Comparing tenders by total figure alone assumes every contractor priced against the same scope, which is rarely true unless the tender documents were tight enough to prevent it. A fair comparison means checking what sits behind each number before ranking them, not after the contract is already signed.
Before comparing figures, confirm each tenderer worked from the identical specification and site information. A lower price built on a smaller assumed scope, fewer coats or a lighter preparation standard is not actually a lower price for the same job.
Where a tender document leaves room for interpretation, ask each tenderer to confirm their assumptions in writing before final comparison, rather than assuming silence means they read the specification the same way as everyone else.
Proposed programme, sequencing around any occupied areas, and how clearly a tenderer has responded to the specification all give a useful sense of how the job will actually run, separate from the number at the bottom of the page.
A short written comparison table, even for a modest job, protects the decision if it is ever questioned later, and it forces genuine comparison rather than an instinctive choice based on the headline figure alone.
It is worth checking that a notably lower figure has priced the identical scope before assuming it represents better value, rather than a narrower interpretation of the work.
Yes, and it is good practice — questions and answers should ideally be shared with all tenderers so everyone is pricing with the same information.
Enough to give a genuine comparison, but tendering too widely on a specification that is not tight can waste everyone's time interpreting an ambiguous scope differently.
Send us your tender documents and we will return a fully itemised response you can compare against others.
A fair tender comparison checks what sits behind each figure, not just which figure is lowest.
Speak to a Hampshire commercial decorating contractor that turns up, communicates clearly and delivers a finish that lasts.
