5. To what extent was innovation encouraged in National Savings' consultation exercise? | |||||
| Greatly Encouraged | Encouraged | Neutral | Discouraged | Greatly Discouraged |
Partnerships | 1 | 3 |
|
|
|
Staffing issues |
| 3 | 1 |
|
|
Business Process |
| 4 |
|
|
|
Re-engineering |
|
|
|
|
|
Contract length |
| 2 | 2 |
|
|
Performance measurement |
| 2 | 2 |
|
|
Risk allocation | 2 | 2 |
|
|
|
Profit and gain sharing |
| 3 |
|
|
|
Third party business |
| 3 | 1 |
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
6. How would you describe National Savings' attitude towards any innovations suggested by you in the following areas? | |||||
| Very receptive | Receptive | Not receptive | Opposed | Not applicable |
Partnerships | 1 | 2 | 1 |
|
|
Staffing issues | 1 | 3 |
|
|
|
Business Process |
| 3 | 1 |
|
|
Re-engineering |
|
|
|
|
|
Contract length |
| 4 |
|
|
|
Performance measurement |
| 3 | 1 |
|
|
Risk allocation |
| 3 | 1 |
|
|
Profit and gain sharing |
| 3 | 1 |
|
|
Third party business |
| 4 |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
7. How would you describe National Savings' requests for information at the consultation stage? | |||
Very excessive | Excessive | About right | Too little |
|
| 4 |
|
8. Do you think that National Savings provided sufficient information at the consultation stage? | |||
| Excessive | About right | Too little |
| 4 |
| |
Visits to sites |
| 3 | 1 |
Access to staff |
| 2 | 2 |
9. How clear to you were the criteria by which bidders were assessed at the consultation stage? | |||
Very clear | Clear | Unclear | Confusing |
1 | 2 | 1 |
|
10. How would you describe the time taken by National Savings from the issue of the Information Memorandum to shortlisting for the Invitation to Negotiate stage? | ||
Too long | About right | Too short |
3 | 1 |
|
11. What were your consortium's full costs after completion of the consultation stage? | ||||
up to £300,000 | up to £500,000 | up to £750,000 | up to £1,000,000 | up to £1,250,000 |
2 |
| 1 |
|
|