The Fourth C: What Travel Procurement Must Test Before Award

Capability. Cost. Culture. Commercial sustainability.

By Gemma Ryder, Director of Bids and Account Management at arrangeMY

Travel management RFPs are becoming more sophisticated.

That does not automatically mean the decisions are getting better.

A detailed pricing schedule, extensive questionnaire and polished technology demonstration can all create the appearance of rigour. But none of them, on their own, tells a buyer how the relationship will perform when implementation slips, travellers resist change, volumes fall or disruption hits.

Early in my career, I was taught that every good procurement decision should balance three things:

Capability. Cost. Culture.

After more than 20 years in business travel and over 15 years leading bids, I still believe those principles matter.

But I now believe travel procurement needs a fourth C:

Commercial sustainability.

This is not an argument for higher fees or greater supplier margins. It is about whether the commercial model behind a proposal can continue funding the people, technology, account management and service being promised throughout the contract.

Appointing a Travel Management Company is not simply buying a booking tool or agreeing a transaction fee. It is selecting an operating model and a supplier relationship that may need to perform for the next three, five or seven years.

A strong travel management tender should help the buyer predict that future, not simply compare responses.

The rules have changed. Has the evaluation?

The Procurement Act 2023 came into force on 24 February 2025. For procurements within its scope, the award terminology moved from the “most economically advantageous tender” to the “most advantageous tender”.

Government guidance confirms that the basis of award is largely unchanged, but the wording reinforces that wider factors than price can be considered when determining value. The Act also introduced the competitive flexible procedure, allowing contracting authorities to design multi-stage processes suited to the requirement and market. (GOV.UK)

That flexibility is particularly relevant to travel management services.

Strong written bids still matter. A good response should demonstrate understanding, provide evidence, address risk and make clear commitments.

But procurement should also test whether the organisation behind the response can deliver what has been written.

That is where the four Cs can help.

Start with the problem, not the RFP

Some organisations begin designing a tender before establishing what they need the market to solve.

This is particularly common in unmanaged or fragmented travel programmes. Bookings may sit across airline websites, hotel platforms, rail providers, personal assistants and individual travellers. Meetings, groups, long stays and emergency requirements may all be handled separately.

The visible cost is the booking.

The less visible cost may include internal administration, missed VAT recovery, booking leakage, fragmented data, inconsistent decisions and weak traveller tracking.

The first question should not be:

Which TMC has the lowest transaction fee?

It should be:

What are we trying to control, improve or achieve?

The data does not need to be perfect. A lack of reliable data may itself be part of the problem.

But without an honest baseline, suppliers must price and design their services around assumptions. The buyer then risks comparing different interpretations of the requirement rather than different solutions to the same problem.

1. Capability

Capability is not a list of system features.

It is the supplier’s ability to manage the complete requirement, including the parts that do not fit neatly into an online booking tool.

Many travel management tenders still focus heavily on air, rail, hotel and booking technology. Those areas matter, but organisations may also need complex travel, group movements, apprentice or project accommodation, long stays, emergency decant support, venue sourcing, event management and sustainable event planning.

Not every service needs to sit with one supplier. But buyers should understand the whole requirement before choosing the operating model.

Technology should also be tested against real journeys rather than broad functionality claims.

Ask suppliers to demonstrate what happens when a booking needs to change, a public rate appears cheaper, a request falls outside policy, disruption occurs or human intervention is required.

Buyers should distinguish clearly between capability that is live today and capability that requires configuration, third-party support, additional cost or future development.

The newest platform is not automatically the right solution. The right technology is the one that fits the programme, is adopted by users and is properly supported when the process becomes complicated.

The capability test: Can this supplier manage our complete requirement, including the difficult and specialist parts?

2. Cost

Cost matters.

Suppliers should expect their fees to be challenged, and buyers have a responsibility to secure value.

The risk is allowing the easiest number to compare to become the whole commercial conversation.

A transaction fee explains one element of the cost. It does not explain the total financial impact of the programme.

A credible evaluation should also consider implementation, integrations, complex support, payment arrangements, VAT recovery, booking leakage, late-booking behaviour and the cost of fragmented suppliers or poor service.

Savings must also be defined properly.

Realised savings, negotiated savings, behavioural savings and cost avoidance are different measures. Procurement should agree the baseline and methodology before accepting a headline savings figure.

This is not an argument for paying more.

It is an argument for understanding total value rather than comparing one visible price in isolation.

The cost test: What will this programme genuinely cost, and how will value be measured?

3. Culture

Culture is often reduced to generic questions about values, communication and partnership.

But culture is visible in behaviour.

It is how quickly people take ownership when something goes wrong. It is whether difficult conversations are addressed. It is whether the supplier challenges constructively and whether decision-makers remain accessible after the sales process.

Most importantly, it is reflected in account management.

The proposed account manager should form part of the evaluation, not be introduced after award.

Give them a sample of the organisation’s travel data and ask:

• What do you see?
• Where is value being lost?
• What would you prioritise?
• What would your first 100 days look like?

Buyers can test account management through practical scenarios, references, workloads, escalation structures and evidence of measurable improvement.

Supplier relationship management also requires responsibility on both sides. A TMC cannot create value alone. The buyer must provide the data, governance, stakeholder support and willingness to act.

At arrangeMY, bringing bids and account management together at board level is deliberate. The commitments made during the tender should become the starting point for implementation, governance and the account plan. They should not disappear into a folder once the contract is signed.

The culture test: How will this supplier behave when circumstances are difficult?

4. Commercial sustainability

A lower-cost TMC is not automatically commercially unsustainable.

Some TMCs deliberately prioritise volume, scale and market share. Technology, automation or income generated elsewhere may allow them to operate at fee levels that would not be viable for another supplier.

Those can be legitimate commercial strategies.

The risk arises when the buyer does not understand how the model works, which assumptions support it or what may change during the contract.

Commercial sustainability does not mean selecting the supplier with the highest fees or greatest profit margin.

It means determining whether the model is transparent, resilient and capable of supporting the service promise.

Buyers should understand:

• how the TMC generates its revenue
• which volumes and online-adoption levels underpin the pricing
• how account management and consultancy are funded
• what happens if volumes fall or complexity increases
• which fees or services may change during the contract

A higher fee should not be rejected simply because another supplier has proposed a lower one.

Equally, it should not be accepted without understanding the value, service model and commercial assumptions behind it.

The question is not whether a supplier prioritises profitability, volume or market share.

It is whether the buyer understands the implications of that strategy and whether the service being promised can endure.

The commercial sustainability test: Can the model still support the promise if the original assumptions change?

Sustainability should not be a separate conversation

Environmental sustainability should run through all four Cs.

It requires credible data and practical capability. It can involve different policy and commercial decisions. It depends on a relationship where both parties are prepared to challenge behaviour and act on the findings.

The same applies to sustainable event planning. Sustainability should influence destination, venue, transport, food, production, suppliers and measurement from the beginning, not be added to a proposal at the end.

Another dashboard will not change behaviour on its own. Someone must interpret the information, identify the priorities and help the organisation act.

Make the procurement process credible

The tender is often a supplier’s first experience of how the organisation manages relationships.

Timelines change and internal approvals take longer than expected. Suppliers understand that.

What damages confidence is prolonged silence, repeated deadline changes, indefinite pauses or a lack of meaningful feedback after substantial supplier investment.

Where a timetable changes, explain why and provide a realistic update.

Where an incumbent is competing, procurement should also be clear internally about the organisation’s appetite for change.

Incumbency brings knowledge, established integrations and lower transition risk. A challenger must demonstrate enough additional value to justify the disruption.

That is a valid commercial consideration. But it should be recognised rather than hidden behind a process the organisation is unlikely to act on.

Before approaching the market, buyers should understand what would justify changing supplier, whether stakeholders support the change and what implementation resource is available.

Tendering when the organisation is not genuinely prepared to act wastes time on both sides.

Procurement is a two-way due diligence process. Suppliers are also assessing whether expectations are realistic, decisions will be transparent and the eventual relationship is likely to work.

Better tools will not replace better judgement

AI can help analyse submissions, compare evidence and identify inconsistencies.

But it will only be as effective as the data, rules and governance behind it.

Procurement should ask where AI is used, what data it accesses, when human intervention takes over and who remains accountable.

As tender responses become more polished and consistent, evidence, transparency and practical testing will matter more, not less.

A future-fit travel procurement decision should answer four questions:

Capability: Can the supplier deliver the complete requirement?

Cost: What will the programme genuinely cost and what value will it create?

Culture: How will the relationship work under pressure?

Commercial sustainability: Can the model continue supporting the promise?

The fourth C is not a reason to reject low prices or favour one type of TMC over another.

It is a reason to ask better questions.

A strong bid should explain what the supplier is promising.

A strong procurement process should establish whether that promise is right for the organisation, whether it can be delivered and whether it will last.

Preparing a travel management RFP?

If your organisation is preparing to tender its travel management services, I would be happy to offer a no-obligation consultation before you approach the market.

We can discuss your current programme, the outcomes you want to achieve, the information suppliers will need and how your evaluation can properly test capability, cost, culture and commercial sustainability.

Connect with me on LinkedIn or contact me at Gemma.Ryder@arrangeMY to arrange an initial conversation.

About the author

Gemma Ryder is Director of Bids and Account Management at arrangeMY, where she leads strategic tenders, renewals and the account management function at board level.

With more than 20 years’ experience in business travel and over 15 years leading bids, Gemma brings a distinctive perspective on the full client lifecycle, from procurement and implementation through to governance and long-term contract delivery.