Why following the rules for proposals results in losing proposals

Bids for commodities simply require quotes. Bids for complex services and solutions require proposals. Every proposal is developed under different circumstances. To maximize your win rate you must become superior at figuring out how to turn those circumstances into a competitive advantage every time. Companies that try to create an assembly line for their proposals end up creating a machine that loses in volume. 

Don’t define your proposal process by making it based on rules. Rules will break. Don’t define it based on steps. Steps can’t adapt. 

In practice, every proposal rule has an exception. So does every step. There are so many exceptions, it’s the real reason people struggle to document their proposal process. Even if you could write down all the rules, how do you document the fact that in practice you are forced to ignore or replace them most of the time?

Why a proposal process based on rules creates bad proposals

Rules set boundaries. Rules that tell people what they absolutely must not do can be vital for safety, and in the case of proposals preventing loss. They tell you where not to go and what not to do. 

Using rules to define the things people are required to do is where the problems are. Rules that tell people what they must do are primarily the result of leaders who don’t trust their own staff. These kinds of rules replace judgment with mandates and send the message that people are the sources of the problems that come up, and they are incapable of solving those problems on their own.

A proposal process defined in terms of rules and steps will not maximize your chances of winning. Rules and steps will not enable you to adapt to circumstances better than your competitors. Your proposal process should be defined in terms of what will enable you to adapt better and not to maximize compliance with one-size-fits-all approaches. The best proposal processes help people accomplish the process goals instead of mandating that people do certain things.

Rules can achieve acceptable proposals and reliable submissions. Proposals that are merely acceptable are not competitive.

Have you ever noticed that best practices are not rules and will soon no longer be best practices when they are turned into rules? If you want people to exceed the status quo, which is how you win proposals that are competitive, you need people thinking beyond the rules. 

What should you use instead of rules and steps?

Proposals are about problem solving. They don’t follow the same steps every time, but they do have repeatable goals. Goals define the things you need to do to avoid common problems and figure things out. Goal-driven proposal processes are far better than proposal processes based on steps.

How do you accomplish your goals without rules? In proposals, goals are accomplished by people collaborating. How do you collaborate without rules? You do it with expectations.  

What is the difference between rules and expectations? Expectations flow in both directions. They are not mandates defined by a hierarchy of authority that imposes them. Expectations are negotiations. But it is vital that they be made clear. Your process should explicitly state what is expected of people regarding achieving the goals. But it must also invite them to share their expectations in order to anticipate expectation conflicts so they may be resolved before they happen.  

You can set expectations without rules. In fact, it’s better to do that. Rules and steps are not negotiable or adaptable and therefore break down during expectation conflicts.

When was the last time you had a frank and open discussion about your expectations, that:

• Learned what everyone else’s expectations are?
• Removed any conflicts in a way that everyone agrees creates a new set of expectations in common?

If it's been a while, then now you know why your proposal process is not working as well as you think it should. You've got expectation conflicts. 

Implementing rules to impose your own expectations sucks the innovation and adaptation right out of proposal development. It also lowers your win rate. This is partly due to passive resistance or cheating as a result of expectation failure, partly due to under resourcing due to priority conflicts, and partly due to turning people’s innovative talents to gaming the system instead of winning. People will perform only up to or down to the rules set. 

Instead of developing integrity, rules suppress integrity. Rules require people to ignore their own judgment and comply. Expectations, however, require integrity to be fulfilled. If you aren’t working in a culture of integrity, rules aren’t going to help you create one. And if the people working together on a proposal don’t show up with integrity, you’re not going to be able to maximize your win rate until you fix that.