Results for developed bids received

5  We explored two possible causes of variations in the number of developed bids received by procuring authorities. First, we looked at whether the capital value of a deal was relevant, using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) test. Figure 17 shows that deals with different numbers of bidders did not vary significantly in capital value. Second, we tested for a relationship between geographical location and the number of developed bids received using a chi-squared test, following indications in interviews that this could be important. However, the test failed to confirm a statistically significant relationship (Figure 18).

17

An ANOVA test of the relationship between capital value and the number of developed bids received

 

 

Anova

 

 

 

 

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

Between groups

20,921,043,489,022,000

1

20,921,043,489,022,450

0.193

0.662

Within groups

4,325,472,172,028,323,000

40

108,136,804,300,708,100

 

 

Total

4,346,393,215,517,345,000

41

 

 

 

Source: National Audit Office

 

 

 

 

 

18

A chi-squared test of the relationship between geographical location and number of developed bids received by procuring authorities

 

 

Strength of competition (number of bidders at ITN)

Total

 

Value

df

Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

 

 

Two or fewer of ITN

Three or more at ITN 

 

Pearson Chi-Square

9.0311 

0.172

Region

London 

1

6

7

Likelihood Ratio

9.488 

0.148

 

North West 

1

3

4

Linear-by-Linear Association

2.665 

0.103

 

North East

1

9

10

N of Valid Cases

44

 

 

 

Midlands 

6

4

10

 

 

 

 

 

South West 

2

2

4

 

 

 

 

 

South/South East 

3

2

5

 

 

 

 

 

National 

1

3

4

 

 

 

 

Total 

 

15

29

44

 

 

 

 

Source: National Audit Office

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note

1 Twelve cells (85.7 per cent) have expected count less than five. The minimum expected count is 1.36.