Bidding Process Irregularities: A Business Law Case Study Analysis

This case study examines the ethical breaches in a bidding process involving Tom Jones, Mark Smith, and Strong Built. The assignment analyzes the parties involved, detailing their roles and the relevant facts, including the unethical actions of Mark Smith who attempts to gain an unfair advantage by using competitors' bidding information. The study identifies key ethical issues such as professionalism, confidentiality, due diligence, fairness, integrity, and transparency. It further explores how these ethical issues interrelate between the parties, particularly the breaches of confidentiality and integrity. The analysis proposes potential solutions, such as Tom Jones maintaining ethical conduct and reporting unethical behavior, and suggests constraints like intimidation. Finally, the case concludes with a call for adherence to professional codes of conduct and ethical bidding practices. The assignment is structured to address the learning outcomes of understanding business law and identifying relevant issues.

BIDDING PROCESS IRREGULARITIES 1
Bidding process irregularities
Name
Course
Professor’s name
Institution
Location of institution
Date.

BIDDING PROCESS IRREGULARITIES 2
Bidding process Irregularities.
The parties involved and facts relevant to each party.
The parties involved are Tom Jones, New salesperson at Wood Truss
commercial building supply firm. Mark smith, is Tom’s boss at Wood Truss.
These are the relevant facts. Tom is a salesperson for Wood Truss. He
reviews bills of materials and prepares bids for his company. Mark is highly
involved in illegal robbing of contracts from construction firms such as Strong
Built. He uses the inside employees of contractors to get their bids. Strong
Built. It is a commercial contract. The insider of Strong Built, he/she provided
bidding information to Mark and said the lowest bidder takes the contract
(Vörösmarty& Matyusz, 2015).
Ethical issues for each party.
The bidding process irregularities are a big threat to business
performance at all levels of contracts awarding (Dimitri, 2013, Balaeva, &
Yakovlev, 2017). Irregularities are highly evidenced in between contractors
and company employees. The ethical issues involved are; Professionalism:
Tom’s respect and loyalty to the profession standards. He protested the use
of competitors bidding information to complete him firm’s bid.
Confidentiality by the contractor. Providing Mark, the bidding documents of
other firms before the due date was unethical. Revealing the extra plus for
winning the contract to Mark by the insiders violated the bidding process.
Due diligence: Strong Built employee’s due diligence in doing his work.

BIDDING PROCESS IRREGULARITIES 3
Providing extra information to mark about the selection criteria ( Shakantu,
2006).
Fairness of Wood truss due to the inside contact from Strong Built
contract gave the company favoritism over other bidders. Integrity: there
was dishonest for Tom because he was not allowed to do his work
professional. Tom’s boss contacts made the business stand instead of the
expertise of Wood truss company. Transparency; Strong Built contractors
were not practicing transparency while conducting the bidding process. The
connivance of the employees with the bidders showed loopholes in the
procurement criteria (Özlen. & Čengić, 2013). Mark convinced Tom to use
the competitors’ information that denied him transparency of the
professional code of conduct.
How each party’s ethical issues related to other parties?
Confidentiality. Both Mark and strong Built were unethical. Strong Built
failure to keep secrecy of the bidding information from other competitors.
Integrity. There was no truthfulness portrayed by Mark. This affected Tom
since Mark said that the only way of doing business was to get an insider
involvement. Strong Built should increase the visibility and integrity of
ethical rules among her employees. Through visibility and integrity,
protection and secrecy of all bidders in safeguarded to help in proper
decision making (Vörösmarty, & Matyusz,. 2015). Professionalism should be
practiced amongst the parties. Tom’s reaction to using documents for other

BIDDING PROCESS IRREGULARITIES 4
competitors portrayed the level of professionalism in him. Due diligence in
the bidding process. Transparency for contractors. Mark was confident of
winning the contract with the help of the insider. Corruption may have taken
course to help Wood Truss win. Increased transparency in the procurement
process is very important. Businesses need to know stages of procurement
and have protection through handing in sealed bids.
possible solution(s) or alternative(s) for each party’s ethical issues
It is evident that there is a case of unethical tendering behaviour. The case
demonstrates cover pricing and collusive tendering. This has reduced the
potential for any genuine competition and thereby eroding the benefits
which come with competitive tendering. An ethical solution in this case is for
Tom Jones to maintain his duty to ensure to a careful examination of
construction tenders. He should maintain his ethical duty to identify to reject
and also report any acts of bribery. He should consult legal authorities to
handle the matter and bring to justice any parties that seek to suffocate
professional and ethical contractual practices (David., Yavuz., Samuel, 2018).
As for Mark Smith, he should listen to the advice by the Tom regarding the
need for professional and ethical practices in the bidding process. In the
event that it’s discovered that his actions are based on lack of knowledge of
ethical practices in the contractual process, he should be empowered. Efforts
should be taken to teach and educate Mark smith the ethical practitioner in
the field of contractual and bidding processes. A conscious effort should be

BIDDING PROCESS IRREGULARITIES 5
put in place to ensure that a corporate code of ethical conduct should be
followed at all times and by everyone at the firm (Özlen., Tulić, & Čengić,
2013).
Strong Built was also in violation of the ethical duty to be fair and
confidential to all the competitors. By disclosing classified information
regarding Wood Truss’s competitors, the company did not only violate its
ethical duty to have integrity, due diligence and confidentiality, it also
committed an illegal act. The promoters and directors at Strong Built should
be prosecuted in the courts of law for conniving to derail ethical contractual
bidding practices (Balaeva & Yakovlev.2017).
possible constraint(s) or barrier(s) that might prevent a resolution
of the ethical issues for the parties
There is a possibility for Tom to be compromised through intimidation and
threats. Given that its Tom’s boss that is engaged in such a dishonest act,
Tom might want to protect his job and hence refrain from trying to be the
whistle blower (Rahman et al,2007).
The other barrier might be a connivance between two couplable companies
to evade any efforts aimed at pursuing justice. They could collude to destroy
evidence (Imhof, 2018).
Unprofessionalism. Professionalism is vital in promoting ethical issues in any
organization. All the parties need to consent to a high level of professional
standards (Dimitri,2013).

BIDDING PROCESS IRREGULARITIES 6
Conclusion
It is clear that Mark Smith’s behaviour is both unethical and illegal. Tom
should henceforth stick to his professional code of conduct and refuse to be
engaged in acts that compromise honest and ethical efforts for competitive
and professional bidding.
References
Balaeva, O., & Yakovlev., (2017). Estimation of costs in the Russian public
procurement system. International Journal of Procurement Management. 10.
70. 10.1504/IJPM.2017.10000827.
David, I., Yavuz, K., Samuel, R. (2018). Journal of Competition Law &
Economics, Volume 14, Issue 2, June 2018, Pages 235–261

BIDDING PROCESS IRREGULARITIES 7
Dimitri, N. (2013) ‘“Best value for money” in procurement’, Journal of Public
Procurement,
Imhof, D. (2018). "SCREENING FOR BID RIGGING—DOES IT WORK?". Journal
of Competition Law & Economics. 14 (2): 235–
261. doi:10.1093/joclec/nhy006.
Özlen, M. K., Tulić, M., & Čengić, S. (2013). Ethics and Competitiveness in
Supply Chain Management. Management, 3(5), 259–265.
doi:10.5923/j.mm.20130305.03
Rahman, H.A., Karim, S.B.A., Danuri, M.S.M., Berawi, M.A., Yap, X.W. (2007).
Does professional ethic affects construction quality? Quantity Surveying
International Conference. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Shakantu, W.M.W. (2006). Corruption in the construction industry: Forms,
susceptibility and possible solutions. CIDB 1st Postgraduate Conference
2003. South Africa: Port Elizabeth, 274-283.
Vol. 13, No. 2, pp.149–175
Vörösmarty, G.,& Matyusz, Z. (2015). Ethical issues in the companies' buying
practice. Közgazdász Fórum / Forum on Economics and Business. 18.