Navigating Ethical Practices and Automated Solutions

According to Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act [CAP 22:23] and General Regulations (Statutory Instrument 5 of 2018) the public procurement and disposal activities are conducted in a manner which promotes transparency, accountability and fairness in the tendering process. Breaching the rules and procedures governing public procurement tendering results in the net effect of losing potential suppliers that may provide the entity with quality products at lower price. Public procurement requires high accountability, fairness and transparency since public funds are used in every transaction, hence failure to adhere to the laid down tendering procedures will result in loss of trust and increase in favouritism and corruption.

According to Lysons and Farrington, (2006) it is believed that most favoured efficient purchasing mechanism by buyers may not be open to competitive tendering. These procuring mechanisms creates challenges and problems among suppliers since they would not compete from the same platform, hence despondency among them. Moreover the Procuring entity might end up procuring sub-standard products and services at un-competitive prices, for instance a price of an item purchased could be inflated above the prevailing market prices. According to Van Weele (2010) professional buyers would rather exclude poor performing suppliers from the tendering procedure since they are counterproductive and makes the tendering process cumbersome claiming that running a competitive tender is a very expensive and the transaction costs may exceed any likely efficient benefits. However criminal charges are a potential consequence for certain regulatory non-compliance. Failure to comply in areas pertaining to, supply chain could result in jail time (Chappel, 2009). He further explained that the business public image is key to its success, when a company is thrust into the public perceptiveness for failing to comply with regulations, there are reputational repercussions, which eventually leads to distrust and loss of potentially beneficial partnerships.

CONTRIBUTION OF AUTOMATED TENDERING ON ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE

Corsi (2006) defines automated tendering as the utilization of electronic strategies, ordinarily over the internet to lead exchanges between granting powers and providers. Awang and. Maniam , (2010) considers that E-procurement as one of the most important tool for projects, the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is crucial in order to improve service and lower operating costs which in turn will improve performance. ICT use in procurement is perceived as an advantages tool, as it lowers contract prices, compact administrative costs and increased transparency to the public sector (Shalev, and Asbjornsen , 2010).

The benefits of e-tendering as indicated by Kajewski and Weippert (2004) includes, quick and easy access to tendering information; increased tender opportunities; improved access for geographically isolated organisations; increased distribution speed of tenders; improved communication between parties; improved tender management; and reduced time spent on routine administration Lou (2006) postulates that the main driver behind the e-tendering environment is competitive advantage achieved through improved work processes; efficient information sharing and reuse; better returns on investment; strategic partnerships and the reduction of whole life costs within the supply chain. Amit and. Zott (2004) posit that, E-business has the potential to generate huge new wealth, specifically by altering the way that the business and tendering system was conducted for the paper tendering system. He further explained that e-tendering environments improves efficiency, speed, data accuracy, and effectiveness in everyday business processes and management as it allows fast response to questions and points of clarification during tender period.

According to Parida and Parida (2002) the use of e-tendering requires a web collaboration platform integrated with electronic data interchange (EDI) which provides a good platform for data-centric. This means that every tender processed generates intelligence about the process and provides a full-audit trail. Hence the organisation can have visibility on what was submitted. However the largest barrier to the adoption of e-tendering environments is the employees themselves, as opposed to technological barriers. These employee-related barriers include a lack of awareness, no quantifiable measurements or indicators of success, limited skilled workers, poor cross-disciplinary communication, a fragmented supply chain, and poor industry standards for information interchange (Alshawi and loung, 2009). Bailey, et al (2010) revealed the need for employees to be equipped with ICT skills and knowledge in order to make tendering process effective.

IMPACT OF UNETHICAL PRACTICES ON TENDERING PROCESS

Kitson (1995) argues that the public purchasing environment can create an atmosphere conducive to unethical behaviour. An organisation characterized by an absence of clear ethical policies can contribute towards unethical behaviour. Awang and Maniam (2010) state that the ethical level of behaviour of procurement staff is mainly determined by the environment of an organization, top management, limited productive resources and lack of intellectual support in the organization. Monczka (2010) outlines the environmental factors affecting the ethical standards in public procurement as: internal environment, legal environment, political environment and socio-economic environments. Petrick (1997) explain that, ethical behaviour is important in public procurement as it involves the expenditure of large sum of public money, and is subject to public scrutiny. Kitson (1995) also stated that, public procurement is underpinned by five pillars which are very vital in the attainment of value for money, which is to be attained by having sound tendering process, that are equity, ethics and fair dealing, competition, accountability, transparency and value for money. Public officials should always behave ethically and fairly in their business undertakings. Ethical behaviour supports openness and accountability in a procurement process and gives suppliers confidence to participate in the government marketplace.

However, the manifestation of unethical procurement practices impedes the achievement of the above benefits. Petrick (1997) says that good practices reduce costs and produce timely results, and poor practices lead to waste and delays. Lack of efficient procurement highly affects development issues such as service delivery and economic growth. Pooler (1997) posit that unethical conduct by public officials has provoked a widespread global discourse on good governance. Unethical practices have globally affected national developments in a negative manner as it is contributing to financial losses thereby enhancing poverty in nations. Petrick (1997) point out that amongst other unethical conducts by public servants, corrupt actions in tendering, which stems from almost across sectors of the society including education, business and government makes it a daunting task and almost impossible for the ‘already impoverished Africa’ to escape poverty.