The most important feeling is not that the technical options are different, but that the issues in the tender documents themselves are far more difficult to handle."Support for unified identification"、":: A seamless interface with existing systems"、"Provide complete log retention"It looks like every one of them is good, but the judges can't judge which one at the time of evaluation."It's seamless."And what one?"Uniform"It is one thing. The vagueness of the solicitation documents is the source of subsequent contractual disputes.
These types of requirements are most frequently presented in actual bids for higher and vocational education, and it is the hardest to be clear.
Harmonization of identification
This is almost a label, but the understandings of each household vary. Some say that even if support for LDAP is matched, some believe that it is true to have a single point entry on campusnet and the teaching system accounts, while others think that a uniform identity not only includes account synchronization, but also one point exit from the unified portal and cross-system session management.
Three understandings correspond to three sets of technology realization options, and the price is not missing by a single star."Support for unified identification"The winner will say when the contract is signed"We support LDAP, which is a unified identity."The school will say,"I want a single login. It's not the same thing."The difference is not in technology, and the boundaries are not clearly defined at the stage of defining needs.
Multi-equipment binding policy
Students are connected to the Internet using mobile phones, tablets, notebooks, a number of devices that can be tied up, how to calculate the amount and how to change the equipment. These are usually included in the solicitation documents.
One school wrote it on the bidding."Support multi-equipment management"The system is online, and students find an account number with up to two devices, which means they're forced off the line. School is meant to protect bandwidth resources, and students think it's a majestic clause."Two devices."The restrictions were not mentioned at all in the solicitation documents, but were default configurations in the system, and communication between the parties on this parameter took place after the signing of the contract when it was discovered that the system had already run.
Retention cycle and query function for logs
When insurance and financial audit requirements are in place, they usually write."The log stays at least six months."But it is rarely clear in the details solicitation documents, which logs, what the retention format is, who has access to the search and how much time it takes to respond. When the evaluation body comes to check out the log format, it finds that it does not conform to the specifications, as the manufacturer says, this does not meet the requirements of your level of protection, which is the term used by each side, and the school is caught between whom it listens.
The more practical question is who checks the logs, how and how long it will be. If the process of checking the logs and response time frames are not included in the list of needs during the bidding phase, when security incidents occur, the network centre calls the manufacturer for technical support, and the firm says that we can only supply logs for three working days on our side, and schools cannot afford to wait.
Smooth transition to package changes
Some schools adjust their billing strategies after the system is online, for example, from long to bandwidth."Support flexible package configuration"It seems that nothing's wrong, but the smooth transition of a package switch is the real problem.——The historical bills can be traced to the processing of orders, the handling of fees withheld before conversion but not used up.
There was a case in which three months after the first line, the school wanted to change the monthly package into a school-style package, and after the system had been cut off, an old group of students who said that their monthly package had not expired but had already been switched. The billings found that the system converted the remaining duration into a correspondence for the new set, but the formula for conversion was different from the initial communication between the schools. This translation logic was never mentioned during the bidding phase; the parties agreed that they knew each other and did not get the same understanding until they were online.
Quantifiable nature of acceptance and inspection criteria
Almost all the acceptance clauses for solicitation documents are in place."System operations are stable"、"Users react well"This is a subjective expression."Run steady."And the manufacturer understands."Function running properly"The blogger says that the government is not in a position to do so."Users react well"There may not even be a specific threshold for the number of complaints in the quantitative indicators.
If the acceptance criteria are subjective, there is a dispute at the contract enforcement stage: schools say that systems are unstable, students complain more often, manufacturers say functions are achieved, complaints are user-friendly and nobody can convince anyone. A truly valid acceptance clause should be clear about specific quantifiable indicators: for example, certification success rates are not lower, billing delays do not exceed a few seconds, failure recovery times do not exceed minutes, rather than writing a sentence."Run steady."The two sides are waiting to be checked.
The solicitation documents are the legal basis for the contract, not the programme design document.