Discussion 8: Understanding Scope as a Supplier

The aim of this discussion is to understand what information vendors will need to know about the potential scope of this opportunity in order to respond to a future competitive process.

There are some Key Performance Indicators that suppliers of the technology would need access to in order to estimate scope of the S2C solution. The following figures are our best guesses at scope for the Province of BC at the current time:

  • The unique number of buying organizations will access the functionality? At least 420
  • The number of vendors/suppliers will be using the system? At least 21,000
  • The number of procurement notices likely to be run by ministries and the broader public sector through this system? Currently around 7,500 per year
  • The total ministry procurement expenses and the number of different commodities? Over $6.5 billion spend, on approximately 250 categories of commodities and grant-like transactions
  • The likely number of contracts from core government that will go through the system? Approximately 40,000
  • The existing tools that are used to support the procurement lifecycle?
    • Spend analytics: Data warehouse in the corporate financial solution (core government only)
    • Sourcing: BC Bid
    • Contract Management: A variety of spot solutions developed by ministries, and one corporate tool as part of the corporate financial solution
    • Performance Management: Currently managed through manual processes
  • Number of integration points required? Approximately 10


NOTEThis page summarizes the feedback received between June 15 and September 30, 2015 on the BC Bid Replacement project, and is provided for historical reference only.




1.     Nancy said on August 4, 2015 at 11:51 am:

Appreciate the KPI’s provided by would like a little more granularity.

How is this the projected being funded? By Core BC Government? By Ministries? By Local Agencies?

Can you provide a “Org” chart of BC – listing each entity and the users that would be accessing the S2P suite?

Is there a standardized Taxonomy that is used for all of BC?

Is there any concern with Spend Data with BC – can all user see all spend related data of would BC require spend cubes?


moderator Jason said on August 5, 2015 at 12:50 pm:

The reply is broken down to match your comments:

Q: How is this the projected being funded? By Core BC Government? By Ministries? By Local Agencies?

A: A business case is currently being developed requesting funding for this initiative. A funding source and cost recovery structure have not yet been determined. The cost recovery structure may in part be determined through a competitive process, since funding models vary depending on the vendor.

Q: Can you provide an “Org” chart of BC – listing each entity and the users that would be accessing the S2P suite?

A: Please note that the Province is investigating a source to contract (S2C) solution, not a source to pay (S2P) solution. A high level overview of the structure of the BC Government is available at http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations. It is very difficult to estimate the number of users from each organization that will be participating in the solution.

Q: Is there a standardized Taxonomy that is used for all of BC?

A: I’m not sure that I understand the question. Is the question regarding a standard financial taxonomy?

Q: Is there any concern with Spend Data with BC – can all user see all spend related data of would BC require spend cubes?”

A: It is anticipated that spend cubes would be required, to keep some spend data segregated and other information consolidated and shareable.


2.     Paul said on August 8, 2015 at 1:05 am:

It would help to know the phase rollout expectations for the project. Will it be a pilot with the BC government (or a subset within) first? Followed by planned or on-demand roll-outs to other interested agencies?

What is the preference of the Province with regards to separation of duties between software implementation and business process re-engineering? Is the Province comfortable with the Software providers doing the former while trusted consultancies do the latter?

With regards to integrations with various systems like Oracle and SAP, is the Province going to provide resources to manage their side of the integration work or is the intent to get outside experts with access to BC backend systems who will do the work?


moderator Jason said on August 14, 2015 at 11:41 am:

For the first question, the overall roll-out plan for source to contract technology is to implement modules in the following order: sourcing, spend analytics, contract management and performance management. Since the sourcing tool is currently used by multiple public sector organizations, it is expected that components of the sourcing module will be rolled out concurrently across the broader public sector and core government. It is expected that language will be included in the solicitation and contract documents that allows broader public sector organizations to leverage modules of the technology faster or slower than the BC government. For example, if a municipality or health authority wanted to implement the entire solution immediately, they would be free to engage the solution provider to complete this process. If there are other ways to structure this approach, the Province of B.C. is open to suggestions.

For the second question, there are no set expectations about a separation of duties for software implementation and business process re-engineering. The Province of B.C. is open to suggestions regarding appropriate separations of duties between software implementations and business process re-engineering.

For the third question, it depends on the degree of integration required between the solution and back-end systems. Options exist for both behind the firewall solutions, and software as a service (SaaS) options. A mix of internal and external resources will likely support the anticipated integration work for a future solution.


← Discussion 7: Technical Requirements Discussion 9: Key Performance Indicators →