Sealed Bids vs. Competitive Proposal Chapter 6

Sealed bids vs. Competitive proposal Chapter 6 of the Federal Acquisition Regulations states that contracting officers are only allowed to solicit sealed bids when time allows for solicitation, submission, and evaluation of the sealed bids (Justia Law, 2012). Contracting officers are under strict instruction to only make an award on the basis of the price. Besides, the law compels the contracting officers not to engage in any form of discussion with the offerors about their bids.

Other forms of acquisition give relative importance to cost or price as opposed to sealed bidding where an award is made on the basis of price and price related factors. In a situation where a contractor is offering goods and services which are clearly defined, where discussions are not a requisite, and the selection process probably factors in price and price related factors, then it is imperative that the contractor synthesizes the rules and procedures that accompany sealed bidding (Justia Law, 2012).

Competitive proposal methodology cannot be used in this situation as it is only ideal when there is increased risk or less definitive requirements. Sealed bidding is considered less costly and fastest form of competitive procurement method (Justia Law, 2012). Not so much time is invested in protracted discussions except in exceptional cases where a requester and prospective supplier decide to engage in discussions. It is also considered the fairest of the competitive contracting methods as it does not provide sly suppliers an opportunity to appear smarter.

Besides, it provides a clear and a definitive commitment that stifles trade-offs on non-price related factors used in evaluating a bid's responsiveness. Fixed priced contracting with economic price adjustments allow for flexibility. Firm-fixed price is another type of sealed bidding that is authorized by the Federal Adjustment Regulation. Competitive proposal is favored in government procurements especially when complex procurement is involved. It also used when contracting officers consider it to be in the best interest of the government (Manuel, 2012).

With competitive proposal, a contracting officer is sure of getting a fair and a reasonable price. It also guarantees a contracting officer an opportunity to obtain the required delivery schedule. Besides, the contracting officer also gains control over the performance of the supplier in terms of man hours of effort, levels of technical talent, special equipment and testing requirement, and nature of sub-contracted effort (Manuel, 2012). Control is also gained over the supplier's performance with regard to quality, quantity, delivery, and service terms.

Through competitive proposal, government institutions are guaranteed of supplier cooperation. The supplier in return gets timely payment, fair treatment, and contract compliance. The suppliers are also guaranteed of future orders (Naval Air Warfare Center Training System, 2007). Competitive proposal ensures that there exists a sound and continuing relationship between buyer and seller. All these are made possible because of the element of negotiation that accompanies request for proposal (RFP).

Negotiation is normally given a chance when the acquisition process is complex, the risks cannot be accurately determined at the onset, when there is protracted production time, and.