What may you offer in the negotiation?
A fictional London trainee exercise asks you to discuss two supplier quotes.
The question
The brief lets you explore quotes for 1 site, up to £12,000 and within 5 business days. The supervisor decides whether to accept any quote.
| Price (£) | Business days | Sites | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quote A | 11500 | 5 | 1 |
| Quote B | 10800 | 8 | 1 |
You can discuss options within the brief and take your recommendation to the supervisor.
“Which option would you take to the supervisor?”
Not saved by this site. Your browser may restore text when you navigate back.
A strong answer, step by step
Open each step in turn. This is one strong answer, not the only one.
Step 1: Read the brief
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Name all three limits and the approval owner
The strong move. An option must fit the entire brief.
Treat price as the only limit
Tempting, but it misses something. The brief also specifies one site and five business days.
Tell the suppliers you can accept a quote
Tempting, but it misses something. The supervisor owns acceptance in this exercise.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I can discuss quotes for one site within £12,000 and five business days. I’ll take any recommendation to the supervisor for a decision.”
Why it works: The brief gives limits on price, time and scope. Acceptance has its own owner.
Step 2: Compare the quotes
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Recommend A for supervisor review
The strong move. Its price, time and site count fit the opening brief.
Recommend B because it costs less
Tempting, but it misses something. B misses the five-day requirement.
Accept A directly
Tempting, but it misses something. The supervisor still owns the decision.
See how a strong candidate says it
“A is £500 below the cap and meets the five-day limit. B is three business days beyond the limit. I’d take A to the supervisor for review.”
Why it works: A fits the original one-site brief. B has a timing gap.
Step 3: Check the scope
Supplier A keeps the same price and date only if the quote covers 2 sites. The instruction still covers 1 site.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Request a one-site quote and refer the change
The strong move. This keeps the discussion within the current instruction.
Recommend the revised A because the price still fits
Tempting, but it misses something. The revised scope exceeds the one-site instruction.
Switch to B without checking its schedule
Tempting, but it misses something. B still takes eight business days.
See how a strong candidate says it
“A’s revised quote covers 2 sites. The brief covers 1. I’d ask for a new one-site quote and refer the scope change to the supervisor.”
Why it works: The price and timing stayed the same. The change in site count removes A from the original brief.
Step 4: Brief the supervisor
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Explain both gaps and request the next instruction
The strong move. The supervisor can decide whether to change the brief.
Tell A the second site is agreed
Tempting, but it misses something. The packet gives no approval for that scope.
Present B as ready to accept
Tempting, but it misses something. Its delivery time remains outside the brief.
See how a strong candidate says it
“A now requires an extra site. B still misses the timing limit. A fresh one-site quote or a revised instruction would let me compare the options again.”
Why it works: The supervisor gets the reason each option fails and the information needed for a new decision.
The answer, in short
- Decision
- Ask for a one-site quote and refer the revised scope.
- Because
- A exceeds the site limit. B exceeds the delivery limit.
- What would change it
- A new quote or a revised supervisor instruction could give an option that fits.
Common traps
- Compare scope as well as price.
- Keep acceptance with the named owner.
Check your answer
- I named the three limits.
- I checked both quotes.
- I revised my recommendation for the extra site.
- I kept the decision with the supervisor.
Last reviewed Nov 11, 2026