Still Bidding Like It’s 2024? 7 Ways the Procurement Act Has Made Your Old Habits Costly

If you’re still approaching public-sector tenders exactly as you did in 2024, you could be missing opportunities, underestimating the work involved in bidding and making commitments that are too difficult to deliver.

The Procurement Act 2023 came into force on 24 February 2025, meaning buyers now have more flexibility to design competitions, suppliers have greater visibility of upcoming opportunities, and contract performance faces greater transparency.

These changes affect how you find opportunities, plan your bids and follow through on what you promise.

But why does that mean you should change your approach?

Because waiting for the tender to appear could leave you competing against suppliers who have spent months preparing; budgeting for one written submission could leave you unprepared for demonstrations or negotiation stages; and making ambitious promises just to win marks could create delivery problems that become publicly visible.

I.e. your bid could now have a direct impact on your company's public reputation.‍

You don’t need to start from scratch, but you do need to recognise which old habits could now cost you time, money or your next contract.

Here are seven worth changing:

‍

1. Waiting Until the Tender Lands

If your first proper look at an opportunity happens when the tender goes live, you're probably already be behind.

The Act now requires authorities (expecting to pay more than £100 million under relevant contracts in the coming financial year) to publish pipeline information in advance - this covers all planned public contracts worth more than £2 million over an 18-month reporting period (exceptions apply, including private utilities and transferred Northern Ireland authorities).

This newfound visibility gives you time to collect references, assess delivery capacity and identify partners before the writing starts. You have to remember that pipeline dates can change, and publication does not guarantee a procurement will proceed.

What's the worst thing you can do?

Well, the most costly habit we see time and time again is treating advance notices as background noise, and then paying for rushed submissions.

What's the better approach?

Track relevant pipeline and market-engagement notices alongside live tenders (or pay for a professional service like BWS to do it for you) and use them to prepare evidence and make earlier bid/no-bid decisions.

‍

2. Treating Supplier Registration as Deadline-Day Admin

Knowing your usual tender portal does not mean you have everything ready.

The central digital platform (through Find a Tender) stores core supplier information. Authorities must obtain confirmation that suppliers have registered, submitted current and updated information and shared it through the platform at the required point. They can set an earlier deadline than the statutory latest point.

This is designed to reduce repetition - it works best when someone owns the information and keeps it current.

What's the worst thing you can do?

Discovering missing financial information, access problems or outdated declarations while the bid team is trying to finish the submission.

The solution?

Assign an administrator, check your information regularly and follow each buyer’s sharing instructions. Remember that registration does not replace every procurement-specific question or the buyer’s submission portal.

‍

3. Budgeting for One Written Submission

The Act provides two competitive tendering procedures: the open procedure and the competitive flexible procedure. The latter lets buyers design a process around their requirements, potentially including shortlisting, negotiation, dialogue, demonstrations or other stages.

For an IT supplier, that might mean preparing a demonstration; or a contractor, it could mean additional technical discussions. Your written response may only be one part of the competition.

What's the costly habit?

Approving a bid budget based on word count, then discovering your technical director is needed for several further stages.

The better approach?

Map the entire procedure before committing - make sure to include staff availability, stage deadlines, preparation costs and approval responsibilities in your bid/no-bid assessment.

‍

4. Assuming Your Old Scoring Strategy Still Fits

You may have heard that “most economically advantageous tender”, or MEAT, has become “most advantageous tender”, or MAT.

That does not mean quality suddenly matters for the first time. Cabinet Office guidance explicitly says the terminology change is not a policy change - buyers could already consider factors beyond price.

A genuinely new provision allows award criteria to be refined in certain circumstances within a competitive flexible procedure. That's subject to legal conditions, rather than permission to change the scoring arbitrarily.

The mistake?

Recycling a previous winning answer and assuming the same emphasis will earn the same marks.

The winning approach?

Build your response around the current questions, weightings and methodology - evaluators only care about how you'll make a difference to their contract. A strong answer explains what you will do, how you will do it and provides evidence that supports it.

‍

5. Treating Every Framework as a Closed Door

Missed a framework deadline? Check the arrangement before writing it off.

The Act introduces open frameworks: schemes of successive frameworks that allow suppliers to join at reopening points. The typical maximum overall term is eight years - for multi-supplier open frameworks, reopening must occur at least once within the first three years, and at least every five years afterwards, but buyers can reopen more frequently if desired.

An open framework is not permanently open, and a standard framework does not automatically become one.

A mistake to avoid:

Abandoning a target buyer for years because you assume the supplier list can't change.

What should you do instead?

Record the framework type, reopening schedule and entry requirements. If you are already appointed, check how subsequent frameworks affect your position - admission should be followed by a realistic plan for pursuing call-off work.

‍

6. Making Promises Your Delivery Team Has Not Approved

“We’ll commit to that and work it out later” has always been poor bidding practice, yet we see it in failed bids all the time. The new increase in performance transparency makes it harder to keep these consequences contained.

For public contracts estimated at more than £5 million, authorities generally must set at least three KPIs.

*Important exceptions include frameworks themselves, light-touch contracts, concessions and private-utility contracts, plus cases where KPIs cannot appropriately assess performance. Qualifying framework call-offs can still be covered.*

The Act also creates performance-publication obligations, which puts greater emphasis on whether commitments survive contact with actual delivery.

The worst thing you can do?

Offer ambitious response times, staffing levels or outcomes without checking the resources behind them.

A good alternative?

Agree on your commitments with the entire delivery team - check the baseline, reporting method, delivery owner and cost.

Remember, winning an unworkable contract can be more damaging than losing a well-chosen bid.

‍

7. Filing the Feedback and Moving On

A score tells you where you finished, but the explanation can tell you what to fix.

Feedback is one of the most valuable parts of bidding - it tells you where you're falling short, what you can do better next time and how you can implement improvements across your entire bid strategy.

Under the Act, assessment summaries must be provided to suppliers that submitted assessed tenders before the contract award notice is published. Unsuccessful suppliers will receive information about their own assessment and how the winning tender scored - this information is integral to every company's continuous improvement initiatives.

Where mandatory standstill applies, it is eight working days, replacing the previous 10 calendar days, and starts with publication of the contract award notice.

The mistake we see far too often:

Recording “unsuccessful” bids, getting frustrated with your failure and refusing to implement changes, therefore taking the same weaknesses into the next tender.

What you can do instead:

Compare the feedback with your submitted answers. Did you fail on evidence, detail, delivery confidence or price? Turn this feedback into specific improvements and implement this as part of your ongoing bidding strategy. If the decision raises concerns, review them promptly rather than relying on an old calendar reminder.

At BWS, we offer feedback implementation services as part of our long-term retainer packages. Signing on to a retainer with us is a guaranteed way to strengthen your bidding position and ensure you're putting your best bid forward each time.

‍

Give Your Bid Process a Proper Update

You do not need to throw away your bid library, but you do need to check whether its content, ownership and supporting processes suit the opportunities you now pursue.

At BWS, we help suppliers strengthen their tendering position through opportunity assessment, bid writing, bid reviews and bid management. That can mean preparing earlier, testing an existing response or coordinating a more complex competition - whatever bid position you're in, regardless of company size or sector, we're here to help you access the contracts you deserve.

If your bidding process has not had a proper review since 2024, now is a good time to find out what it is costing you. Get in touch on info@bidwritingservice.com for more information.