Edition 11 went out this morning and closes Series 1. Rather than summarise it here, I want to put the exercise from the end of the edition to this group, because it works better with other people in the room. Take one real project. The kind you would actually want if it appeared next month. Then answer four questions in order. 1. Which of the three procurement systems is it in, and which thresholds therefore apply to you? 2. Is the money committed, or merely intended? 3. Which obligations does its value trigger, and do you hold them today rather than at tender close? 4. Can you evidence the commitments you would make, not just write them? Most firms find their gap at question three or four. Post where yours is. If a few of us do this the answers get more useful, and I will respond to each one. Series 2 starts Wednesday.

This one’s worth breaking down, because it costs SMEs winnable work all the time. A tender rewards “support of local business.” A contractor checks their address, sees they’re in the wrong region, and writes the whole thing off. Understandable, but usually wrong. Here’s the reframe. A “support of local business” criterion is almost never a simple postcode test. It’s an economic-contribution test. The evaluator isn’t really asking where your office is. They’re asking how much of the money from this contract stays in our region. That’s a question you can actively influence. So on a recent job where our client was based one region over, we didn’t accept a low local score. We built the response around evidenced regional contribution: • Materials sourced from suppliers inside the buyer’s region • A locally based subcontractor brought onto the delivery • The percentage of total contract spend staying in the region, mapped out • Evidence attached, so it was demonstrated, not just asserted A business that read as “non-local” on paper ended up presenting a genuine, documented local economic footprint, and stayed in the fight on the exact criterion that looked like an automatic loss. The principle travels well beyond local content: before you disqualify yourself on any criterion, read how it’s actually scored. Half the time the barrier isn’t a rule. It’s an assumption you’ve made about the rule. Question for the room: what’s a criterion you’ve assumed you couldn’t score on? Local content, financials, experience, something else? Let’s pull a few apart. 👇

Worth knowing if you're planning cleared resourcing for a bid. Everyone quotes AGSVA's processing targets: Baseline 20 business days, NV1 70, NV2 100, PV 180. Real and published. The footnote is what gets missed. Those timeframes only commence once AGSVA has verified a complete application has been received. Sitting in front of them is a separate shared KPI: applications submitted and accepted within 30 business days. So published end-to-end is 50, 100, 130 and 210 business days. Of that 30 days, the Charter gives the clearance subject up to 20 business days to submit, with information accurate at lodgement. It is a deadline rather than a fixed wait, so a chunk of it comes back if your person gets the form in quickly. One more that catches people. A clearance only stays active while someone sponsors it. AGSVA's guidance says clearances without a sponsor will be made inactive and may be cancelled, and reinstatement may require additional assessments and background checks. A cleared person from a finished project may not be cleared now. Practical version: map roles to levels before you commit in a bid, start early, and check sponsorship rather than assuming. 👇 Has anyone here had a clearance lapse without realising?

Worth knowing if you're early in Defence construction and wondering why nothing suitable ever seems to be listed. For construction services, open tender is only required at $7.5 million and above. Under that threshold Defence can approach selected suppliers directly, without advertising. That's how the Commonwealth Procurement Rules are written. AusTender does show you those contracts eventually. Defence publishes contract notices within 42 days of entering into the contract. But that's after the fact. You're seeing who won, not what's available. ⏱️ The practical consequence: watching AusTender tells you about the market, not about your next job. Useful intelligence, not a pipeline. 👇 Genuine question for the group. Where did your first Defence job actually come from, a public listing or someone who already knew you?