidding for a virtual volume of business, and although it is quite a large volume you are not pricing against criteria as you would be with a normal contract.

“You have to have an economic model of what an ‘average’ customer in such a field might want.”

Turner says he has seen public sector frameworks where it was uneconomic to bid because “the scope of what is wanted does not make it viable and would not justify the time and expense”.

He can though see their attraction for clients, who having chosen their suppliers can “just call off someone from the framework or perhaps hold a mini-competition among suppliers on it”.

Redfern Travel’s commercial director Mark Bowers says public bodies are becoming more aware of framework contracts but have yet to “get the hang of mini-competes”.

These should be cheap and cheerful competitions between approved suppliers for parcels of work, but Bowers says he has known some government bodies use a full OJEU process for these even though all those bidding are already on the framework concerned.

Properly done, “I can respond to four mini-competes in a day if need be”, he says, but bids for inclusion on frameworks themselves can take between three and nine months for results, and Bowers knows of one from a public body where negotiations have gone for two years without conclusion.

He says to be effective for both clients and suppliers, use of a framework should be “100% mandated” by each member on its staff.

The reality is different. “Procurement officers try to find ways round it because if you have a framework that works, would you need so many of them?

“If a framework were mandated in the private sector and someone refused to use it they would lose their job, and quite rightly so, but that does not happen in the public sector.”

Mandating also concerns Steve Summers, chief operating officer of Key Travel, as once on a framework, suppliers have to invest in continued sales and marketing work to promote themselves to each of four layers of organisations, departments, bookers and travellers, since they compete both with other framework members and attempts by staff to buy elsewhere.

“The process chosen for any framework should be proportionate to the amount of control it exercises on the spend of the membership,” Summers says.

“Given the significant costs of responding to frameworks, and the competitive pricing expected in such a process, it would not be unreasonable for a supplier to expect a level of return, but volume or spend commitments rarely exist, if ever.”

He adds: “A TMC can create the biggest impact on spend when it operates in partnership with clients managing a controlled travel programme.

“This is not seen often enough in the public sector, although the new economic reality may now drive this change.”

Summers says frameworks can be extremely helpful where they consolidate the requirements of a large number of members that would be harder for a supplier to approach individually.

But in the public sector those member bodies can have different needs or objectives for travel management.

“Where those differ significantly, the final impact of the framework, measured by adoption, can be reduced significantly,” he says.

Summers says ultimately it is the appetite of an organisation to control travel spend that delivers value.

Gaining membership of a framework is, it seems, a means to an end for TMCs, rather than an end in its own right.

People who hold public purse strings will be looking for deals that offer good value and that help them to meet their efficiency targets.

And those parts of the public sector that never previously troubled to consolidate their travel spending will find themselves under pressure to do so.

Even with the impact of the current round of sending cuts, it’s worth remembering that central government, local government, the National Health Service, devolved administrations and quangos will remain huge organisations with a lot of money to spend.

Yet private firms can be deterred from bidding for public contracts by the perceived complexity of doing so. Lengthy processes and tender documents that demand information on everything short of the bidders’ inside leg measurement can be daunting, and appear unreasonably costly in terms of the management time needed to compete.

It is worth persevering though because the public sector has a massive advantage for suppliers – you get paid.

Invoices can go astray or be disputed like they can be anywhere else, but public bodies do not go bankrupt, delay payments due to cash flow problems, or abruptly vanish. Secure a public sector client and the payments are as guaranteed as they can be.

Steve Summers, chief operating officer of Key Travel, which deals with many public bodies, says: “It is difficult to generalise around such a diverse sector, which inevitably uses a variety of ways to buy travel. But it is largely true that customers in the public sector can be relied upon to pay, although fragmented approval processes can mean you have to wait a while for your money.

“Large aged debt can be a problem for a small supplier from any sector dealing in low margin goods/services and travel is no different.”

Vera Philippou, director of Delta Travel, which deals with a number of NHS bodies, agrees: “It is an advantage with public sector clients that you know you will get paid and they will not go out of business or disappear, and even if an invoice gets lost I know it will be paid eventually.”

She has though found bidding to the public sector a complicated process as “the pre-qualification questionnaires are often lengthy and sometimes hardly about travel.

“They instead ask about equal opportunities, environmental and health and safety policies.”

This approach is common, if a source of frustration to suppliers. It is driven in part by the normal desire of any client to know they are dealing with a supplier who is reputable and financially stable.

But the public sector will also wish to hold suppliers to the same standards by which it must operate.

For example, a public body’s reputation would be at risk if it used a supplier with a poor health and safety record, or one which disregarded environmental issues when public bodies themselves face targets for recycling and CO2 emission reductions.

Summers says: “It is right that any organisation wants to perform a level of due diligence on any proposed supplier, and of course there are European regulations that apply in most cases governing the process for such a tender process.

“There is an obligation on organisations, however, to ensure that the process they demand of suppliers is proportionate to the service being requested and that the process is not of a scale that it deters smaller organisations that may actually have the best solution for the client.”

Some tenders can absorb months of management time “something that the average TMC cannot support while at the same time fees are constantly being marginalised”, he notes.

A further hazard for bidders, Summers says, is the trend to use procurement consultants, “who are not necessarily audited or accredited, yet they are often given open access to run a lengthy tender process that requires suppliers to expose all of their intellectual property”.

“Again, one must balance the need for due diligence, which is the absolute right of the client, with the potential erosion of hard-fought differentials between TMCs, as the consultant moves onto the next job.”

Summers adds: “I certainly believe the industry would benefit from a code of conduct for travel procurement that encouraged clients to go deeper into the areas that matter and not to spend time disproportionately in areas that do not add value.”

So, what should those who want to win public sector business do to navigate this maze?

Paul Seddon, who advises clients on procurement for the consultancy
Expense Reduction Analysts, says: “Any TMC that is interested in becoming a preferred supplier to a public sector organisation needs to be reasonably well-informed about the processes of public sector procurement and to have a system to monitor for opportunities as they arise.”

Central government travel procurement is organised by Buying Solutions, on a framework contract which runs until March 2013.

The presence on this of suppliers NYS Corporate and Redfern Travel suggests, says Seddon, “that the door of even central government work is not closed to smaller TMCs, and getting on to the successor framework in 2012/13 is an obvious goal for an ambitious TMC that wants public sector business”.

More generally, he says, “public bodies welcome approaches from suppliers, so if you feel there should be an opportunity to do business with local authorities and the like in your region, then approach them as you would any prospective customer.

“If they have preferred supply arrangements, these will come up for renewal, competitively, so get your interest recorded.

“To equip yourself to win in competitive tender for public bodies, you need preparation. Very few win at their first attempt, so be prepared to work at it and also to get advice.”

Wendy Wills, managing director of the tendering consultancy Ways2Win,
advises: “Public sector tendering really does not have to be the black hole that it is perceived to be.

“As long as you are aware of the requirements and process then it can be seen as a ‘game’ that is full of strategy, risk and excitement.”
She points out that the thresholds at which public contracts must be advertised across the EU were lowered in January “meaning that far more opportunities will be publicly ‘up for grabs’ across Europe – helpful because there is more openness and accountability, unhelpful because there will be more competition”.

Tendering processes in the public sector will be either ‘open’ or ‘closed’, the difference being that in the latter there will be a pre qualification stage though which bidders must pass to be invited to tender.

Wendy Wills says: “The rules of the game have been designed by the EU so our local buyers have a huge task in front of them with every tender to abide by the complex legislative process, so they are not just being awkward when they get to the stage of inviting us to tender. Many are actually very helpful.

“There are more and more opportunities to freely meet with your local buyers that I would advocate just phone up your local procurement departments and ask.”

But what about the cuts? They could be both a threat, in that there will be less business around, and an opportunity in that the public sector will want help to find good value.

A spokeswoman for the Office of Government Commerce, now part of the Cabinet Office Efficiency and Reform Group, says: “Travel is likely to be one of the categories included in the new approach to centralisation of procurement of common categories of goods and services within central government.”

The ERG is looking at Whitehall spending of all kinds, with a brief to conduct centralised procurement for commodity goods and services to drive down prices, renegotiate contracts with major suppliers across government.

Steve Summers says: “There is clearly pressure being exerted on all manner of public sector and non-profit organisations to save money. In addition to staff headcount reductions, customers are reducing the overall travel miles, lowering the class of travel and adopting a more managed approach to the travel category.

“It is this last feature that will enable the TMC to add more value to its clients, helping them implement cost saving strategies and controls that bring real savings to bear, rather than using more draconian methods.”

The certainty of a public contract is worth having in economically turbulent times, but winning them is a matter of understanding the culture and requirements, keeping alert to opportunities, and keeping one’s spirits up when the questions asked seem onerous or pointless.