Main contractor, JV member or subcontractor: whose experience counts and for how much?

The headline value of a project is not automatically the bidder's experience value. A contractor may have worked on a USD 500 million project while its own subcontract was USD 60 million. A JV member may have participated in a USD 300 million contract with a 35% share. Qualification forms therefore ask both the total contract amount and the bidder's participation. The evaluator is trying to identify the scale of responsibility actually carried by the legal entity that is bidding now.

World Bank's standard works prequalification example is explicit: similar contracts may have been completed as prime contractor, JV member, management contractor or subcontractor, but where the applicant participated as JV member or subcontractor only the applicant's share by value is considered for the cited requirement. The same example also explains that JV members cannot simply aggregate fractions to manufacture a single minimum-value contract where the criterion requires each contract to meet a minimum value. The exact live SPD can differ, but the principle is clear: participation is not ignored.

Scope can matter as much as value. Suppose a subcontractor performed the complete electrical and SCADA package on a major water-treatment plant. The bidder may not be entitled to claim the full civil-treatment-plant experience, but the same reference could be exceptionally strong for a tender that specifically asks for HV distribution, automation, instrumentation, control-room integration or commissioning of comparable systems. Good qualification strategy therefore decomposes each historic project into work packages and key activities rather than treating the project title as one indivisible credential.

JV structures create another common trap: legal participation and execution participation are not always identical. A JV agreement may show formal shares while the actual division of engineering, procurement and construction responsibilities is set out in a responsibility matrix or internal agreement. The bidder should preserve both. Where the procurement document asks for value participation, the financial share is critical. Where it asks for a specific key activity, the evaluator may also need evidence that the member actually executed or was responsible for that activity.

Subcontractor experience should be documented from both ends whenever possible. Keep the subcontract and amendments, approved subcontractor status where the main contract required employer approval, scope schedules, quantities, invoices/payment certificates, completion or acceptance records, and a confirmation from the main contractor or employer. If the project was MDB-financed, preserve the procurement and contract records that show the subcontract was legitimate and disclosed where required. The stronger the chain between main contract, subcontract and executed scope, the easier it is to defend the reference.

The practical bid matrix should therefore contain separate columns for project total value, bidder contractual value, bidder final executed value, participation percentage, role, key activities, completion status and supporting evidence. Never allow marketing material to populate those fields automatically. Qualification claims should be sourced from contracts, certified records and employer confirmations, not from brochures or website project values.

This article compares Turkish public-procurement work-experience rules with international tender qualification practice. The applicable tender document, procurement framework, current Turkish legislation, country law and issuing/receiving authority requirements always govern the specific case. It is not legal advice. Requirements can change by procurement package and date, so bidders should verify the live tender documents and current official rules before submission.