The Salient Characteristics Approach is a procurement method where you define what you need to achieve rather than prescribing exactly how to achieve it. Instead of detailed technical specifications, you outline key performance requirements and let suppliers propose innovative solutions. This shift from "build it this way" to "deliver this outcome" can open doors to better value and creative approaches you might not have considered.
How It Works
Traditional procurement often locks you into specific technical details—particular software versions, exact materials, or prescribed methodologies. The Salient Characteristics Approach flips this around. You identify the essential characteristics or outcomes your project requires, then give suppliers room to figure out the best way to deliver them.
The term itself isn't explicitly defined in the current Government of Canada Supply Manual, but the concept aligns closely with how modern federal procurement operates, particularly through solution-based Supply Arrangements. In these arrangements, suppliers determine team composition, manage delivery to meet requested outcomes, and assume accountability and risk for the work performed. The supplier owns the "how" while you own the "what."
What does this look like in practice? Your procurement documents focus on performance metrics, functional requirements, and desired results rather than step-by-step instructions. You might specify that a system must process 10,000 transactions per hour with 99.9% uptime, rather than dictating the exact hardware configuration. The 2005 editions of the Supply Manual reference "characteristics" in the context of defining supply activities, though the framework has evolved significantly since then through vehicles like the Solutions-based Informatics Professional Services Supply Arrangement, which is mandatory for solution-based informatics work across federal departments.
Key Considerations
- Risk transfer is real: When suppliers assume delivery accountability for outcomes, they also take on more risk—which affects pricing. You need to balance flexibility with cost implications and ensure your evaluation criteria reflect this value proposition.
- Your requirements still matter: Specifying outcomes instead of methods doesn't mean being vague. You need clear, measurable performance standards and well-defined success criteria. Ambiguous requirements lead to disputes and failed projects regardless of procurement approach.
- Evaluation gets trickier: Comparing proposals becomes more complex when each supplier offers a different solution path. You'll need evaluation criteria that fairly assess diverse approaches against your salient characteristics without bias toward familiar methods.
- Documentation requirements persist: Solution-based arrangements still require detailed record-keeping. Suppliers must maintain records for six years after final payment, and quarterly usage reports—including "NIL" reports when there's no activity—are mandatory.
Related Terms
Performance-Based Contracting, Statement of Work (SOW), Outcome-Based Procurement, Supply Arrangement, Technical Specifications
Sources
- Government of Canada Supply Manual - Official federal procurement policy and procedures
- Solution-based Supply Arrangement - PSPC guidance on outcome-focused procurement
- Supply Manual (2005 Edition) - Historical reference on PWGSC supply activities
When you're drafting your next solicitation, ask yourself: am I prescribing a solution or describing a need? The distinction shapes whether you'll get commodity bids or creative proposals.