Carl Dickson

This is an example of a solution that we prepared for someone else. The solution that we prepare for you will be based on your particular needs. However, it’s a good way for you to get an idea of how we work and a great way to start a conversation about how your needs are similar or different. The Customer’s Circumstances. There were two customers. One was a government contractor that wanted to see how their proposals stacked up against our standards. The other was a small mom and pop financial business that wanted an outside opinion on their proposals. Our Approach. When we do assessments we can do them formally or informally. Either way, they are based on a set of assessment criteria that in part of the MustWin Process available in the PropLIBRARY Knowledgebase. Anyone who is a PropLIBRARY Subscriber can perform their own assessments using our criteria. When we do a formal assessment, we document the findings. This can be criteria by criteria, or it can be by using the Microsoft Word commenting feature to place our observations directly into the document. Or both. The more detailed the documentation, the longer it takes, the more expensive it is. But sometimes having it documented is the whole point. Once these options are finalized, the key variable becomes the page count. We like to use a total page count that can include RFPs as well as proposals. We also like to present our findings, usually in an online meeting. We use screen sharing software and go through the key points, showing the document and the comments and we describe them. . Our Solution. With the mom and pop business, they didn't need a formal assessment or documented findings. They just wanted us to tell them what we thought could be improved. With the government contractor, we proposed a fully documented assessment, because that would give them something to use to improve all of their other proposals. For the mom and pop business our proposal was based on two hours of time and a limit of 30 pages. There was no RFP to consider. We read their proposal and made notes, then we held the online meeting. We charged them $400. For the government contractor, we proposed an assessment of up to 100 pages of proposal material. They could decide whether to include whole proposals, sections, or parts. The could RFPs (or parts of RFPs) for context and to assess compliance and optimization against the evaluation criteria. We proposed delivering an Assessment Report that would include: Comments comments inserted into MS-Word files An Assessment Findings document that will use our quality criteria as the Table of Contents. The Assessment Findings will also include recommendations for improvements and a subjective assessment of the relative quality of the materials based on the many other proposals we have seen. Our fee for this assessment was a fixed fee of $3,000. Both customers were able to improve all of their future proposals as a result of the assessment. Both customers learned to see their proposals in a completely different way. Not even considering any improvement in their win rates, both customers probably learned enough about quality standards to prevent re-writes and changes that would cost them far more than what the assessment did. To discuss this solution and how it might be similar to or different from what you need, click here to set up an appointment.

This is an example of a solution that we prepared for someone else. The solution that we prepare for you will be based on your particular needs. However, it’s a good way for you to get an idea of how we work and a great way to start a conversation about how your needs are similar or different. The Customer’s Circumstances. A company with multiple business lines (B2B and B2G) wanted to improve the quality of their proposal writing and accelerate their proposals. Their initial plan was to implement a re-use library and contacted us to make recommendations and help improve the quality. Our Approach. Most of the time re-use libraries improve your chances of losing. We had to be very careful qualifying this customer. It turns out that at least one of their business lines was a potential candidate for a re-use library approach. We started off with email and then had a conversation with the customer. From there we made some recommendations and had another conversation. When we were discuss bid strategies, how they vary from customer to customer, and how they impact the proposal, the customer realized that how they planned the content of their proposals was central to the quality of the writing as well as a better way to accelerate things. We finalized our recommendations and sent the customer a proposal. Our Solution. This project fell naturally into several phases. We took advantage of this to mitigate the customer’s risks. In the first phase, we would re-write the introduction to a proposal they had submitted. If they went with a re-use approach, they could use this as a foundation for the new content. It would also give them a chance to see what kinds of improvements we could make. In the second phase, we would take the Content Planning methodology from the MustWin Process in the PropLIBRARY Knowledgebase and create something they could start their future proposals from. Instead of providing re-usable narrative text (which could not be optimized for every customer context), we would itemize everything that should go into and be addressed in their proposals. This way their writers could sit down and put it in the write context much faster than working from a blank page and achieve better quality than editing an existing narrative. In the third phase, we would take up to 100 pages of their existing proposals and insert them as fragments and instructions into the Content Plan. This way they could carry forward their past work, but not necessarily as an updated narrative draft. Finally, we also offered a vehicle for ongoing proposal review and support to help them continuously improve the quality of their proposals. The result was: For under $10,000 they’d have a baseline Content Plan to speed up the start of their proposals in a way that is driven by strategy and optimized to win for each new customer. For under $20,000 they’d have that plus their existing proposal material revised and inserted into the Content Plan to accelerate going from Content Planning to a narrative draft. For substantially under $30,000 they’d have all that plus support for three active proposals they were anticipating. They’d get all this along with a Corporate Subscription to PropLIBRARY and without any long term commitment and with opportunities to bail out if they didn’t like the way things went. To discuss this solution and how it might be similar to or different from what you need, click here to set up an appointment.

This is an example of a solution that we prepared for someone else. The solution that we prepare for you will be based on your particular needs. However, it’s a good way for you to get an idea of how we work and a great way to start a conversation about how your needs are similar or different. The Customer’s Circumstances. A company wanted training in proposal writing provided at their site. They were potentially interested in other services, but wanted to start off with the training. Our Approach. We started with email and progressed to a lengthy conversation with multiple participants that was almost like a job interview. We talked about what was driving their need for training, who the participants would be, what their backgrounds were, and what results they would like to see after the training. Proposal training involves some major trade-offs. For example, you should have lots of exercises. Exercises take lots of time. If you’re trying to cover everything in just a day or two you get a trade-off between exercises and subject matter coverage. There’s also a trade-off between packing the room with as many people as possible and keeping the number of participants low so they get more personal attention. We can discuss the pros and cons of either, but like the customer to drive how these trade-offs should be made. We knew the customer was speaking with other potential providers, but we don’t mind. The way we leverage PropLIBRARY makes for a unique solution and a number of the other things we do are disruptive to the competition anyway. Our Solution. We proposed a two day session that reflect our discussions about the trade-offs. Then we added some of our special techniques: We offered exercises that could be performed outside of the classroom and uploaded to PropLIBRARY for review. This had the effect of increasing the amount of training time by 50% while holding the actual classroom time to two days. We set up a series of post-training webinars for ongoing Q&A and support. We included a Corporate Subscription to PropLIBRARY that provides participants with an insane amount of takeaway value. We offered options regarding the training topics. Our curriculum is modular by design, giving us the ability to economically customize the presentation. No two are ever the same. Our training, and even our exercises, can reflect your lines of business, the backgrounds of your students, the types of bids you submit, etc. We laid the foundation for future support by including as options things like online training and support. This way they had a vision of the future that until then they only thought of as a potential. The two-day session itself ran $7,000 and included instructor travel and lodging. There was also a $65 materials fee for each participant, to cover our costs if they decided to pack the room with participants. To discuss this solution and how it might be similar to or different from what you need, click here to set up an appointment.

This is an example of a solution that we prepared for someone else. The solution that we prepare for you will be based on your particular needs. However, it’s a good way for you to get an idea of how we work and a great way to start a conversation about how your needs are similar or different. The Customer’s Circumstances. A company with international offices contacted us about proposal training for 500-600 people. They weren’t sure what to do because it just wasn’t economical to send an instructor to all of their offices. They also didn’t want the training to be one-time event. Finally, they wanted to build a repository for training materials and proposal support. Our Approach. We started with a conversation. We talked about the problems with each form of training and discussed how a combination approach might work best. We agreed to prepare some ideas and have a follow-up conversation. During the follow-up we went into details and verified the estimates (how many sessions, how long, how many participants, etc.). We talked about price ranges and value. After the second conversation we prepared a written proposal that they could share with their management. Our Solution. We proposed a combination of a PropLIBRARY Corporate Subscription, with customization and support so they could use it as their training, monthly continuous improvement webinars (that also provide an opportunity for live Q&A), and skills enhancement exercises to provide an interactive experience. We also set-up a vehicle for consulting support that they could use when they ran into problems and wanted some advice. With some of our other customers we have proposed spending a day or two at their site at the beginning to kick things off and provide some live training. However, in this case that didn’t make sense. We broke the implementation down into a pilot phase and a final roll out. The charge for each phase was approximately $6,000. For this they would get: An online tool that everyone could use as needed that was customized with their processes and materials. Remote instructor-led training spread over a year instead of a one-time event. Monthly opportunities to ask the instructor questions. Exercises that would not only reinforce learning but would demonstrate capability and provide a way to track individual participation. For what some companies charge for a single on-site instructor-led course presentation they could have an international solution with interactivity, quantifiable improvement, and fully access to the PropLIBRARY Knowledgebase for 500-600 people. To discuss this solution and how it might be similar to or different from what you need, click here to set up an appointment.

monthly_2016_02/RealWorldTeamingTips_pdf.05aeda89621ac921de5bb04394612196

monthly_2016_02/Capability_Statement_doc.41716578dee3594a63d4c97e56fd5986

monthly_2016_02/HS_GSA_Capabilities_0911_pdf.df51d1955260cdf9149a444e8276925d

monthly_2016_02/Capabilities-Statement-1-2010_doc.8b35a4a18f48d52cfd0be2f507605482

monthly_2016_02/CapabilitiesStatement_doc.396ec1073f978002603b8610946ec088

monthly_2016_02/56c47970af1ce_CapabilitiesStatement-AgH2OHoldingsLLC_doc.a65ba06dadab062da0cda44f70499704

monthly_2016_02/btacapabilitystatement070306_doc.7a3ec8d4f9f6b9b2e66605d3221b4ecd

monthly_2016_02/Consulting_E_doc.32d6fada5915feeccc5f58d8e7ec3a9c

monthly_2016_02/project-team-proposal_pdf.268b19facd6426d3d568c71c6e09f6a4

monthly_2016_02/FFA_Proposal_Piedmont_Final_pdf.d6e3182ccbb978645c9a7ec99441a29e

monthly_2016_02/56c479705a471_CTProposalandFees_pdf.c4518ee5d3cb4d59f5bfac393b691dfe

We get tons of inspiration for our articles from participating in discussions in our group on LinkedIn. We were thinking about something we posted there recently on the topic of what to do when you get an RFP. We realized that some people set themselves up for failure right from the beginning. When you get an RFP, do you do the things that lead to winning or the things that lead to losing? Do you assume you are going to bid and start work on the proposal or do you look for reasons not to bid it and only start work after it passes the test? Do you line up subject matter experts and start passing out writing assignments or do you put the SMEs on hold and talk to someone who knows the customer, their preferences, and concerns because you know you're not ready to talk to the SMEs until you understand the context? Better yet, do you hold the meetings and planning sessions before the RFP is even released because after release is usually too late? Do you build your proposal around your outline and offering, or do you develop an understanding of what it will take to win and build your proposal around that? Do you build your pre-RFP intelligence gathering and bid preparation efforts around what you can learn in meetings and surfing the web, or by discovering what it will take to win and positioning your company in the eyes of the customer? Do you track your opportunities and progress through regular meetings or do you implement a process that tracks whether you've collected the information related to what it will take to win and gives you the ability to quantify whether you will be ready to win at RFP release? Do you try to come up with some “themes” you can sprinkle around the proposal, or do you figure out how to articulate your understanding of what it will take to win? Do you create an outline and start writing, or do you identify everything that would go into a winning proposal and develop a content plan before you start writing? Do you focus like a laser on the Statement of Work and requirements, or do you assess the evaluation criteria and optimize what you plan to offer and write to score highly? Do you have some people review what you wrote without any structure or guidance, or do you lay the foundation for measuring what gets written against the content plan, which itself was based on what it will take to win? Do you base your reviews solely on the experience of the reviewers, or do you implement a review plan to validate that the proposal reflects what you said it needs to in the content plan as well as what it will take to win? Oh, and while you're at it, do you develop your offering by writing to meet the requirements of the RFP, or do you develop the winning offering in a parallel process because designing/engineering by writing about it is a bad way to go? Did we pass the test? See also: Winning After we wrote this, we thought should assess our own MustWin Process to ensure that our recommendations do indeed lay the right foundation for winning. Not only do we give you a checklist of things to verify when the RFP is released, we also give you a nice long list of reasons to consider no bidding, all of which are in addition to our pre-RFP Readiness Review process which qualifies the leads and provides several opportunities to no bid an opportunity, all designed to make sure that what you bid you have a better than fair chance of winning what you choose to bid. I think we passed this one. The pre-RFP Readiness Review process is designed to deliver insight about the customer, opportunity, and competitive involvement so that it is in place, in the right format, and ready to use to win the proposal. You won’t need to schedule any extra meetings to get this because if you follow the process it will already be there. I think we passed this one. That’s what the pre-RFP Readiness Review process is all about. But if you first learn about the RFP when it’s released and you still think it’s worth pursuing, you can still use the Readiness Reviews to quickly determine what you know and don’t know about the customer, opportunity, and competitive environment to accelerate the development of your win strategies. That’s another one passed. Outlining is the first of eight steps in our iterative Content Planning process. It’s designed to make sure you don’t overlook anything that should go in your proposal. Pre-RFP Readiness Reviews are designed to identify what it will take to win so that it can guide the Content Planning process and drive the creation of the proposal itself. So we cover discovering what it will take to win, outlining, and getting it into the proposal. That’s a check. The pre-RFP Readiness Reviews start by gathering intelligence and end with assessing it, formatting it, and turning it into what you need to articulate in the proposal. Each of the Readiness Reviews has clear questions to answer and goals to accomplish so that the time is not wasted. Check! Readiness Reviews get scored with a simple Red/Yellow/Green system that can be converted to numerical scores and turned into a full-blown metrics analysis system that can unlock the hidden factors driving your win rates. They also enable progress to be measured and the trend towards red or green determined so that the valuable time before RFP release isn’t wasted. No more meeting after meeting saying that “we’re tracking it” only to arrive at RFP release unprepared. Another one passed. The combination of Readiness Reviews and Content Planning takes what it will take to win and turns them from intelligence into instructions for what the writers should say in the proposal. They are also turned into criteria that are used to validate the quality of the draft after it is written. I think we passed this one. The Content Planning process starts with an outline and then adds to it everything that should go into the proposal through eight steps that make sure you don’t overlook anything. When completed, it provides a complete set of instructions that the authors can follow to write the winning proposal instead of a blank sheet of paper with a heading at the top. That’s one we definitely pass. One step in the Content Planning process is designed to specifically target assessing the evaluation criteria and how they should impact what gets written. Another step accounts for the requirements of the Statement of Work. There are six other steps that guide you through considering everything else that needs to go into the proposal. I say we passed this one too. The review process we recommend actually starts with the Content Planning process. We validate that the draft proposal follows all of the instructions in the Content Plan. We actually place a higher priority on reviewing the Content Plan prior to writing than we do on reviewing the narrative draft. The Content Plan is based on what it will take to win, which is discovered during the Readiness Reviews. The progress of writing can be measured by how much of the Content Plan has been fulfilled. Quality is validated the same way. I think we definitely pass this one. The goal of our review process is to validate that the proposal reflects what it will take to win, as documented in the Content Plan after being discovered during the Readiness Review process. How you validate each item depends on the size, scope, and nature of the proposal. So we prepare a Review Plan at the beginning of the proposal that covers how they will all be validated. Our process documentation turns this into something that’s checklist quick and simple so you can have a written Review Plan prepared in mere minutes. We pass this one as well. We think designing or engineering by writing about it is a horrible way to go about it, and is just asking for proposal failure. But what methodology you follow for design or engineering are particular to your company. So we give you the points where you should need to synch them up. Our Content Planning approach takes what you come up with as input and turns it into instructions for the writers. We wrap your offering in everything else needed to win the proposal. This is the last one and it looks like we passed them all. If you think the list we started with was a good list, then the MustWin Process is a good way to make sure you are doing the right things for every item on it. If you’re not doing the right things on the list, then instead of laying the foundation for winning, you may be starting off down the path towards losing right from the beginning. The MustWin Process and other materials in the PropLIBRARY Knowledgebase may give you the inspiration and techniques you need to turn that around.

One of the most important things to realize about proposal writing is that it is not about you, your company, or even your offering. It’s not about telling the customer anything. It’s about the customer, their decision, and what they need to hear to make it. It’s hard to turn your brain inside out and backwards to articulate things that the reader wants to hear instead of what you are trying to say. It is impossible to do this if you don’t know your audience. To better understand your audience, you should ask questions like: See also: Winning What matters to them? This is what you want to write about. Your offering is merely a way of fulfilling it. They don’t want what you're proposing. They want what matters. So give them that if you want to win. How will they assess what they are reading? Will your proposal be scored or read? Do they have written evaluation criteria? Can you influence their assessment by how you describe what’s important? How do they make decisions? Some organizations are consensus driven and some are authoritarian. Some are centralized and some decentralized. Most have policies, procedures, and various thresholds. How will these impact what you are proposing? Who is involved in making decisions? Is it a person, a committee, or a chain of command? What is the role of the person you’ve been talking to or submitting your proposal to? What are their preferences? In what you are proposing there are countless choices and trade-offs. Did you pick the ones that you thought were best or the ones the customer would prefer? What do they already know or believe about what you are telling them? What you are telling them will be compared to something they already know that can act as an anchor point. What will your offering get compared to? Changing a customer’s world view through a proposal is usually impossible. But if you understand how they view things you can position yourself in a way that is not in conflict with what they already know or believe. What alternatives do they have? Can they do nothing? Could they do it on their own? Do you have competition? Do they need to be motivated? What processes do they have to follow before acting on your recommendations? Do they have internal policies and procedures they have to go through in order to purchase something or act on your proposal? Is what’s in your proposal compatible with them? What are their expectations regarding format, presentation, and level of detail? Expectations can be written or unwritten. If they are written, they should be treated as instructions and followed. If the reader’s expectations are not written down, you need to discover them and then treat them like instructions. These are the things you need to learn about your customer. If you cannot answer questions like these, then your problem is with understanding how to develop audience awareness, not with knowing how to write a proposal. There is no writing trick that can overcome a lack of audience awareness, so the best place to start is to make sure that you understand the reader. In fact, you should put far more effort into understanding your audience than you do in the actual writing.

We’ve noticed a trend in proposal debriefs, where the comments are more and more likely to be based on black and white criteria like “did address” or “did not address.” Never mind whether what the proposal said made sense or is qualitatively better than what your competitors have offered. The criteria have been made objective so that the evaluation can’t be questioned. It’s been made black or white, with no protestable shades of gray. When this is the case, the evaluation is performed mechanically. There were always forms to be completed, but now instead of providing a rationale for a score, the evaluator may just be checking the boxes and going down the list. The evaluator could very well be a robot, and no one would ever know. When an RFP is written to make the evaluation of the proposal formal and objective, there’s a good chance that it will be reviewed by a robot. Or at least a human pretending to be a robot. Sooner or later they’ll get around to replacing that human with an actual robot. How you write your proposal depends on whether it will be evaluated by a human or a human pretending to be a robot. See also: Customer perspective This trend has accelerated recently, due to a focus on awarding to the lowest price technically acceptable offering. When these are the evaluation criteria, then the technical evaluation is pass or fail. The evaluation criteria are no longer about scoring the offers to determine the best, they're about creating an objective standard for what is sufficient. If a proposal meets the standard, then they evaluate the price and pick the lowest one. There are signs you can look for in the RFP that will help you determine whether your proposal will be evaluated by a human or a robot. If the evaluation score is turned into a label, such as “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” or “unacceptable” and the evaluations are performed on the labels, it’s a sign that robots have taken over the evaluation. There is no precision. All the bids fit into a few categories. Everyone within a category is treated equally. The next thing you will probably read in an RFP like this will sound like they are evaluating based on best value, but it’s just a ruse. It will say “price is not the most important factor” but when the evaluation scores are the same “price becomes more important.” Guess what? Everyone who has a chance at winning will be labeled “outstanding.” Or if they pick the lowest label then everyone who has a chance at winning will be labeled “satisfactory.” So what really determines who wins is the price. But if you really want to know for sure, you have to look at how they evaluate the assignment of the labels. If it’s based on “did/did not” or any other variation of Boolean logic or other objective criteria, then the robots are in charge. If the criteria require subjectivity or judgment, such as determining which is better, then there might be a human in the loop. The reason you need to know is that a human can be persuaded by providing a rationale. A robot is persuaded by the completion of their checklist. A human will be persuaded by what they want and what best meets their needs. A robot will be persuaded by the presence of keywords. We always hope there is a human behind the scenes ready to step in and apply some judgment. We try to fulfill the structure and keywords, while providing a rationale to persuade someone not to pick a proposal with better keyword stuffing. We hope that the objective criteria are just there out of protest paranoia. So the question remains, is the evaluator of your next proposal a human or a robot? Our MustWin Process, which is part of the PropLIBRARY Knowledgebase, shows you how to plan the writing of your proposal so that it responds to the factors that drive what it will take to win.

When you are a contractor, sometimes deadlines are missed, budgets are exceeded, or specifications go unmet. Sometimes it’s because of an oversight, bad estimates, or mismanagement. And sometimes it’s because the customer was unclear or changed their minds. Either way, your past performance record may suffer. Customer complaints, cure letters, or termination of a task can do irreparable damage to your ability to win future work. It can be worse when you are trying to bid a recompete, because you can’t hide from it by not saying anything about it. The customer knows. So how do you win a proposal when you know you might have negative past performance information? Start by looking it at from the customer’s perspective. You have a vendor that had a problem. Do you care? What matters to you as the customer? Did they make things right? Did you have to drag them, kicking and screaming, to make things right? Or did they respond in a way that impressed you? What do you anticipate from them in the future? Do you still trust them? Are they better than your alternatives? These are the questions that you need to anticipate and have answers for. You may have noticed that a lot of them depend on what you did. What you say about it now may not matter. The problem is that if negative performance drove the customer to complain, the odds are that you weren’t being responsive and how you did respond did not impress them. The least effective way to address a past performance problem is in a proposal. And yet, that may be just what you have to do… Here are some of the proposal strategies we’ve tried with customers who had past performance problems: Change before the new RFP comes out Let them see the changes that are coming when the new RFP comes out Say that the new contract frees you from the restrictions of the old contract, so now you can bid the changes you wanted to implement all along Put the emphasis on how you responded instead of what occurred Show that you are an example of the right way to respond to a problem Show how the issue demonstrates that you are trustworthy Arrange for your president or a senior executive to meet with them, show commitment, and get feedback Talk about what changed during the course of the old contract Show that you proved your willingness to partner with the customer in difficult circumstances, even if it wasn’t in your financial interests Prove that every challenge you’ve faced has made you a stronger, better company Add staff Replace staff Add new resources, software, or tools Add or replace subcontractors If you can’t show a rapid response, show a thorough investigation and comprehensive resolution Explain why it can never happen again Put a new emphasis on prevention instead of repair Improve transparency and real-time status awareness Track metrics and then share the data Make everything new Give them a reason to believe things will be different, and give them something to want Show that how you have changed or responded makes you a better choice than any of your competitors who lack that experience and will show up unprepared Remember that when the RFP comes out, the question in the customer’s mind is who they should pick. If you have a negative issue you may not be doomed. It just makes it harder to be the better pick. It is critical that you show why you are the better pick. Out of all the things we’ve tried, what actually worked? The only time these techniques work is when: You have a positive relationship with the customer and they trust you The customer has seen the changes you describe Your competitors suck worse than you do If you don’t interact with the customer except when there’s a problem, then all you can hope for are competitors who have messed up worse than you did. That’s not a winning strategy. A winning strategy turns the negative into a positive by making it about a better future. A winning strategy makes the result of the problem something you can brag about. It’s not about hiding. It’s about using it as a stepping stone to becoming something better than your competitors. Many more strategies and tips like these are available in the PropLIBRARY MustWin and Recipe Libraries. Information about how to get access to them is available here.

I’m sitting here working on a proposal and I just realized that the way I was first taught how to write an Executive Summary is backwards. When I first started writing proposals it was considered innovative to have a box or section titled “Why Us” at the end of your Executive Summary. It was intended to itemize and spell out the reasons why the customer should accept your proposal. But as I’m writing today I realize that it shouldn’t go at the end. It should go at the beginning. The very first thing I’m writing in this proposal is what makes this proposal submission different (and better!) from all the others the customer will be reading. I’m going straight to what matters to the customer. And I’m following it by positioning the company according to its strengths and weaknesses. The company has some special qualities and does some things that really need to be called out. It also has some problems that need to be put in context. Along the way I’ve paid close attention to the evaluation criteria in the Request for Proposal (RFP). I’m saying things that relate to the most important evaluation criteria so that the customer can get a sense of how we’ll stack up when they score our proposal. This positioning forms the basis for the company’s bid strategies. And how we articulate those strategies in the proposal becomes our themes when we pick up that language and carry it throughout the rest of the document. And I’m doing all of this in the first two or three paragraphs. What I have, in essence, is the minimum someone needs to know about the company and its proposal in order to explain their decision. They won’t make the decision until they read the rest of the proposal which substantiates these points, but the context is there. Right from the beginning. See also: Executive Summary It’s a very useful tool for writing the rest of the document. It gives me the points I need to support and the context I need to use to frame the details. When I go to write each section, I can refer back to the Executive Summary and explain how the section-level details substantiate why the customer should accept our proposal. It also makes it easier to write the proposal from the customer’s perspective. I made sure that the Executive Summary is about what the customer will get instead of being about the company submitting the proposal. Now when people refer back to it to write their sections, they can pick up the context and way of articulating from the customer’s perspective. Instead of addressing the requirements by saying what the company will do, they can see how to address the requirements by explaining how the customer will get what they want and need as a result of what the company will do. When you address “Why Us” at the end of your Executive Summary, it means you’re putting a lot of words between the beginning and what really matters to the customer (and to you!). It also means that you are probably not writing from the customer's perspective. You may think that you’re making those points and just summarizing them at the end, but the customer doesn’t get to see the context of your proposal until the end. If you are the customer, you don’t want to read an entire section to find out what matters. If you’re the customer, that’s where you want to start.

Most proposals start off with outlines, compliance matrices, and kick-off meetings. If they’re smart, they plan the content before they start writing. Then they get writing. When they have a draft, they hold a review, usually called a Red Team. Then they do some more writing and editing, before going into final production and submission. They’d be better off if instead of starting by planning the content, they started by planning the review. Only it’s not the logistics of the review that you need to know. It’s the standards. What will the reviewers be looking for? What criteria will they follow? At the highest level, reviews are about providing quality assurance. So how do you define proposal quality? Then how do you validate it? How can you start writing without knowing these things? When you let the deadline pressure tempt you into writing before you’ve figured this out, it’s like hitting a moving target. Most writers don’t find out what’s expected of them until the draft gets to the reviewers. That’s when they find out they need to do it over because what they wrote isn’t what is needed. Only there’s not enough time to do it over, so they try to fake fix it. Unfortunately almost reflecting what it will take to win is not good enough and everyone knows it. So they make more changes (often introducing errors) as the clock ticks down and eventually they submit what they have rather than what it should have been. If they had started by defining the quality standards for the reviews, then the writers would have had a much better chance of getting it right in the first draft. Proposal writing is about understanding what it will take to win, and getting it in writing. One of the best ways to spend your valuable but limited time on a proposal is by discussing that. Starting from a simple outline or a compliance matrix is not enough for the writers to address everything that goes into what it will take to win. See also: Faster When the writers and the reviewers conduct themselves separately, then often you don’t get a definitive discussion about what it will take to win until the review — when the proposal is halfway over. That makes it impossible to build the proposal around what it will take to win. That discussion should be your first priority. It should not be left for individuals to figure out on their own while they do the writing, subject to correction later when there won’t be enough time to change it. Within the MustWin Process that's available on PropLIBRARY we define proposal quality as the degree to which the proposal reflects all of the things you have determined are necessary to win. The good news is that a lot of what it will take to win can be anticipated before the RFP is released. But some of it depends on what’s in the RFP. What we did was create a draft set of criteria and a process for customizing it. The idea is to enable people to put a written review plan in place in about 15 minutes. Then we channel that information into something called Proposal Content Planning. That’s our approach for figuring out everything that needs to go into the proposal and putting it in the right context. It provides a detailed set of instructions for the writers that matches the instructions the reviewers get. It gets the writers and reviewers on the same page regarding what it’s going to take to win and then verify that the proposal reflects it. The key takeaway is that if you get your proposal started and then turn your attention to the review process, you’re just asking to get hurt. Start discussing your review standards and process at the beginning. It’s one of the things that you can realistically start before the RFP is released. Because if you don’t start your proposal having already discussed what it will take to win, you’ll never be able to build your proposal around it.

Most proposal introduction paragraphs are wasted space. They are written like the writer needed to get warmed up while figuring out what to say. And yet when the customer looks at your proposal, wondering what’s in it for them, it’s the first thing they read. It's the first thing they consider when deciding whether to read further and whether to accept your proposal. An ordinary proposal introduction won't add value or help the customer. A proposal introduction is not for describing yourself before presenting the proposal. It's not about you. It's about whether the customer will bother to read your proposal and whether they will consider accepting it. When the first thing a customer reads is all about you, then you are just another self-absorbed vendor trying to sell them something. Your credibility is suspect. But when the first thing they see is that you've considered them first and the impact of what you are proposing on them, you better position yourself as a partner that they want to work with. Everything that you say in the introduction should be presented in support of what the customer is going to get if they accept your proposal and anything they might need to know before they get to what they think is the good stuff. See also: Customer perspective An ordinary proposal introduction won't add value or help the customer. They usually include a company's standard way of talking about itself instead of something that talks about what the customer cares about. Anything that doesn't help the customer understand: What they will get if they accept the proposal Why they are getting it What they need to know before they read further Why your proposal is the best alternative What action you want them to take should simply be deleted from the proposal introduction, or put elsewhere in the proposal. What remains will depend on the type of proposal and your relationship with the customer. What you need to include will depend on things like whether: The proposal is solicited or unsolicited There is a written RFP and evaluation criteria You have had previous contact with the customer and how well they know you Your bid includes teaming partners or subcontractors What alternatives the customer has What you are offering What the competitive environment is like Who will be reading the proposal The introduction paragraph itself should say as little as possible, to keep the customer reading further. It should promise the customer that they will get something that matters to them, and make them want to read further to find out more. If it does just that, then it has done its job. The problem with most proposal introductions is that the customer continues reading even though they don't want to because they haven't found anything of substance. They read your proposal wondering if there's anything in it for them, getting more doubtful with each line they read. With an extraordinary introduction, they immediately see what they want and read your proposal eagerly to find out how to get it.

Since we know that only the customer can decide what a winning proposal is, to increase our win probability we need to be able to guess what the customer will decide. To do that, we need to know what the customer: See also: Introduction Needs Expects Finds compelling Can afford You also need to know how they make decisions, what tradeoffs they prefer, and how they evaluate the proposals that they receive. If they formally evaluate and score the proposals they receive, you need to know not only their evaluation criteria but how they apply those criteria during the evaluation. Your only hope of gaining this knowledge comes from relationship marketing and asking the right questions. Relationship marketing is best pursued before the RFP is announced. The questions you need to ask to discover the answers you need are something that you should be able to anticipate. Making sure the questions get answered, accumulating knowledge in a useable form, and then assessing that knowledge for how to best use it in the proposal is what your process should do. You can create your own, or you can use the ones that we’ve developed in our Readiness Reviews to track, assess, and prepare to win before the RFP even hits the street. You also need to know: What your customer expects to see in a proposal What your proposal should look like How it should be organized What it should address How should you articulate what goes into your proposal What your proposal should look like depends primarily on the customer’s expectations, which you should discover before you even start the proposal. How a proposal should be organized depends primarily on how it will be evaluated. This requires understanding the customer's decision making processes, which you should also discover before you even start the proposal. What should go into the proposal is an iterative process. It is driven by what it will take to win, which you should also seek to discover before you even start the proposal. There are a number of subjects and sources of information that need to be addressed in your proposal. How do you account for them all? And at what level of detail? And in what context? Before you can write a complex proposal, you need a planning step to define and arrange all the contents. You can't just start writing and hope to address everything and present it in the way needed to maximize your win probability on the first draft. And if you start by writing instead of planning hoping to get there by rewriting and rewriting until it somehow turns into a great proposal, you will run out of time before that happens. You need Proposal Content Planning to make sure nothing gets overlooked and that enables you to validate that the proposal reflects what it will take to win before you convert the plan into a written narrative. The next thing you need to win is a process for making sure that you have created a quality proposal. To do that you need a definition of proposal quality and a methodology for conducting your reviews. Your review methodology should use your pre-RFP discoveries to define what it will take to win, and to turn it into criteria that can be used to both plan the content and measure the quality of the proposal narrative. What you don’t want is a review process that is based on finding fault and identifying corrections after the mistakes have been turned into a narrative. With a complex proposal and a tight deadline, your review methodology provides the structure that you build the rest of your proposal around. That’s what we did with the Proposal Quality Validation methodology that is built into the MustWin Process. It fully integrates Readiness Reviews and Proposal Content Planning so that all of your efforts to prepare the winning proposal reinforce each other. One theme you may have picked up on is that winning a proposal requires you to know things before you even start writing. Not knowing those things means that the only way you can win is by guessing. You should consider not bidding instead. But if you really must bid, there are techniques you can use. They involve asking the same questions and assuming the answers. This approach won't be competitive against someone who really does know the answers, but it easily beats the other companies who also do not know the answers and try to write a proposal without going through the process. The MustWin Process is designed so that you can maximize the value of what you do know, or assume, about the customer and drive it into the proposal so that you can still build a proposal around what you assume it will take to win when you can't confirm your assumptions with the customer. Another theme to take note of is that what happens at the end of the proposal depends on things you should have done earlier. The things you do build on each other and should have quality assurance built in. That is why developing a winning proposal management process increases your win probability over just jumping in and doing what you think should be done or sounds good. Having a proposal process becomes a competitive advantage because it enables you to beat the companies that just do their proposals without thinking through the process.

Our normal advice for beginners about how to format their proposals is to not make things worse by exceeding their capabilities. An overly ambitious layout can slow you down, introduce errors, and distract you from perfecting your message. We generally recommend that your goal should be a simple and elegant layout. See also: Faster But that’s our advice for beginners. If you are capable of reliably and efficiently producing advanced layouts, then you still need to give it some thought. The point of the proposal is not the layout, it's the message delivery. Your layout should improve your win probability, and the primary way to do that with layout is to reinforce the messaging and not through making it pretty. Sometimes you can do both, but prettiness is not the point. Winning is. You may have heard of the design principal that form should follow function. In proposals, form should follow strategy. What are your bid strategies? What is your message? What are the customer's expectations? What matters to them about what you are proposing? What will it take to get the customer to accept your proposal? What can your formatting do to reinforce your strategies and message, fulfill the customer's expectations, and help them accept your proposal? Before you start picking fonts, debating typography, or creating your layout you need the right win strategy. Then your formatting should reinforce your win strategies. Here are several ways to approach formatting your proposal to make it about the customer instead of trying "to look good." Strategy #1: Meet your customer’s expectations by formatting your documents to look like their documents If you want to know what a customer expects in terms of formatting, getting a peek at how they prepare their own documents can be incredibly valuable. Are they formal or informal? Are they precise or sloppy? Are they consistent? Are they complex? What fonts and margins do they use? Are their covers elaborate or functional? If you are not sure what a customer expects your document to look like, making it look like theirs is a safe bet. Just don’t get fooled by their marketing collateral — their internal reports and memoranda probably look nothing like their marketing materials. You may be able to improve on the customer's format. But should you? That's a tricky question. You may want to demonstrate your capabilities, but you might also look frivolous. You might be able to improve on readability, but it will come at the potential cost of looking different. Then again, different can be good as well as bad, and maybe the customer will be impressed by your formatting or aspire to the professionalism of your formatting. This is why your proposal formatting efforts need to be thoroughly grounded in win strategies that are informed by customer awareness. Do you want to look like part of them or are you an outsider who they want to bring in something better? Does the work you are proposing involve producing deliverables and do they give you any insight into how you should prepare your proposal format? Will your formatting impact your evaluation score at all or is proposal formatting and style a very minor consideration? Strategy #2: Ask a lot of questions If the goal is to format your proposal in a way that is compatible with the customer's expectations, you really need to discover what those expectations are. "How should we format our proposal" might not seem like a business development priority, but understanding the customer's expectations should be. It's nice when the customer spells out how to organize and format your proposal, but not all customers do that. Instead of asking what fonts you should use in your proposal, you might ask questions like: Do they handle proposals routinely or is it unusual for them? How will they perform the proposal evaluation? Do they have preferences or expectations? What questions would they like to have answered? Do they want all the details in writing or an overview? How long is too long? Do they have a formal or informal decision-making process? Do they have any file size limitations or issues? Do they have any copies of previous project deliverables that are relevant that you can review? Do they know what a style guide is, do they have one, and do they follow it? Can you get a copy? These are clever ways of asking if it should be simple, what length it should be, what it should address, if they expect you to put a lot of time into it, who the audience will be, and how they will approach reading the proposal. All these things impact the formatting. Strategy #3: Pay attention to their culture Is the customer formal or informal in their speech and in writing? Are they authoritarian? Hierarchical? Consensus driven? Chaotic? Inconsistent? Practical? Creative? Your win strategies should reflect their culture, and your proposal will be viewed in the context of their culture. To maximize your win probability, your proposal should reflect their perspective, their way of making decisions, and their expectations for what a proposal should be and look like. Strategy #4: Tell a visual story Mimicking their formatting is playing it safe. Maybe that's a good thing. But maybe the customer doesn’t want you to be just like them. Maybe they want something better. Maybe they want something innovative, creative, motivated, clear, intelligent, capable, insightful, competent, quick, or comprehensive. Maybe you should show that to them. Your layout can look traditional or modern, reliable or innovative, clear or detailed, comprehensive or simple, routine or extraordinary. What story do you want to tell based on your win strategies? If you have the option, make your proposal highly visual. If you have the skills you can make the entire proposal look like an infographic. Can it be so visual that they get your key messages just from looking at the graphics, without even having to read the text? If you can't visualize the story you're telling them, how will they be able to? If you are creative, you can make text visual and use it to reinforce your messaging. You can replace text with graphics, and given a choice it's probably better to do so. People comprehend better and faster through graphics than they do from text. But while you may aspire to make your proposals look good, it can get in the way of your win strategies instead of helping. And it can slow things down and introduce proposal-wrecking mistakes. You also may be limited by the formatting requirements provided in the RFP. Strategy #5: Go back to basics People almost never want to read a proposal. So keep it short and simple. Only say things that matter. Your slogans and unsubstantiated claims don't matter to someone making a decision. Your proposal is not a commercial, it's a decision tool. A decision tool that's too long to read won't help influence the decision, at least not in your favor. Sometimes the best proposal format is having the least amount of proposal to format. Focus on your message. Deliver it with formatting that is clear, simple, and elegant. Communicate visually instead of with text. Format it so that the headings pop and your customer can get the message by skimming. Formatting for clarity means making it simple to be able to find things. It means making sure there is no confusion about how to read the content. If you don't understand typography, then trust the research that Microsoft or Apple have done and go with the defaults. If you don't understand document layout design, then find something simple that you like and copy the layout. If you've never worked with multiple columns, keep it a single column. Remember that whitespace is your friend and have a lot of it. Don't add extras to the formatting if you're stretching outside your comfort zone. If you don't know the art of document design, then make your proposal layout invisible. Make it so routine that no one notices it and all the focus goes to the messages in your proposal. Your proposal messaging will do more to influence the customer's decision, anyway. A great layout with bad messaging will result in a losing proposal. Great proposal messaging with an invisible layout will result in a win. Can layout help? Maybe. But just maybe. If you have the skills to produce a dramatic layout, it can help with clarity, provide an impression, and call attention to your messages. But the messages have to be there. The job of a proposal layout is to reinforce that messaging, and sometimes the best way to do that is to get out of the way.