1.10 The overarching conclusion we draw from our research and consultation is that where the Competitive Dialogue procedure is used appropriately both the public and private sectors believe the Competitive Dialogue procedure has been a positive addition to the procurement spectrum. There is a general consensus that the procedure: i) maintains competition; ii) imposes discipline on all parties (particularly in closing off the key project documentation whist still in competition); iii) establishes excellent working relationships between the public and private sectors; iv) delivers improved solutions with a better 'deal' for the public sector; and avoids the scope and price creep often found with negotiated procedure procurements. Competitive Dialogue has also been useful in focussing effort by reducing the number of variant bids.
1.11 However public and private sector participants agree that Competitive Dialogue is only a positive addition to the procurement spectrum when it is conducted appropriately. Where that is not the case it can be burdensome and expensive. There was specific criticism focusing on: i) the frequency with which Competitive Dialogue is used (especially where the project is not complex and the Restricted procedure could be used); ii) the lack of preparation, insufficient skills and capacity on the part of contracting authorities; and iii) the negative impact these issues have on bid costs and procurement times.