Marta Andhov  0:01  

Welcome to Bestek, the Public Procurement Podcast. Today, we’re talking about sustainability clauses in public contracting with our guest Dr. Ezgi Uysal, and advice for first-year PhDs.

Bestek Voice  0:20  

Welcome to Bestek, the Public Procurement Podcast. In this podcast, Dr. Willem Jansen and Dr. Marta Andhov discuss public procurement law issues, their love of food and academic life. In each episode, Willem, Marta and their guests search for answers to intriguing public procurement questions. This is Bestek. Let’s dish off public procurement law.

Ezgi Uysal  0:44  

Hello everyone. 

Marta Andhov  0:46  

Hi Ezgi, welcome to the podcast.

Ezgi Uysal  0:49  

Thank you. It is so nice to be on the podcast. It’s like a full circle moment for me, because I started my public procurement journey when I was listening to this podcast, now I’m one of the guests, and it’s like a huge milestone for me.

Marta Andhov  1:06  

Ah, that’s so nice.

Willem Janssen  1:07  

Look, we love having you. So it’s like also, because I feel like you’ve been one of our most loyal listeners. You’ve actually managed to say to us in the pre-recording how we normally do the intro and how inconsistent we are in the intro. So we appreciate having you also for that reason, but of course, also for the research you’ve been doing. So it’s a pleasure to have you. 

Marta Andhov  1:29  

Yeah, and Ezgi also helped out behind the scenes in some earlier episodes. So we’re very grateful to also, right now take you from the backstage onto the main stage. 

Marta Andhov  1:42  

So, to structure our podcast today and give a little bit of intro to those that might hear Ezgi for the first time, you probably, if you’re into procurement and sustainability and procurement, come across some of her work already. But today, as always, for our main course of the podcast, we will be focusing on sustainability clauses, and that has been the PhD thesis research topic of Ezgi’s, and that’s why we are having her with us. Ezgi is currently a postdoctoral fellow on the PurpLE project in Copenhagen, so I’m very grateful to have her on our research team. But before joining, Ezgi was part of SAPIENS Horizon 2020, ITN network, led by Professor Caranta, and she was doing a PhD under that umbrella of this project, and what else. And she’s just been a very active contributor to our academic environment of sustainability and procurement, and corporate sustainable due diligence directives, so all those important things. Now for the dessert today, we will ask Ezgi to reflect a little bit on her PhD journey, and what would be some pieces of advice that she would give to her younger self. So that’s a little bit of an intro. Let’s get into it. How does that sound? 

Ezgi Uysal  3:20  

Yeah.

Marta Andhov  3:22  

Great. So Ezgi, without further ado, tell us a little bit about sustainable contractual clauses; What they are? And are they different, and if they are, how are they different from any other contractual clauses that we see in public contracts?

Ezgi Uysal  3:42  

So sustainability contractual clauses, or shortly referred to as SCCs, or simply as sustainability clauses, are clauses that incorporate environmental social and labor related obligations ranging from emissions reductions to working hours from energy efficiency to prohibition of forced labor, they can cover anything that would fall under the scope of sustainable development or sustainable development goals. They are different from traditional or regular contractual clauses in the sense that they have a purpose, which is to transform public regulation into enforceable contractual obligation, to give another basis for enforcement, especially where public enforcement is not strict, and also to turn soft law into a binding obligation for contracting parties. For instance, these can be codes of conduct, some sort of guiding principles, which do not have binding power unless they’re incorporated in the contract. So what sustainability clauses, sustainability contractual clauses do, is to close the regulatory gap created due to the globalized production. This is how they’re different from a traditional regular contract clause.

Marta Andhov  5:11  

That’s interesting. But would that be only applicable then when we’re talking about products? So something that its production is really far away, very often outside of our jurisdiction, maybe outside of EU or are those clauses also applicable if we are talking about service contracts or construction contracts, and we are talking about regulating behavior or regulating those labor related on environmental related aspects, really that, so to speak, happens in our jurisdictions. The reason why I’m asking is because, of course, regulatory systems will vary depending where we are, and if I’m a bit of a skeptic, which we always try, as you know, in the podcast, try to play both roles, I would say, Well, why do we need to have this in a contract when we have labor law and we have environmental law? Shouldn’t, you know, these sorts of things about health and safety or other labor-related issues, or polluting or not recycling, wrongly disposing landfill waste and so on. Shouldn’t that be something that is ultimately regulated outside of my commercial contract when I’m just building something or producing something?

Ezgi Uysal  6:25  

In terms of the first question, I completely agree. I think the reason why, when I mentioned, I focus on production or the extra territorial part of contracting is that that is the origin, to my knowledge, this is where the concept of sustainability contracual clauses developed, but it is no way limit or prohibit a fair wage requirement in a services contract or energy efficiency requirement in a school that we’re building, and in terms of when we look at supply chain contracting, I think there is an argument to be made that we cannot really control what happens in distant third countries, for instance, Turkey is somehow still on the supply chain of some textiles, including brands. And I think the reason why these are contractualized is because of the lack of enforcement, or at least the enforcement here is not as strict as you would expect in a European country, and putting these into contracts is, firstly, a response to demand coming from stakeholders. So the demand from customers, demand from investors, demand from the general public, but also it allows you to… Contractualizing this gives you a basis for enforcement where public regulation may not be sufficient in itself.

Marta Andhov  8:21  

Yeah, I think that…

Willem Janssen  8:21  

So what I find interesting about this, because I think that sounds, I mean, you described it brilliantly, right? And on paper, it makes sense. But if I can push back a bit, because when I also see, and I think Marta and I have talked about this on the podcast before, is that procurement’s problem then, right? When you say that there’s a gap that can be filled, right? There’s a potential there, I can see it makes sense, this solution that you offer. But to what extent is that something that should be put in a contract, ultimately, right? When you talk about responsibility, for say, shouldn’t we go for the inspection? At the labor law inspection that could enforce it, like when you talk about the balance of going for this option and filling a gap and maybe contractualizing what’s in public legislation already, how would you look at that? And what’s, what are your thoughts on this distinction? Is this a role that procurement should play?

Ezgi Uysal  9:28  

The way I see the contractualization of sustainability, especially from the perspective of sustainable public procurement, is that I, as a researcher, do not adopt a standpoint on whether it should or should not do this. What I am focusing on, if a contracting authority or if a private buyer, in fact, regardless of the reason it came to this conclusion, wants to include anything related to sustainable development, or to further pursue regulatory goals with their contracts. How can they do this? What are the practical limits? What are the challenges? Whether they do this or not, unless it’s a mandatory requirement, is up to them.

Marta Andhov  10:20  

I think I would just…

Willem Janssen  10:21  

And I can’t squeeze out, sorry Marta, I can’t squeeze out a ‘should’ or a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’? Is that?

Ezgi Uysal  10:28  

No, I’m too political to say yes or no.

Marta Andhov  10:32  

She’s staying neutral. 

Willem Janssen  10:33  

I’ve got time in this episode still, right? So let’s see if I can get it later on. Yeah, because the reason why I say that is mostly because I do see overwhelmed contracting authorities, and that’s, I think, something that’s and they’re very willing. Often they want to, but they struggle. And I’m sure we’ll talk a bit more about the enforcement side of it, and how we could perhaps make that easier at a point. But that’s just something where I would, you know, sometimes I’m a bit even though, on paper, it makes sense, from a researcher’s perspective, it makes sense. But you know that question lingers. But anyways, Marta, I interrupted you.

Marta Andhov  11:03  

Yeah, because I think that, just to contribute to the discussion that we’re having, I think, and that would be also my comment and a question at the same time to Ezgi. The comment would be that I do think that there are also different layers or sub-categories in this sustainable clauses, because it’s a little bit like we’re discussing the link to the subject matter, if we’re discussing whether this is something that is connected with technical specification, award criteria, etc, or as a contract performance condition, I think that there is a slight also difference and what I mean by that, that I do think that the sustainable contractual clauses that are directly related to what you buy and also to the price that you pay for it, I would say, are smack in the middle of procurement. I don’t think that we should, or there is a good reason to say, Oh, should they? Should they not be there? In other words, if you say that you want to have energy efficiency, this, or you want to have a clean energy supply, that, or you want to have, you know, sustainably produced something else. You pay a premium for that. We know that, right? We discussed that. Of course, we can discuss that there is a variety of sectors right now and products, particularly, or even services, that are somehow standardized on the pricing level. But in general, you probably pay a bit more. There is a reason why we are saying, and we’re advocating that this, in the long run, kind of helps you save, etc, but there is a correlation to the price. And if there is a correlation to the price, you need to ensure that this is also from a business perspective, this is delivered in the contract, also from a compliance perspective, right? You need to make sure that what you actually procured, you buy. So it’s a little bit for me, and this would be before I give the floor back to Ezgi. It’s also a question, Will, to you, because I don’t know how it is in the Netherlands, but more and more contracts that over the years I really get hands on, and I actually look at them, it’s really quite staggering how different things look. So you have procurement, you have contracting authorities, and you have a huge amount of policies and strategies, and they even in the procurement process say, Yes, sustainability this, and sustainably that. And you pick up the contract, and there is nothing, or there is like one sentence related to sustainability. So for me, I see that a little bit like you opening a tab, everything goes in, but you don’t sort of plug, you know, your sink, so it all goes through you kind of, you know, there is something that that we need to close, the lever, we need to sort of holistically look at it, and that’s where I will see sustainable contractual causes. So a question to you, Willem, is like, do you see something similar in practice? Or this is maybe, you know, my isolated experience, and the question Ezgi to you is, would you agree with what I say? Or maybe you have a different perspective on the fact that we still have a different variety of sub-categories of what those sustainable contractual clauses actually are, what they relate to, and how they regulate them. So, yeah, those two. Ezgi, will you start, and then we’ll give the floor back to Will?

Ezgi Uysal  14:32  

I think that the current understanding of sustainability is so broad that you can basically put anything on it. And when it comes to, I think in differentiating different types of sustainability clauses, it is easier to make the case for clauses that advocate for law compliance. So, for instance, incorporating requirements, referring to collective agreements that make sense, is the legal obligation of a contractor to comply with. But I completely agree that when it comes to going beyond the minimum, it becomes a bit more challenging, and it requires actually a justification and more robust systems to monitor.

Marta Andhov  15:28  

Definitely. Will, what do you think about this?

Willem Janssen  15:34  

Yeah, so I appreciate your point, Marta, and also what you just mentioned, Ezgi. When I asked my question before, I realized that I wasn’t clear about one assumption is that I was mostly talking about the ones that are really related to a long supply chain. And I find that, of course, the national ones are far easier, also in terms of enforcement, make a lot more sense, often, or at least all of them can make sense, right? But they are easily, I would say, more easily drafted. The data is more readily available. So I just wanted to reflect on that a bit because the international ones are still where I see the potential on paper, but I wonder what actually happens in practice. So it would be really interesting to pick your brain. And when I look at Dutch practice, a lot, it varies quite significantly. What ends up in the contract or not. You see that there is one consistency, or one consistent point is mostly the social clauses that end up in the contractual term. So it’s the what has been coined really broadly social return clauses, so hiring long-term unemployed in one way or another, something like that, or disadvantaged workers. But that’s what I would say, the only thing that you could say, in general, if I reflect on Dutch practice, as limited as my n=1 perspective might be there. But yeah.

Marta Andhov  17:00  

Another aspect that I’m really interested in, in this discussion that we’re having Ezgi that I would want to pick your brain about, is, one of the aspects that surround sustainable contractual clauses over the years that I had a chance to discuss with different people is, what’s the value of the clause where none of the parties are interested in triggering it? What I mean by that is that if you introduce sustainable, and now we are theorising a little bit, but I think that is important, also having in mind right now the upcoming renegotiation and redrafting of the directives, because a lot of those things potentially can be on the table of discussion. And my question here is

Willem Janssen  17:50  

We want to open a lot of cans of worms, right? That’s the whole idea. We just want to, we’re going to broaden the horizon of this reform big time. Okay, keep going.

Marta Andhov  17:59  

No, because I’m thinking the two things, and that’s another podcast episode, but the two things that are for sure, I think, on the table of something of a very contemporary challenge that needs to be somehow addressed is contract management side contract performance. So the thing that, Ezgi, you ultimately looked into in your thesis, but also the sustainability that we continue banking on on this podcast, because it’s important. But the challenge that, in a really practical sense, has been discussed quite often in the circles around me, is okay, so you’re putting in sustainable contractual clauses that, for example, say, Well, this sustainability element is extremely important. If you’re not delivering on that, that would be considered a substantial contractual change or a continuing, systematic breach of your sustainability-related obligations, which may lead to termination, let’s say. But we know that in practice, contracting authorities are very averse to terminating contracts or trying to change because it’s extremely resource-intensive, etc. The competition is usually not really robust, so you might end up ultimately with the same supplier. The contractor also is not interested, obviously, in triggering any of that. So the question is, what’s the value of a contractual clause when both of the parties to the contract ultimately do not have an interest in triggering it? Do we then sort of rely on the fact that there are third parties that will seek to enforce those elements, or do you have even different perspective on that?

Ezgi Uysal  19:48  

I think what the main problem is, regardless of whether it’s a business contract or a public contract, is the principle of privity of contract. So the external, extra-contractual parties whose benefits or whose rights are incorporated are either unaware or they’re not able to enforce these obligations because of the exceptions, the principle of privity is interpreted very narrowly. That being said, there are other extra contractual parties that might have an interest in giving effect to or trying to enforce these sustainability obligations, which are interested economic operators. Those are economic operators who have just decided not to tender because of these sustainability requirements, or tendered but failed to win the contract because of the actual cost of complying with these obligations. In case of the selected tender’s failure to comply with these obligations, interested third parties can take action for the contract to be terminated or for the contract to be awarded to them. I think this gives the incentive to the contracting authorities when it comes to enforcing sustainability clauses, because they see that if you put them into competition, if this were a decisive factor in the selected tender, then you have to do something about it.

Marta Andhov  21:34  

Yeah, this is, I think it’s a really good point, and it’s also nice segue between, ultimately, the work that you’ve been doing, and we will be promoting it in the upcoming year, not only your PhD, but also the work that you’re doing on PurpLE right, and this sort of third party enforcement that you, that you just mentioned, that will be a chapter that will be publicly available, that you co-wrote with Katerina Mitkidis. So we are looking forward to it. 

Marta Andhov  22:01  

But that’s, I think, also a nice segue. I was wondering whether you could, out of this long project, right? Three years sitting with a topic, it’s a fair bit of time. So you know, all those things back and forth, upside down. What do you think would be the main challenges around sustainable contractual clauses in sustainable public procurement and public contracting, where you think the practitioners that listen to our podcast should particularly focus on? What do you think are some of the elements that are worth highlighting out of your research for them? To be wary, to pay attention to, when they draft public contracts, or what should they advise public authorities on how to manage those contracts?

Ezgi Uysal  22:52  

So I think so far, both the research and the practice have been focusing on what kind of consideration can be included in the technical specification. Can this be an award criterion, and what is a contract performance condition? But I think, and what I argue in my thesis, is that the actual impact of sustainable public procurement happens after the contract is awarded, so everything materializes once the contract execution starts. So I think both in the research as well as in the practice, the focus should be more on what happens after the contract. Okay, we put these requirements, and we awarded the contract to the most economically advantageous tender. But does this tender actually deliver what it’s promised in its tender? So I think we need to focus more on contract management, otherwise sustainable public procurement is simply a tool for greenwashing and social washing. Yes, we put these labels, we put these requirements to cut emissions. But are you actually cutting emissions? Are you actually checking that the supplies you are given comply with your labor requirements? Additionally, as I mentioned, when we fail to look at the contract management phase, we also risk the legality of the procedure, because there is this inherent risk that non-enforced sustainability obligations can be considered a substantial contract modification and may call for the termination of the contract. So what I argued in my research is that for sustainable public procurement for giving effect to sustainability clauses, what we need is contract management, and this is not nice to have, this is a must-have. For instance, when we look at business contracting, to draw some examples for the enforcement of sustainability clauses or for the management of sustainable contract performance, we see there’s a shift from formal enforcement mechanisms to more relational enforcement, focusing on monitoring regulatory compliance and taking actions to restore or maintain compliance.

Marta Andhov  25:20  

So just to jump your word for a second, Ezgi. I think that this is also really connected with the fact that it’s not only any more about the compliance, but it’s also how you build a relationship, right? The thing that in contracting we are always going back to, it is a document, but it’s all about relationship, and there are reasons why that relationship building is somehow limited in the procurement context, but when you have, when you already chosen your contractor, that’s a space for you really to build that relationship, right? How are you ensuring that? Because there’s also a certain level of trust. But just to ask you one more question in that regard, because I 100% and I think I see Willem also shaking his head, I think that we both agree with you on everything that you’re saying so far. But don’t you think that also one of the challenges in why we lack a good contract management, often in public procurement, is also connected that if you look on organizational side, very often there is a different team, the different team of people that do procurement, and then you ship the contract, so to speak to contract managers, and you have a change of hands. And often those different teams don’t really communicate continuously. So potentially, there is a risk that certain messages of intent that were built into procurement are lost at the contract management side. So I think also up here, potentially there is some aspect.

Willem Janssen  26:54  

And before we bounce it to you, Ezgi, I think the same happens. Also on the contractor side, right, there’s tender teams being set up, and the technicians give a little bit of input. But what’s promised in whatever goes on in a public procurement procedure, is often very different to when the tender team passes it on to the technicians or the team that will actually perform the contract. And so it’s like the loss in translation in the future might be doubled down, there are two teams that get handed the… That’s not always the case, right? Sometimes they are integrated, but oftentimes, that’s separate on both sides, I think so. So how do we fix that problem? 

Ezgi Uysal  27:33  

To be honest, I cannot talk for the contractor side. This is something I didn’t really think about, but it is interesting in practice. From the contracting authority side, I think I understand and agree that there’s a distinction between the parties in charge of preparing the tender, preparing the tender documentation, setting the technical requirements, and, on the one hand, the group that has been handed over the contract once it is awarded. But in my understanding of contract management, or what I suggest in my thesis is that contract management is not simply a post award issue, because in order to manage the contracts that we included the sustainability clauses, we need to design them in advance in a way that they can be managed after the contract award. So I think this dialog between the tendering professionals and the contract management professionals can be provided within the contract itself by including different tools within the contract.

Marta Andhov  28:56  

I think that’s fair. The only other thing that I would add here is that there was another layer why this has been banged on for the last, I don’t know how many, a good decade, if not longer, that those different teams need to talk to each other, and there needs to be flow of information. Because there is one more thing, if we thinking about design, that is that the procurement team can have great ideas even then they went out, you know, for the market research and pretender sort of consultation, and they want to put all those things into procurement, but simply, the project management team can feed you information, saying, this is great, but we don’t have resources, and we will never be able to deliver that. So you need to tone down on x, y and z. So, you know, it’s just also not to chew too much, but you can, you need to also understand, and this is where procurement, I find particularly fascinating, because there is all this hardcore legal stuff, but a lot of it is also, you.

Marta Andhov  29:56

A very organizational management aspect of it, right? That you need to kind of play in between the two, because it might be all possible, but you’re going to run yourself both into legal troubles if you do not fulfill this sort of organizational tasks, and also it can just be a quite poorly managed contract, right? So those two elements, I think, are quite important as well. 

Willem Janssen  30:24  

So you just noted, Marta, that, you know, it’s not just about the law. So let me make it a bit more legal again.

Marta Andhov  30:30  

Yeah, bring me back.

Willem Janssen  30:32  

Pulling you right back in. I was wondering. There was one thing that all of a sudden, as we’re talking, popped into my head in Episode 21… I had to look it up with Ole Hansen, a colleague at the Center for Private Governance at Copenhagen University. We spoke to him about, well, mostly modifications of contracts, also related to the Purple project, and it was starting up at the time. And when we talk about Ezgi, you just noted, to link it a bit, that there’s a lack of management, right? So isn’t the solution then? And as Marta said, we love playing devil’s advocate,

Marta Andhov  31:20  

Let’s be controversial now.

Willem Janssen  31:20  

…but isn’t the solution then to regulate? We need a directive. 

Marta Andhov  31:26  

All the practitioners start to yell at the radio…

Willem Janssen  31:28  

Yeah, but that’s fine. I’ve noted that when people yell at me, it’s generally Oh, except for maybe my wife at home. But when we yell at each other, that’s a whole different story. I mean, more so, don’t we need? Let me phrase it differently. Would a directive on public contract performance not be the solution? 

Marta Andhov  31:50  

What do you think, Ezgi?

Ezgi Uysal  31:52  

I actually remember that episode. I cited that episode in my thesis, because I specifically remember that I think what Ole said was that what we need is not a public procurement directive, but a public contracts directive. And I thought about it, but I think… So as you said, contract management is a very organizational issue, and even if this is regulated with taking into consideration the exact legal basis for the directive, I don’t think this would be the solution, because what we need is professionalization, and you cannot legislate that, in my opinion.

Marta Andhov  32:46  

Because it’s also a matter of funding, right? For all this and so on. And, you know, I think that when we started the Purple project a couple of years ago, I was, hmm, that could be, that could be a big contribution of the project. Let’s have a diary, but right now, working, you know, three years on it, and looking on Willem, yours, and Matanja and Ezgi, yours, and several other the draft chapters that we have right now, in the in the bullet pin that we’re going through, I think that it’s just simply impossible, because the legal culture around contracts in different countries is so different. People get very upset when you’re starting to talk about contract, contract law principle, contractual aspect in some of these very public administrative jurisdictions, they’re saying, this does not belong here. This is not what we do. We have, you know, it’s not decades. We have centuries of practice in something. And then on the other hand, in other countries, it’s very normal that we talk about quite equal. I think the Netherlands would be qualified there, Willem, right? That we’re talking about certain like equality of the parties that we’re talking about, you know, the public contracting authority is not some sort of organization that dictates, it’s still a contractual relationship, it’s still sort of equality. So I find that this would be very, very difficult to do. What I’m wondering. But I don’t know how much value that ultimately would bring, because I’m reflective of concessions directive that’s supposed to be, ultimately, you know, general principles, and they ultimately just codified some of the Court of Justice cases. And I think that there is quite a unanimous opinion that that directive is a bit wasteful. It doesn’t really help much. So I’m wondering whether you know something about contract management, if that is in the directive or separate, I think it should be more in the directive rather than really outside. But something about just the general requirements of checks and balances. You know, so it’s not left to contracting authorities to decide whether things needs to be audited or so on, but I feel like there’s something that we missing there to ensure that you similarly, like we said at the beginning of the journey with sustainability, that it was at some point nice to have, and now we kind of all say, No, it is there. We talking about scoping, but it is there. It’s similar to say something needs to happen in contract management. You don’t, you cannot just forget about everything. And I just, of course, don’t know how we would word it. Maybe that’s some collaborative work to figure out, but something on the provision of contract management might be good. 

Willem Janssen  35:39  

Exactly what I was just thinking. Sorry to say it, Marta, like I don’t want to steal your thunder, because you probably said it 10 times better than I could have. But I was hoping to push Ezgi this way, so let’s build it a bit more, and then let’s see if we can convince her.

Marta Andhov  35:53  

Yeah, let’s see if we can convince her, that’s a good idea.

Willem Janssen  35:54  

Because I also, I see the controversy, and I feel it too, and I know a contract, public contracts directive, is going to be incredibly difficult, and I understand, even though, you know, it always gets me excited when everyone says it’s not possible, and I think we’ll probably, I can make it happen, but that’s maybe just really arrogant. But yeah, let’s introduce and then Ezgi can respond. Let’s introduce one provision in all of the public procurement directives with simply obligating, and I’m just flying off the edge of my seat right now, obligating management, contract management systems to have just the basic understanding of what that would need to do, and give it five subsections. That’s it. We start there to boost so we do make it lawyery, but not too lawyery. Is that a nice middle ground, Ezgi?

Ezgi Uysal  36:47  

In paper? Yes, but I’m afraid that… So there are some member states or some individual contracting authorities who are very progressive in the way that they manage their contracts. But I’m afraid that if we introduce such a provision with certain elements to be checked, this contract management will turn only into a tick box compliance, which basically means nothing. Did you check this? Yes, but did you actually? So I think legislating such a management issue, because it is not per se a legal problem, contract management. Legislating this organizational problem would not solve our problems. I don’t see it solving the problem. Because if we actually, like I said, we can already use the existing Article 72 on contract modification as a basis for contract management, but it’s not being used. At least, overall, there are some member states who are moving in that direction, but there is no general trend. So I’m afraid that in case we legislate contract management as such, it wouldn’t be effective.

Willem Janssen  38:23  

Yeah, so it’s a bit, and I feel your point. It very much links with, well, what’s how effective are laws? I suppose we don’t need to go too fundamental there. But it also, I think, ties in with discussions that we’ve had on the podcast quite often about, you know, legislating sustainability in a more mandatory way, right? Is that? Is that going to cut the mustard? And in a way, I think my opinion has changed a bit. I do think that we’ve come to a time where we cannot rely on arguments of simply saying, hey, you know, we need to invest more money. We need more professionalization, as true as that might be; if it then doesn’t happen, you know, what’s left? I think maybe just the stick of law enforcement, right? And I think the same, perhaps more with the topic of mandatory sustainability requirements, and less with, say, the more organization of procurement, and then still, I also feel this need to strike a balance. So I fully agree with what you just said. You know, there needs to be some balance between the space that the law leaves for differences, but I do think it could uplift those entities that aren’t doing much with contract management yet, and just here, whilst we’re talking about it, if we’re plugging other episodes, might also be useful for our listeners to listen to episode 20 with Alexandra Andhov about contract management tools, which I think could be like a nice spin off to this episode as well. To talk about what’s possible, and also possibilities of AI to search through contracts, those types of examples. Just wanted to mention that as well. 

Marta Andhov  40:03  

Yeah, I think that this has been a great main and so much to unpack. We, of course, will link all the bunch of great publications of Ezgi that are already available in the podcast description. So we very much encouraged everyone to check out her work. And that PhD is being worked on, and we don’t know exactly when, but we really keeping our fingers crossed for that to become a full-fledged publication, Ezgi. It’s been said right now on the podcast, it needs to happen. That’s how it goes.

Ezgi Uysal  40:38  

Yeah, it has to. Now I have to.

Marta Andhov  40:40  

Now you have to. But yeah, to summarize our main, we talked about Ezgi’s PhD, a great PhD on sustainable contractual clauses, where she really unpacks what they are, what the challenges of them are. She compares between, you know, the origins of sustainability, contractualization and business contracts, and how that is also, then present in public contracts. What are the differences? And then also, one of my favorite chapter, where we touched upon on contract management, and I really all the practitioners I would really urge to get in touch with Ezgi and try to get access to that chapter. Because what is really great about it is, on the one hand, it really talks about these management soft tools, but it also points out how the soft tools are connected with the legal aspect of compliance. That was my favorite for sure, the chapter of the thesis. 

Marta Andhov  40:43  

But without due, we finished this part of the podcast discussing contractualization, sustainability and sustainable contractual clauses. But now, because we do have, I think it’s fair to say it’s still under half a year. So it is fair to say a freshly baked doctor.

Willem Janssen  42:05  

In Dutch, we always say young doctor, but I don’t know how long you’re allowed to say young doctor. But you say it when someone’s just finished, you say, congratulations, young doctor, but I don’t know how long. I think six months for the young is still a bit long, but freshly baked out of the oven.

Marta Andhov  42:19  

Yeah, there you go, still warm.

Ezgi Uysal  42:21  

Out of the oven. I like that.

Marta Andhov  42:23  

Yeah. So I will, I will let Willem, right now, lead us a little bit through the dessert when we talk a little bit about your PhD journey, Ezgi.

Willem Janssen  42:33  

Yeah. So, I mean, I think what’s so amazing about speaking to you now is we laugh about it, but it’s also still fresh. So the emotions, the feelings, the lessons learned, are still really close to your heart and to you in your memory. So what we wanted to do in the last couple of minutes of the podcast is just ask you, I mean, if you would write a letter to yourself at the start of the PhD. Now, right being finished, how would you reflect on that whole journey? I’m sure it’s had highs, lows. But also, you know, of course, we want to be mindful. Everyone’s journey is different. But if there are any, like best practices or what you would tell yourself in those first three months of starting your PhD?

Ezgi Uysal  43:20  

Well, if I were to write the letter to the first-year PhD version of myself, that letter would be as long as my thesis. But I’m not gonna do that right now because we have limited time. So what if I’ll just take the main points?

Marta Andhov  43:41  

Yeah, the bits and pieces.

Ezgi Uysal  43:44  

What worked for me is that when I’m stressed or when I’m anxious about the work that I’m doing, sometimes I get lost in the mix, and what helped me or what grounded me is always to read. Reading other people’s work is always my starting point, not because I can cite them or because I can include references in my thesis, but because I realize when I read other people, I start to argue with them. Even though I completely agree with them, I start disagreeing like, I take notes on the margins, why I disagree. So then I realized, by doing this, I actually formed my own opinions. And then after reading a couple of papers, I have enough material to write my own contribution about it. So I think one of the main advice for me is, when in doubt, read.

Ezgi Uysal  44:52  

Another one is that I was terrified of feedback. I am still terrified of feedback because I thought…

Marta Andhov  45:00  

Many of us still are, if that helps.

Ezgi Uysal  45:03  

Well, yeah, every time I was preparing a paper or preparing for a presentation, I was always aiming for no comments, which I realize now is not realistic, because that’s not the point of academia, that’s not how knowledge grows. So I think what I would say to my first-year version is that don’t take those criticisms or feedback as a personal attack, but opportunities to sharpen your ideas, to come up with something better.

Marta Andhov  45:36  

For sure, but I also feel like there are two comments to just make to that. Ezgi, you know, it’s a little bit like asking you to read through the paper and not write those comments on the site, right? You kind of cannot help yourself. It’s just that’s what’s the interesting thing, right? But I think another thing, and I wonder if you, Ezgi, already have some publications, and this is a question to both of you. Also Willem to you, I personally find that if I look at my list of publications, the things that I’m most proud of are not the things that went in and got, you know, very few remarks or just went through peer review and got published. But actually, the things that I got fair a bit of comments and I needed to labor over, I think that that really… because it’s often you touch upon certain really controversial elements, or really important elements, things that people have a lot of opinions about. And so it helps you really to funnel down the argument. So some still, one of my favorite things is a chapter in the Cambridge book, the first book on sustainable public procurement with Beate Sjafjell and Anja Wiesbrock, and they run me a fair bit on that chapter, to, you know, get it done. And now it’s in the end, when I read that was like, hmm, I didn’t know that I could write like that. So, yeah, I don’t know whether this is, again, more personal experience, or you might have similar, but I actually… Now there’s always these two stages, right? You open the file, it’s all red, and you just get quite upset. You go away, have a drink, and the next day you say, Okay, well, let’s get down to it. Or it might be just me. 

Willem Janssen  47:19  

No, I think it makes a lot of sense. I think it’s when you have those, those red pages, you kind of, I’ve forced myself to not have the sometimes you need to walk away fair enough. But I also try to, like, put myself in the reviewers position, saying, What is this person trying to tell me, instead of me focusing on how angry in every individual comment makes me, and that’s helpful, but no, that’s and I find your comments, Ezgi about not taking it personally, but also making those comments on the side, it’s a really nice insight. Can I maybe nudge you for one more, and then we’ll round up the episode? 

Ezgi Uysal  47:56  

Yeah, I think my biggest mistake in the past three years was to keep comparing myself to other people. As Marta mentioned at the beginning of the episode, I was lucky to do my PhD as part of a European Commission-funded project, which allowed me to work alongside brilliant other PhDs who were working on similar topics. But this amazing opportunity came also with its challenges, where I would look at other people and what they’re doing, and I would feel like an impostor, like I don’t belong there. And I always thought it was too early for me to do a PhD. I should have had more practical experience, but I came to accept that that is not the way you live this life, because you cannot compare yourself with anyone else. Everyone has a different journey, a different thesis, and different supervisors. Everyone has a different path. And the only thing you can compare is your past self; if you’re a step ahead of what you were yesterday, then that’s progress. And to me, that took a lot of my time and a lot of my energy to come to accept that, but I think having now defended it. It kind of gives me still a bit of excitement, but now I can see that none of it mattered. What mattered is your own path and just don’t lose what’s important, and don’t let your work define you, because it’s just your work. It’s not who you are.

Willem Janssen  50:05  

Geez, I don’t really know what to say after this. These are such incredible, wise words. It…

Marta Andhov  50:11  

We shouldn’t say much more. This was very inspirational and beautiful.

Willem Janssen  50:13  

I know, thank you for being vulnerable and for sharing that. 

Marta Andhov  50:16  

Yeah.

Ezgi Uysal  50:17  

Thank you.

Marta Andhov  50:17  

It’s really very nicely said. And I think these aspects, these three points that you’ve joined, I think a lot of people can learn a lot from them. So thanks so much, not just on the content side, but also on the experience side. And let’s wrap up this episode. Thank you so much for being a part of it, Ezgi. Great to chat again, Marta, this was Bestek the Public Procurement Podcast.

Bestek Voice  50:41  

This was Bestek, the Public Procurement Podcast. Do you want to contribute to today’s discussion? Then share your thoughts on LinkedIn or Twitter. Do you have an idea for a future episode? Write to us at www.bestekpodcast.com.

Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.