TLDR: When crafting bid responses, in-depth consideration of client questions, defined requirements, and response levels all aid in establishing a greater understanding of the motivating factors behind the procurement. Appreciation of these factors underpins the 'why' behind the client's thinking and addressing them within responses can help in reinforcing the relevance of your offer, tipping the scales in your favour through a more positive evaluation.
One of the areas we have experience in at Keyne, is the review and assessment of written bid responses. Much of the content we review is extremely well written and articulates a perspective clearly, yet the overall response still scores low when subjected to a simulated evaluation. There are often obvious reasons why, and most can be quickly corrected with minor modifications and tweaks of the response. Those few responses that need major editing tend to have the same root cause, necessitating a rethink of the content and in some cases, a complete rewrite.
To avoid this, we propose that writers think about the response approach from the outset, considering these three main factors:
- What will be delivered. How the business will provide compliant services that meet the requirements and the technical questions posed.
- How it will be delivered. The articulation of the service model in some detail and how quality and service levels will be met.
- Why it will be delivered that way. The basis on which the service model has been designed to demonstrate a clear understanding of the client’s challenges and needs.
Talented writers are very good at answering the first point, but often struggle with the second point and completely omit the third. Primarily, this isn’t down to the quality of writing, but due to a lack of mature knowledge surrounding operational constraints and the methodologies that underpin services. Where there is a strong technical knowledge (point 2), writers can still have strong bias towards the delivery organisation’s standard service model, unwittingly reinforcing a unilateral perspective.
The third point though is the most elusive in many written responses, yet can be powerful in establishing relevance. Understanding and addressing the ‘why’ shows that bidders understand the client, the context of service delivery, and the concerns that the client might have.
In many instances, bidders will cover this off through some rudimentary consideration of 'win-themes’ and ‘hot-buttons’. While a useful approach, it seldom goes deep enough to truly address what is keeping the client up at night.
In the words of the author Simon Sinek, we propose that you always start with the ‘why’.
- Why has the client asked that specific technical question?
- Why are the requirements and service levels defined as they have been?
- Why is the client coming to market?
- Why is the timing important?
- Why structure the market engagement the way they have?
Often the answer to these questions can seem innocuous, but they might also allude to something deeper and more important that may just tip the scales in your favour.
Once you have the ‘why’ defined, you can then start on the ‘how’:
- How will we address client concerns?
- How will we deliver the services?
- How will we adapt and evolve the service to meet changing needs?
- How will we demonstrate value by the end of the contract?
- How can we help the client sleep better at night?
Understanding these elements can make responses more compelling and the ‘what’ more relevant to those evaluating your bid.
If you need help with any aspects of your bidding, or would like to find out about our unique ‘bid sprint’ approach that helps you to identify the ‘why’ early on in the bid timetable, get in touch for an informal chat and some more suggestions on structuring your bid responses.
To find out how the Keyne Group can help you with your complex bids and proposals, get in touch here and let us know what you need.
To access all posts in our series "The psychology of bidding", signup to our newsletter for instant access.