Australia proposes digital project contract performance registry
Australia’s Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) is looking for feedback on a proposal for a new federal register for underperforming contractors engaged in government digital projects.
The DTA has launched a public consultation with digital sellers and industry stakeholders on its proposed Digital Seller Underperformance Policy (DSUP), which is aimed at improving transparency and outcomes in government digital projects.
The policy targets a fair and consistent framework for managing serious underperformance in large and strategically significant government digital contracts, valued at AU$4 million (US$2.58 million) or more. Rather than penalizing suppliers, the DSUP seeks to encourage collaboration between buyers and sellers to resolve delivery challenges and achieve successful outcomes.
“Engaging with industry is essential to shaping a policy that is fair, practical and delivers better outcomes,” said Chris Fechner, CEO of the DTA. He added that insights from the consultation will help refine the policy’s scope and reinforce a competitive, transparent marketplace for digital sellers of all sizes.
Under the proposal, serious underperformance would be reported and assessed by the DTA, with sellers given the right to respond before any information is shared across government.
Confirmed cases would be recorded in a secure register accessible only to authorised government buyers.
The register is not public and does not prevent sellers from winning future contracts, but it will provide buyers with additional information to support procurement decisions. In essence, the DSUP seeks to improve transparency and accountability in government digital contracting, while protecting seller privacy and ensuring that buyers and sellers work together to resolve challenges.
Fechner stressed that the DSUP is not intended as an exclusion mechanism, but as a tool to strengthen transparency and ensure consistent information-sharing across agencies. Buyers will remain responsible for assessing supplier suitability on a case-by-case basis.
The consultation is open until 21 December 2025 at 4pm AEDT, with feedback sought on the clarity of criteria, fairness of the process, and whether the policy should be extended to other types of contracts beyond digital. Following the consultation, the DTA will publish a summary of feedback and finalize the policy, which is expected to take effect in early 2026.
Related Posts
-
July 16, 2025 -
May 22, 2025 -
August 19, 2025 -
April 1, 2025 -
April 3, 2025
-
April 16, 2025
Article Topics
Australia | digital government | government purchasing | procurement
Comments
One Reply to “Australia proposes digital project contract performance registry”
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
At first glance you would think that this might be a great idea to improve performance of vendors, and thus the success of IT projects, but then anyone in the IT industry would know from experience that a similar register should be developed in parallel to rate the performance of government agencies.
Perhaps criteria such as the following:
1. Does the agency actually have the budget approved to complete such a project?
2. Does the govt have the qualified staff to program manage this project?
3. Will there be continuity of essential agency staff?
4. Has the agency even developed a clear set of technical specifications?
5. Or even better still, does the agency’s set of technical specifications even match the business case?
6. Will there be excessive scope creep?
7. Will the agency just be wasting the vendors time cancelling the contract before completion?
8. Does the agency have a track record of putting out multiple tenders over years and then not proceeding, wasting every vendor’s time and effort?
9. Will the agency be hiring particular vendor staff as specification writers and then these same staff revert back to the vendor after tender selection is completed?
10. Is the agency’s own IT department taking on some critical portion of the project where they may not have the expertise to deliver on it?
Because all of these have happened in the region over the past few years.
What would be your criteria to add to an agency improvement register?