‘Experience required’

Back in the day when you looked for jobs via the Classified Ads section, most company advertisements would state that jobs posted required work experience, some would even insist on at least two years working experience. The requirement was quite understandable because the last thing a company would want to do is to spend time and money training a fresh recruit that might have a long and slow learning curve.

The more complicated or highly technical the vacancy was, the greater emphasis on experience and other requirements indicated on the vacancy announcement. Aside from a Master’s degree or specialist certificate for engineering etc., employers would usually specify a particular field of expertise accompanied with several years of both office and field work. The candidates or applicants who could present proof of work abroad or in a multinational company based abroad definitely had the edge or got preferential treatment.

Of course, if you were looking for a future spouse, tradition prefers no prior experience. However, society and people dictate that the candidate fits a specific set of expectations in terms of physical attributes, cultural, moral and spiritual background, and lately some people have suggested that you also check on the mental history of your candidate and his or her family.

In terms of business partnerships, CEOs and corporations now require due diligence and complete background check on the integrity, financial history and stability of persons and companies wanting to enter into a partnership or joint venture. After all that they once again do a due diligence or complete staff work on proposed projects and financial requirements.

Just recently, it occurred to me that the Philippine government should start considering how various infrastructure and development projects are bidded out, particularly in terms of experience, expertise and financial capacity of groups and companies allowed to join such biddings. The government should also start determining the true value of their projects and income potentials to put a stop to cheapskate bidders who under price and undercut the government with their offers.

For several decades now, I have heard or known of such projects and biddings where bidders and some winners/suppliers had no prior experience but got such big government contracts, only to fail. I have repeatedly read and heard members of Congress and the Senate blow their top upon finding out that the real paid-up capital of certain groups and individuals were so miniscule that they would not even be entertained by a micro entrepreneur.

To this day, we keep hearing about how people and companies get together to form a coalition, a super group, or consortium in order to make an impression and an imaginary image of being a big-time corporation. There’s nothing wrong with that, says Philippine laws and business practice, but on the other hand it is largely “fake” if not fraudulent because it’s all temporary and artificial.

The Filipino term for it is “pa-impress.” I call it misrepresentation because you essentially got your “barkada” together formed a fake super company in order to project your legitimacy as a qualified bidder for a government project. But image and perceived legitimacy is not the vital issue as far as government biddings go.

Former president Rodrigo Duterte correctly pointed out that awarding government contracts to the lowest bid is illogical and often disadvantageous to the government. Well, even before that happens, the government should really seriously study and insist on: EXPERIENCE REQUIRED.

Whether the government project involves, roads, bridges, gymnasiums, schools, highways, seaports or airports, there is no doubt that the government would benefit largely by requiring bidders to have experience and local track record aside from any external experts and accomplishments they may bring in from abroad.

In the last two decades, we have all heard of local companies and partnerships that know nothing about certain industries or government projects, their solution is to simply partner up with foreign entities who either have the financial war chest or global reputation and expertise related to certain fields. From trains, the MRT, dams, power plants, to water distribution, etc.

Undertaking major government projects should be done by groups and companies that know what they are doing and have experience and track record doing the project required because experience connotes efficiency in terms of planning, costing and implementation.

Companies who have done or specialize on such project in the country already have the manpower, equipment on the ground and network for better, quicker and safer implementation of projects. Any business expert or engineering consultancy firm can tell you that newcomers are generally not invested in the business.

They don’t have an ongoing concern as project developers, experts with manpower and equipment. Newcomers rely on first getting the contract or winning the bids for major projects, will belatedly be formulating their working plan and relying largely on “job outs” or farming out the various aspects of a project starting from engineering design, environmental impact studies, clearing right of way, land preparation, structural engineering etc., etc.

Given the multiple engagements and companies the newcomer or inexperienced bidder will have to work with, the comparative cost for a newbie or non-specialist doing a government project will be several times higher. You are not just paying the service providers directly, you are also paying for their subcontractors, suppliers, etc. In addition to that, there is a higher cost in terms of corruption or opportunity for corruption. Experienced and established companies and corporations know how to deal with all that at a much lesser cost.

Truly there is wisdom when they say: Experience Required.