Jatin Walia from P&R Infraproject shares views on L1 Bidding System

The QCBS framework, where technical capability, past performance, and financial strength are considered alongside cost, promotes competitiveness while ensuring long-term value, allowing infrastructure projects to deliver benefits beyond immediate savings.

Jatin Walia
Sr. Project Manager
P&R Infraprojects

L1: True Expenses Often Surface Later

The L1 bidding system, designed to ensure cost competitiveness, often compromises project planning, quality, and delivery timelines. Contractors operating on razor-thin margins frequently cut corners, whether in material quality, manpower efficiency, or maintenance planning. This approach leads to delays, disputes, and, in some cases, premature deterioration of assets. While it may seem cost-effective initially, the true expenses often surface over the long term. Compromised construction quality increases the need for maintenance and repairs, project delays escalate material and labour costs, and rework or structural issues add financial burdens while affecting safety and public trust.

Towards a More Sustainable Approach

A more balanced alternative is the quality-and-cost-based selection (QCBS) framework, where technical capability, past performance, and financial strength are considered alongside cost. Such a model promotes competitiveness while ensuring sustainability and long-term value, allowing infrastructure projects to deliver benefits beyond immediate savings. Improvements can also include performance-linked incentives, stricter pre-qualification norms, and accountability measures that extend beyond project handover, ensuring quality throughout the asset’s lifecycle.

Strengthening DPRs for Better Outcomes

Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) form the foundation of infrastructure projects, but they often fail to capture ground realities comprehensively. Inaccurate soil investigations, underestimation of local constraints, and oversight of utility diversions frequently result in significant variations during execution. This disconnect between planning and reality is a recurring challenge that contributes to cost overruns and delays.

Stronger field surveys and geotechnical studies are essential to capture local conditions accurately, along with stakeholder consultations involving contractors, local authorities, and end-users before finalization. Integrating digital tools such as GIS mapping, BIM, and drone surveys can enhance accuracy, while independent peer reviews of DPRs can help flag risks before tendering. By improving DPR quality at the preparation stage, risks during execution can be minimized, enabling projects to achieve both quality and timely delivery.