dk@dkoutsource.com
The way construction consultancy tenders are evaluated could be changing, with greater attention being placed on project scope, manpower, and the resources required to deliver professional services. Two initiatives are central to this shift: the Value Articulation Framework (VAF) and the Resourcing Evaluation Guide (REG).
The primary distinction between them lies in ownership, perspective, and application. The VAF is a consultant-facing toolkit developed by the Singapore Institute of Architects (SIA) to help firms justify fees by articulating project value. In contrast, the REG is a buyer-facing compliance instrument piloted for public-sector tenders, requiring agencies to evaluate the realism of manpower commitments and guard against unsustainably low bids.
Tendering is an important phase of the procurement strategy in which competing firms submit proposals for a project or service. -Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
Together, the VAF and REG show an important principle in construction tender evaluation: a competitive fee must be supported by a realistic understanding of the work and resources required. This dual approach aims to balance competitiveness with sustainability, ensuring that bids reflect both value creation and practical resourcing.
Clarity in Project Scope
The Value Articulation Framework provides a structured way for architects to consider the scope of services required for a project. Construction projects can vary considerably in size, complexity and technical requirements. The professional services needed for one project may therefore be very different from another, even if the projects appear similar at first glance.
Having greater clarity over the work involved can help architects assess the complexity of a project before preparing their bids. This can contribute to more competitive and accurate fee proposals, while reducing the likelihood of firms underestimating the amount of work required.
According to Melvin Tan, immediate past president of the Singapore Institute of Architects, the framework can help architects better understand the actual costs and scope associated with their work. This is particularly important when firms are deciding how much manpower and professional time to commit to a project.
Connecting Costing with Manpower
Understanding project scope is closely linked to determining the right level of resources. When the VAF is considered alongside the new Resourcing Evaluation Guide, firms can gain a clearer picture of how much manpower may need to be dedicated to a project. A closer assessment may reveal that a project requires more resources than a firm initially estimated when preparing its bid.
This is significant because professional consultancy services depend heavily on skilled personnel. A consultancy fee that does not adequately account for the time and expertise required could make it difficult for a firm to deliver the agreed scope sustainably.
Under the REG pilot, bidding firms will be required to provide information on the manpower they propose to deploy and the corresponding rates behind their fees. This gives public agencies greater visibility into how a consultancy has arrived at its proposed price. Rather than looking only at the final figure, agencies can gain a better understanding of the resources supporting it.
Creating a Fairer Basis for Competition
Another important objective is creating a more consistent basis for competing firms. The VAF and REG can provide what Melvin Tan describes as a “same yardstick” for firms when assessing the resources and costs associated with a project. This can help shift competition away from simply undercutting other bidders on price.
Price remains an important consideration in construction consultancy tenders, but the lowest fee may not always represent the best value if it is based on insufficient manpower or an unrealistic assessment of the work involved.
Greater transparency around proposed resources allows firms to demonstrate their capability and approach more clearly. It can also help clients assess whether competing proposals are appropriately resourced. The result could be a more level playing field in which consultants compete not only on price, but also on quality, capability and proper resourcing.
Three Key Takeaways from the Pilot
The pilot highlights several wider changes in how consultancy tenders could be assessed.
Closer scrutiny: Agencies will have greater visibility into the manpower and rates behind proposed consultancy fees. This can help identify bids that may be unsustainably low and encourage firms to submit proposals based on more realistic resource requirements.
Enhanced competition: Greater transparency can provide a more consistent basis for comparing competing firms. Instead of focusing predominantly on who offers the lowest fee, consultants can demonstrate their professional capability, quality and ability to properly resource a project.
Supporting sustainability: Ensuring that firms allocate sufficient resources can support more sustainable professional practices. With realistic fees and manpower requirements, firms may have greater capacity to invest in their people, develop talent and adopt new technologies and innovations.
Addressing Talent and Technology Challenges
The discussion also comes at a time when the construction and professional consultancy sectors are considering broader challenges around talent and productivity.Having sufficient skilled professionals remains essential to delivering complex projects. At the same time, artificial intelligence and other technologies are creating new opportunities to improve productivity and support professional work.
While technology may help firms work more efficiently, it does not remove the need for appropriate manpower, expertise and professional judgement. So, for construction consultancy, the question isn’t only about how much a project costs. It’s also whether the proposed resources are sufficient to deliver the required scope to an appropriate standard.
A Shift Towards Value and Realistic Resourcing
The VAF and REG point towards a broader conversation about how value should be assessed in construction consultancy tenders. Understanding the scope of work, accurately assessing costs and allocating appropriate manpower can help firms avoid underbidding while giving clients greater visibility into what they are receiving for their fees.
As the REG pilot progresses, its effectiveness will provide useful insights into how public-sector consultancy tenders can balance competitiveness with quality and sustainable resourcing. A successful tender is not simply about submitting the lowest number. It is about ensuring that the proposed fee, scope and resources are aligned so that consultants can deliver the expertise and quality that a project requires.
References
- CNA, “Pilot programme to require new details for public construction consultancy tenders”, 22 August 2026. https://youtu.be/57_IKvhOPWU?is=NCnWhxqxRcuYb4I9
