Each Case Story will be assessed depending on the following criteria. Each criterion will be marked between 1 (minimum score) and 5 (Maximum score). Each Case Story shall clearly explain why it is considered an innovative one and what the level of innovation is, how it could be replicated and if it could be sustainable, considering the awarding criteria below.
- Level of innovation: Innovation in this context is defined as solutions that differ from mainstream practices and can create measurable value in public procurement (i.e. it considers the following business processes: planning, tendering, contract management, spent analysis or supply chain management). The Case Story must provide evidence of its creation of value for the procurement process and the organization. Value can be expressed in different ways (monetary value is the most obvious but not the only one) but it must be measurable. Value can be in terms of value for money, efficiency, and integrity of the procurement process.
Scoring will be based on the following:
Score Awarding Criterion 1 The Case Story is not innovative and basically builds on old ways of conducting procurement in the organization. Moreover, the submission is unable to provide evidence on how much value the Case Story is creating 2 The Case Story is innovative but the submission is unable to provide evidence on how much value the Case Story is creating. 3 The Case Story is innovative and there is clear evidence of creation of value. Nonetheless, this value is constrained to parts of the procurement cycle 4 The Case Story is innovative, there is clear evidence of value creation across the whole procurement process. This value is either monetary or non-monetary 5 The Case Story is innovative, there is clear evidence of value creation across the whole procurement process. This value is monetary and non-monetary
- Replicability: This criteria measures whether the innovation can be replicated within the organization impacting additional processes, other organizations in the country or in a different country. For example, innovations that are constrained to specific sectors or require specific legislation or systems may encounter replication difficulties
Score Awarding Criterion 1 The Case Story is too specific and cannot be replicated within the organization 2 The Case Story can be replicated to a few procurement operations but it cannot be mainstreamed in the organization 3 The Case Story can be mainstreamed in the organization/system 4 The Case Story can be adopted by other public entities within the country 5 The Case Story can be easily replicated by public agencies in different countries
- Sustainability of the innovation: This criterion assesses whether the Case Story is sustainable in the long terms. For example, if the Case Story is financially sustainable, if it is endorsed by formal regulation, if it is properly embedded in ICT systems, if it mobilizes many stakeholders, if it is aligned with the organization strategic objectives, if it is aligned with the organization’s culture or if it is endorsed openly by senior management.
Score Awarding Criterion 1 The Case Story is not sustainable or there is no evidence on how sustainability will be achieved 2 The Case Story has resources to work in the short term but there is no explanation how it will operate in the long term 3 The Case Story has a clear financial sustainability strategy 4 The Case Story has a clear financial and organizational sustainability strategy 5 The Case Story has a clear financial and organizational sustainability strategy and its fully embedded in the organization