Facilitate

What We Did to De-escalate Disputes and Help Resolve Issues

Providing suppliers with straightforward, basic information about how federal procurement works sometimes is not enough. The nature of the issue raised by the supplier is specific and, because the supplier is often reluctant or has been unsuccessful in dealing directly with the department, Office of the Procurement Ombudsman (OPO) is asked to intercede. Typically, these are cases where suppliers feel they are not obtaining factual or timely information from departments regarding such things as a particular Request for Proposal or the evaluation of their bid. In these cases our interventions are focused on facilitating - ensuring both the supplier and the department understand each other’s perspective and that the necessary information is exchanged so that both sides can move forward. This may be as simple as acting as a conduit for the exchange of information between the supplier and department or taking on a mediator role and encouraging the department and supplier to engage in open, direct dialogue. In playing this facilitation role, two things continue to be apparent:

• How quickly solutions can be found when each party has the opportunity to be heard, to clarify their respective points of view and share concerns and perspectives in a respectful and neutral environment; and,
• How hearing information from an experienced and neutral third party like OPO, which has no vested interest in the outcome, can make the difference in helping move things forward.

Of the 315 contacts, 281 (89%) were dealt with either informally through our facilitation role, meaning they were resolved as a result of our information conduit or mediator roles, or the issue could not be pursued for regulatory reasons (e.g. did not comply with regulatory requirements).

The 34 remaining cases, all of which were written complaints, are dealt with in the next section of the report, entitled: Investigate.

Some examples of issues resolved informally through the Office’s facilitation include:

Lessons Learned

A supplier submitted a complaint regarding the bidding period of a solicitation for services. The supplier was concerned that the three days allocated were insufficient, particularly as an amendment to the statement of work had been issued the day before the closing date. The supplier twice requested an extension to the bidding period but both requests were denied by the department. The supplier had additional concerns about the transparency of the solicitation, particularly the fact that the organization had not disclosed the names of the companies invited to bid or who had asked questions and received answers during the bidding period. With the supplier’s permission, OPO contacted the department to facilitate communication between the two parties. This resulted in the supplier leaving the conversation assured that the department had understood her concerns and would take these issues into consideration in future solicitations. The supplier, satisfied with how her concerns were addressed, subsequently withdrew her complaint.

Pay up

A supplier contacted OPO regarding an outstanding payment for an invoice submitted two months prior. With the supplier’s permission, OPO contacted the department which resulted in the supplier receiving payment shortly thereafter.

Hello? Is anybody out there?

A supplier contacted OPO because it was having difficulties getting in touch with a department with which it had a contract. The company had recently changed its e-mail address and the company suspected this change had caused technical difficulties but were unsure. OPO contacted the department, which resulted in the technical difficulties being identified and addressed. The supplier received confirmation of the contract timelines and the contract was delivered accordingly.

“You are astounding, thank you so much for your in-depth response and willingness to help!”

– Supplier

Helping Parties to Resolve Contract Disputes

Another aspect of OPO’s facilitation role is the provision of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) services. This is a mediation service to help resolve disputes which arise between a supplier and a federal department over the interpretation or application of the terms and conditions of an existing contract. Disagreements over the fine print of contracts are not unusual in either the public or the private sector. What they all have in common is a breakdown in communication which can often put the project over time and over budget and potentially lead to long, costly legal processes. When the Office is approached and made aware of a dispute between two parties to an existing contract OPO works with both sides in an attempt to restore this communication and to find an informal solution to the dispute. When an informal solution cannot be found and either party to the contract makes a formal request for OPO’s ADR services, the Regulations require the Ombudsman to invite the other party to the contract to participate in the ADR session.

Once both parties to the contract agree to participate, OPO provides a certified and experienced mediator who organizes and guides the dispute resolution session. During the session, OPO provides both parties the opportunity to share their points of view and the ability to generate potential solutions. The process is “without prejudice” and risk-free as participants have full control over the outcome, meaning no decision is imposed and either party can end their participation at anytime if they are unable to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement. In instances where both parties agree to a solution, OPO helps the parties draw up a legally binding settlement agreement.

Four supplier requests for ADR services were received by the Office in 2014-2015, of which:

• One did not fall within the Procurement Ombudsman’s mandate given the dispute was not about the interpretation or application of the terms and conditions of a contract; and
• Three were declined by the department.

While the number of requests is consistent with the previous four years, 2014-2015 is the only year to date where departments have declined to participate in all supplier requests for ADR.

To address the continued low uptake of OPO’s ADR service, the Office undertook a number of initiatives to raise awareness of the benefits of this service among both suppliers and federal organizations. Throughout the year, OPO published articles and advertisements in various publications; shared information on OPO’s dispute resolution services at numerous meetings and events with suppliers and federal officials; leveraged its web and social media presence to promote the service; and created a short video explaining the benefits of ADR.

Date modified:

2018-11-01