When you respond to a tender in New Zealand, a named referee should be more than a familiar contact copied from an old proposal. Choose someone who can speak directly about the work you describe, has agreed to be contacted and understands which facts your response relies on. This preparation helps make a reference usable without turning an independent opinion into a scripted endorsement.
What the New Zealand supplier guidance recommends
New Zealand Government Procurement guidance on response content recommends relevant experience that demonstrates delivery capability. It notes that those experience examples may also supply referees, whose permission should be obtained and who should be warned that a call may follow. This is practical supplier guidance, not a universal number or type of reference for every competition. Follow the actual RFx requirements for the information, format and evidence the buyer requests.
Match the referee's knowledge to the claim
Our suggested first check is a knowledge boundary. Ask what the proposed referee personally observed: mobilisation, technical delivery, contract management, user support or final acceptance. Someone who attended a project launch may not be able to verify its later performance. A senior title does not compensate for limited knowledge of the work being used as evidence.
Next, check that the reference describes the right organisation and team. If your current employee delivered a project at a previous employer, explain that distinction honestly where relevant and permitted. Do not present a partner's complete contract as your own delivery history. The referee, case description and supporting records should all tell a consistent story about who did what.
| Preparation check | What to confirm | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Direct knowledge | Activities and period the person observed | Avoids asking them to validate unfamiliar facts |
| Permission | Agreement to be named for this purpose | Prevents an unexpected reference request |
| Contact details | Current professional route and role | Reduces failed contact attempts |
| Evidence boundary | Claims the records actually support | Keeps the reference accurate |
Brief for accuracy, not for a favourable script
Send a concise factual reminder of the project and the relevant period, subject to confidentiality restrictions. Ask the person to correct errors in your description. Do not ask them to repeat an achievement they cannot substantiate, conceal difficulties or promise a particular rating. Their independent account is more credible when your response has already separated documented outcomes from interpretation.
Use only the personal details requested or necessary for the reference process and handle them through your organisation's normal privacy controls. Confirm availability where practical, especially if the person has changed roles. Do not circulate private telephone numbers broadly within the bid team or add unrelated customer documents to the tender merely because they might impress a reviewer.
A fictional example: the project sponsor was not the service owner
Consider a Wellington advisory firm describing a six-month implementation. Its usual reference contact sponsored the launch but left before operational handover. The team identifies another appropriate contact with direct knowledge of the later work and obtains permission, subject to the tender's requirements. It also narrows a performance statement that the records cannot support. This invented example shows why reference preparation is an accuracy check rather than a hunt for the most senior name.
If the required referee cannot be reached, make the issue visible early. Review the permitted alternatives or ask the buyer through the specified channel. Do not invent agreement, imply that silence is consent or assume that a substitute reference will automatically meet the stated criteria.
Prepare evidence before polishing the story
Our New Zealand tender response guide gives the wider preparation sequence. The project reference guide helps choose evidence with a clear connection to the requirement. MyWiseDocs can support document analysis and drafting; people remain responsible for permission, accuracy and the commitments in the submitted response.
Frequently asked questions
Can we reuse the same referee for another tender?
Check their willingness and the relevance of their knowledge again. A contact who agreed to one reference is not necessarily available or appropriate for every future opportunity, particularly when the requested evidence changes.
Should we send the referee a proposed testimonial?
Do not manufacture or attribute an endorsement without genuine approval. If the tender asks for a testimonial, ensure the final wording and use are authorised and accurately reflect the person's own assessment.
Does a strong reference replace missing mandatory evidence?
No assumption of substitution is safe. Read the actual requirements and supply the specified proof. A helpful reference may support a claim, but it does not automatically satisfy an unrelated certificate, form or eligibility condition.