38. Do not underestimate the importance of managing your team (including advisers) at a personal level. Aside from the usual problems associated with leading complex negotiations, with multiple parties, to a demanding timetable, with massive amounts of public money at issue, there are issues on PPP/PFI projects which are notoriously difficult to negotiate. In particular the payment and performance mechanism can (following many months of development in a "silo") become a real sticking point for those involved in its creation (especially on projects which are innovative and where the concepts have been developed in a bespoke fashion). It is often a reflection of team members' (on both sides) absolute commitment to the project that they become entrenched on certain issues and need someone in the team to sensitively inject some perspective into their thinking. It is therefore important that an IPT Leader (in particular) can recognise where a loss of perspective has occurred and step in to address the issue in a sensitive and timely fashion. A pragmatic approach that doesn't let perfect get in the way of good but also doesn't alienate or de-motivate key personnel is required. The IPT Leader also needs to recognise that a different skill-set is required during the final complex stage of the negotiation - team members who have been powerhouses of innovation and creativity during the inception of the project may lack the "completer/finisher" skills necessary for closure. Recognising this and playing to the team's strengths can alleviate a further source of stress in the process.
39. The "personality" of the preferred bidder can also change. Personnel on the bidder's side with whom the IPT has built a relationship over the preceding months and years sometimes disappear to their next sales assignment with a completion team of battle-hardened "closers" moving into their place. There is very little that an IPT can do about this once it has happened, but questions should be asked during the evaluation stage about the stability of the bidder's team and who will be conducting negotiations post preferred bidder status being conferred. If it does happen, the only real safeguards which an IPT has are the robustness and clarity of negotiations achieved on key issues to date - again this serves to emphasise the importance of preparation and the explicit link between the evaluated position and the position taken during the uncompetitive phase. If a change in personnel does materially alter the character of negotiations to such an extent that a re-negotiation of previously closed positions is actually afoot, then the IPT must act swiftly and decisively to assert control and, ultimately, may need to cease negotiations and look to any reserve bidder it may be have (this has only happened once in the PFI market to date but if there is a reserve bidder then it could be a credible threat) or even look to re-visit its shortlist (although query how real an option this is in practice - especially if there is some distance in time between the appointment of preferred bidder and the breakdown in relationship).