Competitive bidding involves the solicitation of multiple bids; in sole-sourcing, agencies by-pass the solicitation of competitive bids and instead designate a single vendor as a "sole-supplier".

. investment in system and application software and the less is the flexibility when buying replacements; note that this measure is highly correlated (approx. Under this paper's approach, the probability that the agency (buyer) sole sources with the incumbent is the same as the probability that the incumbent is the sole bidder.

INVEST is the recorded value (in millions of dollars) of the owned equipment on site, adjusted for changing producer prices (1967 = 100); it should proxy for the value of switching costs embedded in all equipment, and it is particularly good at identifying the agency sites that have extensive investments in miscellaneous peripheral equipment (as compared with CAPACITY, defined below). First, strict competitive procedures by the GSA (in its role as the federal government's oversight agency) were widely believed to be more price sensitive than those of an unsupervised agency,' which should discourage bidding from incumbent suppliers. REPRESENTING CONTRACTORS, SUPPLIERS, SURETIES AND OWNERS SINCE 1976 . The discussion below summarizes the set of exogenous variables. The presence when there is an incumbent vendor is likely to affect a buyer's choices. H���R�0�����!M��&p���:�"K�����w�ء���ɬv��~�%Q Competitive and Noncompetitive Procurement (Sole Source) requirements are based on the Uniform Guidance (UG) Methods of Procurement to be followed (Section §200.

���bk)��NJ����0H����� 0�� (Competitive Proposal or Sealed Bid required), Preferred method for procuring construction, Bids are publicly* solicited from an “adequate” number of known suppliers, Lowest responsive and responsible bidder for the fixed price contract should be awarded the contract, Used for either a fixed price or cost reimbursement contract when sealed bids are not appropriate, Requests for proposals must be publicized* and identify all evaluation factors and their relative importance, Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified sources, Written policy for conducting technical evaluations of reviewing proposals and selecting the recipient, Most advantageous bid wins, price and other factors considered. DEMSKI,JOEL S., SAPPINGTON, PABLOT., 1987, 'Managing. width:275px; text-align:left; padding:10px; font-size:11px; line-height:14px; font-weight:bold; It would only affect the estimated constants in the indexes of incumbent and non- incumbent bidding, not the coefficients on the exogenous variables. l4 More elaborate specifications for r were estimated, but are not shown for several reasons. Greenstein 119891 explores this topic.

Several variables address this factor. . Not only is such a procedure unauthorized as being in direct conflict with [the statute requiring competitive bidding], but it leads to dissatisfaction among bidders and should be discontinued. Yet, this view only muddles the interpretation of a single coefficient, SIZE, and no other coefficient. The estimate of T= 0.61 in Table I1 means that incumbents won 73 percent of the competitive bids in which they participated. KELMAN,STEVEN,1990,Procurement and Public Management: The Fear of Discretion and the Quality of Government Performance (The AEI Press, Washington, D.C.) MARSHALL, C., MEURER, MICHAEL JEAN-FRANCOIS.

"Turning DEDAP on or off decreases the probability of IBM's bidding by 0.11, but it decreases a non-IBM incumbent's probability by 0.02. .

The first question that federal agencies routinely face for non-labor purchases is whether or not to sole-source. 297-318. concerning an agency's procedure. Various years. } else { 'This assumes that exogeneity of the market segment will be warranted by the breadth of the IDC segments and the government system labels employed. The competitiveness of procurement differs from case to case, depending on: first, the value of the procurement at the office and related offices and the fixed costs of bidding; second, the potential supply of alternatives in the relevant market segement at the time of the acquisition; and third, to a lesser extent, the buyer's relationship with its incumbent vendor, particularly if that vendor is IBM or if the buyer has made extensive investments with an incumbent. Second, the above log-likelihood accounts for the effects of "lock-in" on competitive outcomes, while a simple probit would not.

179-202. So before you do anything else when dealing and negotiating with a sole or single source supplier is to understand exactly that i.e.

SHANE, Vendors: What do Buyers See?

Agencies know that special or broad requirements can influence the anticipated costs to bidding for both incumbent and non-incumbent. Almost all bidding models ignore the procedural decision and focus on vendor bidding in a competitive situation (e.g. LUIS and GREENSTEIN, 1990, 'Switching Costs and Bidding Parity in Government Procurement of Computer Systems', Journal of Law,Economics, and Organizations,6, pp.