While legal processes are undoubtedly important in ensuring clarity, predictability and certainty, municipalities should be aware that different approaches to the procurement process can be adopted, and are relevant to different arrangements. Some are much more relaxed than others. The differences mostly reflect the scale of the proposal, the extent to which the municipality can define its requirements, and how well it knows the prospective bidders. The less complex and the shorter the planned partnership, the greater the scope for some pre-selection; the more complex and the longer the planned arrangement, the more likely it is that the municipality will issue a wider and more open invitation to bidders and embark on a more formal process. There are, however, drawbacks to over-formality and over-specificity: the South African BoTT has cost far more than it should have because it was over-specified. The more a municipality can work with the partners to create a truly collaborative arrangement, the more sustainable partnerships will be.

Whichever method is selected, the procurement process underpins the selection of service providers who are appropriate for the project, and the process lies at the heart of how some key aspects of good governance are reflected in a partnership. A fair process prevents corruption and makes it possible to select the best contractor for the job. Unfair procurement skews decisions away from the most efficient options - decisions that cost the municipality and consumers in the end, and can place the delivery of the relevant service at risk.

In the traditional approach to large-scale PPPs, an early 'request for proposals' stage enables municipalities to gain a better understanding of interested actors, and may even be used to select the partner. This is usually the case if the partnership term is relatively short (e.g., a year) or the monetary value low (exemplified by a service contract for solid waste collection services). Such a process could also be adopted if the goals of the partnership are well defined and simple, if the local government is able to identify potential partners of its own accord, and if the risks of the partnership are relatively small. As a result, the process and the required documentation are generally simple.

Where the duration and monetary value of the partnership is more extensive and large-scale operators are involved, then a more elaborate procurement procedure can be adopted. This will probably entail an initial stage that screens potential partners through a 'request for expressions of interest' or a 'request for qualifications'. This screening enables a municipality to consider a wide range of providers before narrowing the field down to the best qualified, and identifying its objectives more comprehensively. This qualifications stage is used when the local government and the project team have a more defined project but do not know if there are any private sector partners with the resources, experience or interest to meet their requirements.

Competitive tendering is necessary in the case of expensive and long-term partnerships. It helps if the municipality knows exactly what it wants to achieve, as that enables it to weigh the different bids against each other. Such clarity reduces the cost involved in developing a PPP, both for the municipality and the potential partners. But this is rare in weak municipalities. Before requesting proposals, a schedule of the local government's timeframe for completion of the project or initiation of a service should be developed. It may spell out the process and timeframe for evaluating proposals, including the time set aside for public consultation, the activities and timeframes for contract negotiations and appeals, and the outline of project implementation and completion. For large-scale operators it is also important to state related objectives, such as empowerment, environmental sustainability, stakeholder involvement, and the involvement of other actors like NGOs, CBOs and small-scale providers.

The tendering procedure often requires two bidding envelopes: one dealing with the technical aspects of the partnership, and another with the financial aspects. While the bidding documents must provide in-depth information, and the process must ensure the greatest levels of fairness, care should be taken not to overcomplicate either. This is necessary to make the bids accessible to the evaluators, and to ensure that they address the core issues the municipality wants to be dealt with. Furthermore, highly complex processes and documents tend to work against small enterprises and NGOs.