How to Give Honest Commercial Feedback to Small and Diverse Suppliers

September 18, 2026

Blogs

How to Give Honest Commercial Feedback to Small and Diverse Suppliers

Thursday, 18 September 2026

Key takeaways

Supplier diversity policies are growing across Australian government. The Commonwealth’s Indigenous Procurement Policy generated over $13.5 billion in contracting opportunities since 2015, with the annual target rising to 3 per cent in 2025-26
The biggest disservice procurement professionals can do to a small or diverse supplier is withhold honest feedback about why their bid did not succeed or how their performance needs to improve
Honest feedback delivered with care builds supplier capability over time. Generic feedback or no feedback at all leaves suppliers guessing and repeating the same mistakes
Feedback to small and diverse suppliers must meet the same probity standards as any procurement communication: factual, documented, consistent and free from information that would disadvantage other suppliers
Developing the capability to deliver constructive commercial feedback is a supplier relationship management skill that strengthens the supply base rather than just managing it

Giving honest commercial feedback to small and diverse suppliers is one of the most important things a procurement professional can do to build a stronger supply base. It is also one of the things procurement teams most commonly avoid. The NIAA’s Indigenous Procurement Policy Reform Consultation Report found that participants reported improved understanding of buyer and Indigenous enterprise contexts, established through genuine engagement between procurement officials and Indigenous enterprises, would improve opportunities for both sides. The same principle applies to every small and diverse supplier: genuine engagement, including honest feedback, builds the capability that diversity policies are designed to create. Without it, supplier diversity becomes a compliance exercise that generates contract numbers without building a supply base that can compete on merit over time.

Why do procurement teams avoid giving honest feedback?

Three patterns explain most feedback avoidance. The first is fear of appearing discriminatory. Procurement officials worry that critical feedback to a diverse supplier will be interpreted as bias. The paradox is that withholding feedback to avoid appearing unsupportive is itself a form of discrimination. It denies the supplier the information they need to improve while protecting the procurement professional from an uncomfortable conversation.

The second is lack of time. Providing meaningful debriefs after a tender evaluation takes preparation. For a procurement team processing dozens of evaluations, the temptation is to send a generic “your submission was not successful” notification and move on. The third is lack of skill. Many procurement professionals have not been trained in how to deliver commercial feedback constructively. They know how to evaluate a bid but not how to explain their assessment in a way that the supplier can act on.

Why does honest feedback matter more for small and diverse suppliers?

Large suppliers have dedicated bid teams that can analyse their own performance across hundreds of tender submissions. They build internal feedback loops, track win rates by category and invest in continuous improvement of their bid capability. Small suppliers typically do not have these resources. A small business that loses a government tender may not understand whether the problem was pricing, technical capability, compliance, presentation or all four. Without feedback from the buyer, they are guessing.

The NIAA’s Indigenous Procurement Policy page reports that over 4,700 Indigenous businesses have secured more than 86,000 contracts since 2015, with the 2024-25 year generating $1.6 billion in new contracts across 1,200 businesses. These numbers demonstrate growing participation. What they do not show is how many businesses bid unsuccessfully and received no meaningful feedback about why. Each of those missed debriefs is a missed opportunity to build the supplier’s capability for the next round.

What does good feedback look like?

Good feedback is specific, factual and actionable. It addresses what the supplier did well, where their submission fell short against the evaluation criteria and what they could do differently next time. It avoids vague language (“your submission did not demonstrate sufficient capability”) in favour of specific observations (“your submission addressed two of the four evaluation criteria in detail but did not provide evidence of experience in risk management or contract transition planning”).

The feedback must also stay within probity boundaries. The Department of Finance’s announcement on CPR changes reinforces the value for money framework that governs all Commonwealth procurement. Feedback should reference the published evaluation criteria, not disclose the scores or relative ranking of other bidders and not reveal commercially sensitive information from competing submissions. The standard is the same as any procurement communication: factual, documented, consistent and defensible.

A well structured debrief covers three elements. First, what the submission did well, because acknowledgement of strengths builds the relationship and provides a foundation the supplier can build on. Second, where the submission fell short, tied to specific evaluation criteria with enough detail that the supplier understands what was missing. Third, what the supplier could consider for future submissions, framed as practical guidance rather than guaranteed outcomes.

How should feedback differ during contract performance?

Feedback during a contract is different from feedback after a tender. During performance, the buyer has an ongoing relationship with the supplier and a direct interest in the supplier’s success. Performance feedback should be regular, structured and documented through the contract’s governance framework.

The ANAO’s audit of Indigenous procurement targets found that transparency of suppliers’ performance against Indigenous participation targets remained a gap. When performance feedback is absent or generic, small suppliers cannot course correct. When it is honest and timely, they can. A supplier being told in September that their monthly reporting does not meet the contract’s requirements has time to fix it. A supplier being told in June at contract end that their reporting was inadequate for the entire year has been denied the opportunity to improve.

For diverse suppliers who are building their capability through government work, performance feedback is especially valuable because the contract is itself a development pathway. The procurement professional who treats performance management as a compliance check misses the opportunity. The one who treats it as a development conversation strengthens the supply base.

What makes this harder in practice?

Power imbalance is the central difficulty. A government buyer holds significant market power relative to a small supplier. The supplier depends on the relationship for revenue. The buyer has multiple alternatives. This imbalance can make the supplier reluctant to push back on feedback and can make the buyer reluctant to deliver it firmly. The ATO’s supplier diversity guidance describes the structured frameworks through which Commonwealth entities engage with Indigenous businesses, SMEs and Australian Disability Enterprises. These frameworks provide the structure, but the quality of the interaction within that structure depends on the capability of the individual procurement professional.

Cultural context also matters. Feedback norms differ across cultures, and diverse supplier populations include businesses whose owners may interpret direct feedback differently depending on their cultural background. This does not mean softening the message. It means being thoughtful about how it is delivered: in person where possible, with respect for the relationship, with time for questions and with a clear distinction between the assessment of the submission and the assessment of the person.

How can procurement professionals build this capability?

AcademyGlobal (AG), the Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply (CIPS) Centre of Excellence for Australia, New Zealand and Southeast Asia, delivers programs that build the supplier engagement and relationship management skills that honest feedback requires. AG’s Supplier Relationship Management in the Public Sector program addresses how to build segmented supplier governance, conduct performance reviews and maintain productive relationships with suppliers across the capability spectrum. For professionals building broader procurement capability, AG’s Procurement Fundamentals workshop covers the full procurement cycle, including the evaluation, debriefing and supplier management stages where feedback capability is most directly tested.

Supplier diversity policies create the opportunity for small and diverse businesses to participate in government procurement. Honest feedback is what converts that opportunity into capability. The procurement professionals who master this skill do not just manage suppliers. They develop them.

Frequently asked questions

Why is honest feedback important for small and diverse suppliers?

Small suppliers typically lack the internal resources to analyse their own bid performance. Without buyer feedback, they repeat the same mistakes. Honest feedback builds the supplier’s capability over time, which strengthens the supply base and improves competition quality.

Does giving feedback to diverse suppliers create probity risk?

No, provided the feedback is factual, tied to published evaluation criteria, consistent with what other suppliers receive, documented and free from commercially sensitive information about competing bids. The probity standard is the same for all suppliers.

What should a tender debrief include?

Three elements: what the submission did well, where it fell short against the evaluation criteria (with specific observations) and what the supplier could consider for future submissions.

Should performance feedback during a contract be different?

Yes. Performance feedback should be regular, structured and timely so the supplier can course correct during the contract, not at the end. It is especially valuable for diverse suppliers building capability through government work.

Where can I develop supplier relationship management skills?

AcademyGlobal’s Supplier Relationship Management in the Public Sector program builds the skills to conduct performance reviews, deliver constructive feedback and manage productive relationships across a diverse supply base.