Collaborative offering
those of previous assignments , or with reference to competitors in the market . But often it will just be a matter of trust that partners do not add an extra margin .
The second aspect concerns the legal form chosen for the offering . Does one partner act as chief contracting party , with a purchasing relationship towards the other partner or partners ? This means a bigger risk for this partner ; a risk that can be reduced by :
�
� � arranging that the partners are only paid after the client has paid and no further claims can be expected ( back-to-back construction ); requesting a bank guarantee that can be claimed in the event of delivery problems ; requesting guarantees from a holding company or shareholder to prevent the partner from going bankrupt as a result of setbacks during the project or of liabilities afterwards .
In collaborative offering , two or more companies will often want to supply their own part of the solution requested by the customer , but it also requires overall coordination and , in many instances , the customer will want to deal with just one contact point . The latter wish is in order to prevent ending up with a defective solution , should the separate supplies fail to integrate seamlessly .
In formulating a collaborative offering , there are a number of pricing aspects to consider . The first question is what margin the businesses apply in their pricing of their own contribution to the solution . Not all suppliers are willing to fully disclose their cost price calculations , and the extent to which overhead , capacity utilisation and possible inefficiencies are incorporated varies among companies . Prices can sometimes be compared to
Any reduction of this risk should be reflected in a smaller compensation premium for the chief contracting party . However , percentages of 10 to 30 % are not unusual .
Alternatively , the offer can be made as a legal partnership in which both partners have an equal position . If this implies limited liability for the partners / shareholders , this means restricted claim options for the client , who thus will have to consent to that .
Equal collaborations without limited liability for the participating parties can have the consequence that liabilities arise for both parties , instead of for just one . One reason to opt for this may relate to fiscal facilities . In multinationals , the national organisations may choose this option because share transactions , where liabilities can be limited , require the head office ' s permission .
73