Spotting bid-rigging patterns
Listen to this lesson
Nigerian voice narration
Fictional training case. Across 12 past tenders, the same three firms keep bidding and taking turns to win, a pattern that raised eyebrows at internal audit. The procurement officer must analyse the tender history for collusion indicators and escalate properly, without making public accusations that could expose the office to liability. Work through the example, identify the evidence needed and practise the method with cleared or synthetic inputs. Any additional figures in the explanation are separate practice examples, not claimed rows in a downloadable file.
Worked example
Paste the anonymised tender history — bidders, bid amounts, dates, and winners — and ask AI to check for rotation of winners, suspiciously close bid amounts, identical pricing errors across 'competing' firms, and any shared contact details or addresses. Ask it to list each flagged pattern with the specific tender references as evidence, not a vague conclusion. Verify the flagged addresses and phone numbers yourself against the vendor registration database, since this is the kind of factual claim AI must not be trusted to assert without a source. Compile the verified evidence into a schedule and route it to the appropriate oversight or anti-corruption unit — never post or discuss it informally.
The method
Pattern-flag-then-verify: ask AI to detect statistical and textual patterns across the dataset, but treat every flagged item as a hypothesis to independently verify against the vendor registration records before it becomes part of an evidence schedule.
Worked practice and common mistakes
A shared address or rotating wins is a concern, not proof of collusion. Record the period, tender references and alternative explanations, including a shared service location. Independently check material claims and keep original records. The useful result is a traceable concern for authorised oversight review, not a public allegation or an automatic exclusion of bidders.
Review before using the result
Confirm at least two flagged patterns (e.g. shared address, bid rotation) independently in the vendor database before compiling the escalation file.
Your workplace practice
Use the recommended free assistant with this lesson's fictional example. Ask for the output described in the worked example. Keep a copy of the input and draft. Compare the result with the verification steps above, record any correction, and retain placeholders where evidence is missing. The expected result is a checked draft for human review, not an automatically approved decision. Course examples and practice responses are fictional; amounts, dates, rules and thresholds are not official guidance or supplier quotations.
Why this tool: Good at scanning tender history tables for repeated patterns.
Hit a free limit? Switch to ChatGPT or Gemini and continue — the prompt works in any assistant.