Clarify gaps and disclose conflicts
See this course’s project requirements
A requirement brief, three-offer comparison, and documented purchase recommendation ready for an authorized approver.
Keep your working files in your own notebook or software. Save a private description, checklist, and work link in My Proof.
What to include
- A one-page requirement and eligibility screen.
- A normalized quotation table with totals and flags.
- An evidence-based scorecard and tradeoff statement.
- A clarification log, revised eligibility screen, and disclosure note.
- A recommendation memo with evidence and approval status.
- A final purchase packet with acceptance checklist and discrepancy handoff.
Review and revise
Use these criteria to check your work and choose what to improve.
- Every required section is present and traceable to the supplied case facts.
- Decisions separate known facts, assumptions, and unresolved questions.
- Records, calculations, and instructions agree with each other and the stated rules.
- The final revision addresses a changed case and explains what someone should do next.
Want more background?
The idea in everyday life
Gamma’s offer says “8 days after proof approval”; the brief needs delivery within 10 days after order. Proof preparation takes 3 days and production/delivery then takes 8. Jo’s cousin works at Gamma. Policy: record possible conflicts and ask purchasing lead Lee whether Jo should leave scoring; only Lee can approve a deadline change.
Clarification improves the evidence; disclosure protects the decision process.
Clarify gaps and disclose conflicts — guided practice
Resolve uncertain terms without giving one supplier a hidden advantage.
Use a text editor, a free document editor, or paper. Start from the following fictional records; they reset this lesson even if your earlier answer differed. Gamma’s offer says “8 days after proof approval”; the brief needs delivery within 10 days after order. Proof preparation takes 3 days and production/delivery then takes 8. Jo’s cousin works at Gamma. Policy: record possible conflicts and ask purchasing lead Lee whether Jo should leave scoring; only Lee can approve a deadline change.
1. Find the hidden clock
Separate proof preparation from post-approval delivery.
You should see: 3 + 8 = 11 days from order.
Different starting points can make identical numbers misleading.
2. Ask a narrow clarification
Draft a question asking for delivery measured from the order date.
You should see: Please confirm the full order-to-arrival duration, including proof preparation.
The question requests evidence without promising an award.
3. Disclose the relationship
Write a private note to Lee explaining the cousin relationship.
You should see: Conflict disclosed; Lee decides Jo’s evaluation role.
Disclosure lets the organization manage a possible bias.
4. Update the screen
Apply the 10-day rule to the clarified 11-day offer.
You should see: Gamma becomes ineligible unless an authorized, fairly applied change occurs.
A high score cannot override a failed essential condition.
What to finish
A clarification log, revised eligibility screen, and disclosure note.
Watch for this
Treating “days after approval” as “days after order.”
How can I tell I understand it?
Check your result against the worked example, then explain the changed case without using an unstated assumption.
Quick knowledge check
Answer all 3 questions. Get at least 2 right and the lesson completes automatically.
You’ll get an explanation for each answer. Signed in? Your results save to your account.
Pass the check. We’ll save the progress.
Answer all 3 questions above and get at least 2 right. You can review the explanations and try again.
Go to the knowledge checkOptional course overview video · same video as Lesson 1
World Bank Procurement Framework
From ISM-INDIA. Watch here or open it on YouTube .
Optional course overview. Follow the written steps below at your own pace.Tools, templates, and lesson sources
Tools and templates
Tools open in a new tab so you can keep your place here.
Sources and further reading
Explore the references behind this lesson.
Source & access notes · checked 2026-09-12
Inspected tailored criteria and clearly stated relative importance; used as federal-context examples.
Access: Public page inspected without an account.
Reuse: Reference link only. Course prose and practice data are original; no third-party text, figures, or templates are reproduced.
Source & access notes · checked 2026-09-12
Inspected impartial comparison, transportation cost and stated evaluation basis.
Access: Public page inspected without an account.
Reuse: Reference link only. Course prose and practice data are original; no third-party text, figures, or templates are reproduced.
Source & access notes · checked 2026-09-12
Inspected price reasonableness and documentation of non-price decisions.
Access: Public page inspected without an account.
Reuse: Reference link only. Course prose and practice data are original; no third-party text, figures, or templates are reproduced.
Report a problem with this lesson
Tell us what went wrong. Please leave out personal information and private project contents.