By Bill Adams
The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence starts off with the words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” To me, the meaning of the verbiage in its succeeding sentences is obvious, nonnegotiable, and not subject to individual interpretation. The representatives of the 13 colonies, known then as the united States of America and not the United States of America, all agreed to it. How does that relate to buying fire trucks? The Declaration of Independence has slightly more than 1,300 words - clear-cut, precise, and right to the point. There is no doubt about what the document says and means. Apparatus purchasing specifications (specs) today can easily run from 33,000 to more than 50,000 words. Despite the length and comprehensiveness of specs, there can be hidden meanings in the verbiage readily obvious to vendors but not necessarily to purchasers. They are subtle messages telling potential bidders not to submit a proposal. It doesn’t matter if they are by design, deceit, or ignorance. The intent of this article is to make purchasers aware of them and their ramifications. After all, they wrote the specs. Don’t confuse hidden meanings with nebulous and ambiguous terminology that cannot be defined or has multiple meanings.
Dissertations about apparatus purchasing usually explain the advantages and disadvantages of the various specification types such as open, generic, proprietary, and performance. Few admit there is such a thing as a deceptive spec that purposely masks hidden agendas. Hidden meanings can be in each type. I favor no particular style of spec and acknowledge hidden meanings may be inadvertently placed in them.
Favored Manufacturers
Spec writers often promote a favored apparatus manufacturer in their presentations and documents. Some are blatantly obvious. Others discreetly hide favoritism in the technical nuts-and-bolts portion of a spec as well as between the lines. There’s no problem showing favoritism in a publication or presentation as long as the forum allows or offers contradictory viewpoints. It’s different in the competitive bidding arena. In most political subdivisions, purchasing specs are legal documents that can’t or shouldn’t show favoritism.
It makes no difference if a fire department, vendor, consultant, or manufacturer actually writes the spec. The authority having jurisdiction owns it. Showing bias, favoritism, or obvious preference for one fire apparatus manufacturer (OEM) in a legal document can be problematic in those political subdivisions. The ethics, morality, or legality of doing so is not being debated, although purchasers should consider all when writing specs. In highly regulated and hyper-politicized settings, showing OEM partiality may put a fire department in a precarious and an unwanted position. Nobody wants to be accused of collusion, collaboration, or restraint of trade. It is the fire department’s problem because it wrote the specs. Be careful not to put your department in the position where it can be accused of “gorging itself at the feed trough of public funds.” It might not bode well with taxpayers. And, Channel 10 News might be waiting outside in the hallway.
Don’t Bid
The following observations are mine only and do not reflect any purchaser, vendor, or apparatus manufacturer. Seldom considered are the unfortunate positions apparatus vendors can find themselves in by reading and reacting to hidden messaging in purchasing specifications. Most vendors are knowledgeable about their products. Successful ones are cognizant of their marketing territory and can quantify the potential customers within it. Perceptive ones can read subliminal messages in a spec and will react accordingly. Most of the hidden meanings are sending signals to vendors to not submit a proposal. Astute dealers re