2.35 Our review has indicated that contracting authorities are increasingly viewing Competitive Dialogue as the default process for all but the most straightforward procurements.
2.36 Risk aversion is one reason for the upsurge in Competitive Dialogue. HM Treasury is concerned this overuse may be an unintended consequence of the tone of the 2008 Guidance. The intention was to discourage inappropriate use of the Negotiated procedure, it may, however, have been interpreted as an implied ban on everything but Competitive Dialogue.
2.37 While previously comfortable with utilising the full range of procurement procedures, contracting authorities have now expressed nervousness about straying from Competitive Dialogue and are often confused as to what is permissible under the Open, Restricted and Negotiated procedures.
2.38 Authorities would benefit from consistent central guidance on how to engage in these procedures, similar to that produced for Competitive Dialogue. The Efficiency and Reform Group's procurement "Superhighway" should address this.
2.39 This will be in the form of a decision tree for procurers wishing to select the most appropriate route for their procurement. The decision tree will, through a few simple questions covering the value, complexity and nature of the goods, works or service being procured, direct the user to the most appropriate route for their requirement.
2.40 Competitive Dialogue should not be seen as the 'default' procedure for all complex procurements. HM Treasury welcomes the step by step guides to the Open, Restricted and Negotiated procedures which are currently in development. These should give authorities the confidence to return to alternative procedures for less complex procurements.