Too often managed on the basis of cost alone, generally softened with one or more supplementary services including, perhaps, on-site waste management and a willingness to deal with the unusual and unpredictable wastes that might otherwise fall outside contract terms, the supply of new waste containers, close liason with contract support service providers, and the quality of data reporting. Inertia is a common driver, retaining an existing contractor to avoid the uphealal of change while driving down costs though a sometimes faux competitive tendering exercise. 

Applying mathematical science to this process, the author has taken a formal mathematical approeach to teh assessment of various performance and selection criteria including product, dependability, price, experience and availability, an array of sub-criteria are also measured and assessed.

Of course, this is the foundation of any competative tendering process. But the formality of the assessment proposed here ensures the most detailed assessment and parity among competitors who will succeed or fail on absolute terms in a proces that cannot be swayed by other less significant or entirely irrelevant selection criteria and will be unaffected by inertia.

Though securing the best possible contract service is a key goal for waste producers, it is impossible to ignore the cost of change. Though this need not be hugely significant and is often a one-off cost with relatively brief disruption, it does encourage inertia despite the best attempts at salesmanship from competitors.

It is inevitable that assessment of competitive submissions for a new contract award will include consideration of the cost of change, and it is perhaps a surprise that this is not included in this formalised assesment process.

It will be interesting to see this process develop. But how will it cope with the tinkering of individuals within the Environment Agency who seek to manipulate the clinical waste management sector to conform to their personal ideology, and with rules administered by the Competition Commission?  Will the ‘best’ contractor be ruled out by bureaucracy and regulation, and if so can it be acceptible to be required to settlke make do with second best?