How to get a FREE LIMS… and maybe even get paid to take one.
How to get a FREE LIMS… and maybe even get paid to take one.
by Ephraim Gadsby
The LIMS RFP process is apparently the one of the most clever mechanisms I have seen to date for getting something for nothing. Is there really such a thing? Some folks are giving a good impression of it.
I recently noticed a LIMS bid “Opportunity” on LIMSfinder.com, notifying all the lucky LIMS vendors about a bid opportunity. See the following Link to view the announcement.
This RFP looked like any other RFP I have read in the past for a LIMS, except for a few extraordinary things; It looks like the customer wants you to pay them to give them a LIMS and they are not even going to say thank you. It looks like a legitimate RFP but if I were in the business of selling LIMS, (thankfully, I have the good fortune of only having to write about this stuff) I would see this as a bad sign.
So What’s the Deal?
The deal is…. that any vendor bidding on this deal will have to practically pay the customer to take the LIMS and that’s not the worst of it.
First, you must pay the customer a 5% bid bond and it must be a cashiers check or some other instrument (since they obviously don’t trust you), just for the privilege of giving them a proposal. In seeing that, I just about fell out of my chair with laughter. I thought, man-o-man, I am glad I don’t have their nerve in my tooth.
Second, the vendor has to pay the customer $300 / day for each day they are late. That will be fun for both parties. I don’t guess it matters that the customer causes delays. Maybe I missed it or something but maybe the customer will be paying the vendor $300/ day for each day they cause the project to be late. Naaaaugh, that would smack of being fair!
Third, the vendor must pony up a 100% performance bond where the customer gets paid the full amount of the contract if the customer says the project has failed. If the vendor fails, the vendor pays, if the customer fails, the vendor pays. Either way the vendor pays. What can I say about this….? I think this absurdity speaks for itself. You vendors had better watch out, this project is going to be a lot of fun.
Fourth, the “Lucky” bidder who gets this job won’t receive one penny in payment until the customer is totally satisfied and has officially accepted the system. This opens you up to a world of problems…
- If you don’t give the customer whatever they ask for regardless of scope, you run the probable risk of a failed job, losing your bond and not getting paid to boot. Either way you will have a legal fight.
- If you give them anything they ask for, you will be going outside your scope continuously and you will get no credit, let alone payment for it.
- Basically, you will have to give up all of your rights in order to take this contract. It is totally slanted in one direction and it is not equitable and the only thing you can bank on is the hope that you have this customers good will.
The only way for this deal to work is if it is made equitable and fair for both parties.
So why am I writing this Blog?
First, I like to write about things that stir up discussions and this one is bound to cause a discussion by customers and vendors alike.
Second, I can’t stand to see a recipe for disaster put into such a formalized process. All of us in the industry work so hard to make LIMS implementations a success that it is very disheartening to see a new LIMS project headed for tears.
Third, since I have now written this and it is being made public to one and all, this will put the customer on notice that they had better treat this public contract with fairness and that they had better not screw it up by playing games with the vendor. They had better go out of their way to be fair and equitable if they are going to maintain such an blatantly, inequitable contract. As a public servant, you have a duty to all parts of your public and if you cause this project to fail due to a bad contract you will be the ones to pay for it and probably with your job(s).
With bid opportunities like this one, it is no wonder that Government entities pay 5 times the price that all us other folks pay for the same thing in the private sector. This is your tax dollars at work. Such tactics give the impression that the “Government” is being conservative and cautious and trying to be good custodians of public money but the opposite is true. They are simply using the bond mechanism as an approach to make up for their own lack of management and personal responsibility and are willing to pay what ever cost is required in order to shift the burden of responsibility over to Insurance companies that issue bonds.
How can this be made to succeed?
First, get rid of the egregious terms & conditions outlined above. You will get more competitive bids from more qualified vendors and thus reduce your overall cost. With your current terms and conditions, I suspect you will get a handful of bidders. Savvy vendors will see this for what it is and simply not bid. I predict that you will be able to select the vendor you wanted in the first place.
Second, and probably the most important, make your folks who are responsible for running this project actually do their job. The terrible result of the terms and conditions in the current RFP is that it allows the people who are so called “running the project” to simply not do their job and put all of the burden on the back of vendor without the need to pay for it. Since the contract terms are stacked and since the customer has absolutely no risk for failure (or so they think), why do they need to do anything to make the project succeed? Answer… they don’t. They believe that you can get something for nothing. If this project fails, the vendor will make your life hell and the insurance company will help them in order to avoid pay outs.
You won’t get something for nothing. There is no Free LIMS, even if you have written the contract to make it so.
To the vendor who takes this contract, I truly wish you the best of luck. You are going to need it. You will need it even if you have “collaborated” with the customer to lock out all other bidders. There is a price for that type of tactic. I just hope you can afford it.
