Posted by BJ on 12 July, 2006 under Word play & writing | 
I had an e-mail from our good friends out in the Midwest today (hey there Marlene, Sandra, Carol) with an entry for our ‘Newordology’ list. I suspect this word might prove to be one of those ‘industry invented’ terms so I’ll hold off sharing it or putting it into our list, but rest assured, if it turns out that it’s not an industry term, we’ll add it to the list.
The more interesting part of the mail was that the sender (she wishes to remain anonymous and I want to honor Sandra’s request) pointed out that this word might be a case of ‘MSU’ or ‘Made Up Stuff*. This is a new abbreviation for me and I like it a lot. For me, it ranks right up there with ‘SGP**. I asked Sandra (Oops. Did it again. Sorry. Mums the word from here on girl!) about this abbreviation and she said she picked it up at this year’s APMP conference.*** Unfortunately, they don’t recall which session presented this term. If you know to whom the credit for this delightful and very useful abbreviation should go, please let us know.
*The mail actually used a bit stronger term, but I’ll go with the gentler, kinder ‘stuff’.
** Stupid Generic Picture – discovered in ‘Why business People Speak Like Idiots - A Bullfighter’s Guide’ by Brian Fugere, Chelsea Hardaway, and Jon Warshawsky. A fun read and should be part of your proposal library.
***I’ve always said you pick up great hints, tips, etc. at the conference. After all, it’s not just about seeing Jon and I waving magic wands, doing our version of American Idol or Extreme Makeover, etc.).
Posted by Jon on 11 July, 2006 under Musings |
I have the good fortune to be a Member of the Institute of Directors, and often use its hallowed halls as a base when I’m working in London. It’s hard not to think inspiring thoughts under the ornate chandeliers, beneath the gaze of the portraits of distinguished Victorians.
The folks at the next meeting table have spent the past hour discussing a bid. Thanks to the wonders of the IoD’s wireless links, I could now tell you precisely what they think of the customer’s main decision maker (“has no clue whatsoever”). They’ve been unusually frank about their product’s shortcomings versus the client’s spec – and on how they’ll paper over these in their proposal. They’re about to commission some “independent” research to discredit their competitors (whose names I now know).
I don’t mean to pry, but they’re four feet away and talking loudly. Why is it that people feel so free to discuss bids in public? Reading draft proposals on trains, calling colleagues from airport lounges, leaving laptops in full view in Starbucks. Crazy! I wrote an article a couple of years back in the APMP Journal with two associates who are experts in corporate security; they couldn’t believe how lax people are with such important commercial information.
It reminded me of a wonderful (yet poignant) paragraph that I clipped from The Sunday Times Magazine a few weeks back, discussing photographer Michael Ward’s forebears.
As news of the old man’s illness spread, his family gathered around his bedside. Gradually, his breathing grew more laboured. It could not be long before Theo Ward, a patriarch of the Victorian age, drew his last. His seven children watched as he slowly slipped away. With a great effort, he leant forward, beckoning them to come closer: “Can you all keep a secret?” he asked. They waited for their father to divulge news of an inheritance or family scandal. After a long silence he said, “So can I,” and died.
Whilst there’s no need for excessive paranoia, if you’ve not reviewed the security risks associated with your proposal processes for a while (or thought about them in connection with that major deal you’re working on right now), perhaps it’s time to do so.
Posted by BJ on 6 July, 2006 under Musings, Word play & writing |
When presenting proposal concepts, I often speak of or refer to the ‘science’ of proposals and the ‘laws of physics’ as they apply to proposals. By these I am referring to the basic, fundamental principles I consider to be the basis of good proposal practices.
These include such mind expanding concepts as, “In order for a proposal to be well written, the proposal team must have good, solid writing skills.” I know, I know. A huge ‘duh!’ statement, right? Ok, then how about, “In order to honor quality, it is critical to understand how many proposals it is possible to produce in a specified period of time, given finite resources – including time.” Ok, here too another statement that is so obvious it does not merit mentioning, or does it? How about, “Availability is not a skill.” Too obvious? Not in my experience with a great number of clients. Actually, these statements are often real eye openers and lead to significantly changed thinking and behaviors (or ‘behaviours’ for Jon and company.)
Those of you who have seen me present know that we often lead with the Mark Twain quote, “It seems to me that common sense isn’t all that common.” I believe this is true. Or perhaps I’d spin it a bit and say that common sense seems to often get lost in the heat of battle, over time or just due to lack of attention.
I’ve recently come across a quote by Thomas H. Huxley that ties Mr. Twain’s quote with the concept of the ‘science of proposals. He said, ‘Science is organized common sense…’ I really like the way that plays into our approach to proposals. That is, using a common set of basic principles (common sense if you will) as the foundation for helping organizations produce first class proposals (the organized part).
His quote concludes with, “…where many a beautiful theory was killed by an ugly fact.” I greatly relate to this concept as well In my 20+ years in the game, I’ve seen and heard a great many ‘theories’ regarding proposals…many of which, “sound great on paper” (as I like to put it.) but don’t hold up in actual practice. As an example -One leading consultant puts forward that a sales person or knowledge expert should, as part of their job, be able to write well. Those of us in the profession of proposals know all too well that this is not true. Further, we understand the severe consequences of believing this to be true and expecting to receive superbly written, proposal ready content from sales or knowledge experts. Oh sure, it does happen, but in my experience this is the rather rare exception rather than the rule. More often, the ‘ugly fact’ doing the killing of the beautiful theory is that we, the proposal support function we need to provide the necessary writing/editing skills. The reality is that ‘common sense’ tells us that sales people and knowledge experts are hired for their skill in doing their respective jobs – selling, customer relations, product knowledge, the ability to develop solutions, etc. and not because they write well.
Another quote, one that I’ve used often, that comes to mind related to trying to support a beautiful flawed theory is, “It’s like trying to teach a pig to dance. It will annoy the pig and frustrate you.” (And no, by this I’m not suggesting sales people or knowledge experts are pigs.
Posted by Jon on 4 July, 2006 under Musings |
Just came across a nice quote from Robert Frost:
“You can be a rank insider as well as a rank outsider.”
I’ll remember that the next time I have to explain to an account manager why it is that the proposal team wants to sit down and chat before the customer’s RFP arrives.
