Posted by Jon under Musings | 
I’ve just got round to looking up a quote that I half-memorised whilst watching a sports programme on the BBC recently. (One of the dangers of blogging is that everyday life is regularly interrupted by the recurring thought, “I could use that on the blog”!)
They were quoting Anatole France:
“To accomplish great things, we must not only act but also dream. Not only plan but also believe.”
Perhaps that’s one of the differences between tactical and strategic proposal teams: the less mature proposal group focuses on ‘acting and planning’, the execution of the project plan, getting a document out on time. Strategic proposal professionals take a little more time to ‘dream and believe’, helping the team to visualise a great proposal and to develop a compelling story.
Posted by BJ under Musings |
An interesting typo in USA Today recently. They ran an article on a new program being considered by Homeland Security designed to allow frequent travellers to provide information and be pre-screened and than by pass security check.
Unfortunately for Homeland Security, the article presented the program as ‘Probably Registered Travellers’. This would certainly make things interesting at the airport:
TSA employee to traveller, “Are you a registered traveller?”
Traveller, “Um. Probably.”
TSA employee, “Okay. Then you can go through.”
Posted by Jon under Proposal Guys news |
Well, we’re now six months in to “The Proposal Guys” – so it’s time for the second of our quarterly “best of” posts, to help new readers to catch up one what they might have missed in the 20,000 or so words we’ve written so far. Here our personal favourites:
1. “Pre-Written Content – Top Tips”: a 25 June post by Jon on how to manage your proposal content library, and the pitfalls to avoid
2. “Can you keep a secret?” – Jon’s 11 July challenge on proposal security
3. “Getting Real About What You Can and Can’t Do” – in which BJ discussed how to define capacity and demand for the proposal centre, dating from 24 July. (Centre? Center? Hopefully you’re used to this site being bilingual by now!)
4. An example of excruciatingly bad proposal content in BJ’s 7 August post, “As They Say, You CAN’T Make This Stuff Up”.
5. “The impact of TLAs” (14 August). We’re forever taught to avoid ‘Three Letter Abbreviations’ and other jargon. Jon explores why this is the case – from the customer’s perspective.
6. “Talents and Traits”. Shrewd advice from BJ on a useful technique for building your proposal team. (16 August).
Hope you’re having fun reading the blog. As ever, we’d love to hear from you – what you like, anything you’d like us to discuss. Our email addresses are at the top of the page. We’ve heard lots of kind things from readers over the past few months
PS we’ve got ourselves a new logo for the site: hope you like it!
Posted by BJ under Musings, Proposal training |
I ask participants at the start of my workshops what comes to mind when I say the word “proposals”. I then ask the question again at the end of the workshop. I did this during a workshop in Baltimore this past week. It’s interesting to me to see the shift in thinking that can take place when someone has an opportunity to be introduced to and explore the core concepts and the ‘best practices’ related to proposals. Here’s the list from this past workshop.
BEFORE THE WORKSHOP –
I Think - I Feel
This is going to be very difficult – Anxious, nervous
I have no support, No one will help me – Frustrated, angry
I don’t know how to do this - Intimidated
I hate doing this - Annoyed
No one understands what I do - Abandoned
AFTER THE WORKSHOP –
I Think - I Feel
This is an opportunity - Excited
I understand my role - Eager to assist
There’s a logical process to follow - Competent, equipped
I know why we’re doing this - Energized, psyched
This is important - Valued.
This is after a 1 day workshop. So, I guess that might explain why I am so “Passionate About Proposals”. After all, I’ve been exploring, working with and discussing proposals for how many years now? :-)
Posted by Jon under Processes & best practice |
“The customer will expect my organisation to win, before they receive the bidders’ proposals.
When the proposal documents from different vendors sit on the meeting room table in front of the evaluators, ours will stand out from the crowd before they’ve even read a word of the text.
The title page of our proposal will persuade them that ours is the document that will capture their hearts and minds.
As they scan through the documents for the first time – flicking through the pages, their eyes alighting only on the titles and graphics – they’ll be convinced that ours is going to be the best.
By the time they’ve finished the Table of Contents, they’ll be excited about reading the rest of the document: section titles alone will demonstrate our understanding and our differentiation.
The Executive Summary will establish clear blue water between our approach and that of our competitors.
The proposal Q&A (or sections in a pro-active proposal) will re-confirm our compelling story, expanding on and validating our win themes.
Our conclusions section will ensure that they close the book with our key themes clearly in mind.
Our proposal presentation will re-enforce their decision that we’re the people with whom they want to do business.”
How did you do on your last effort?
Posted by Jon under Word play & writing |
Before the weather turns completely autumnal, I thought it was time to post about a sign that’s kept me amused over the summer. Posted on the gate of the building site next to an office in which I’ve been doing a fair amount of work is the following large notice:
No hard hat
No boots
No work
Every time I wandered past, I smiled as a mental image came to mind of construction workers in sombreros and flip-flops, lazing languidly in the sunshine.
I guess the sign-writers knew what they meant to say (presumably something along the lines of, ”If you’re not wearing safety kit, you won’t be allowed on site”). Yet somehow that’s not quite the image that they actually conveyed.
I guess proposal content can be like that: sometimes you need an impartial reader to point out the obvious errors!
Posted by Jon under Processes & best practice |
A few more thoughts on the ‘eRFx’ debate, which has sparked a few emails! BJ and I both have both discussed this in recent posts; I wanted to expand my thinking a little further.
I also tend towards the “send in a nice hard copy” model that BJ discussed. But there are a couple of big caveats.
Most importantly, there’s a big risk of being seen to be non-compliant (“not playing by the rules”, or as a disruptive element). You might create an impression that you’re inefficient / high cost (“why have they wasted money on this, when we have a perfectly good online process?”).
You might embarrass the purchasing manager (“Sam, why are some bidders still sending in paper copies – is there a problem with the system”). You may be perceived to be trying to gain an unfair advantage.
Bear in mind that – depending on the system – they may only circulate answers to the evaluators in the electronic format (“so why did they destroy so many trees unnecessarily?”, and “why do I have these unnecessary documents cluttering up my office”?). Pragmatically, you won’t know how many copies to send in – whatever number you do send, it’ll be wrong!
So, I’d probably tend towards asking the buyer! (That conversation needs to be carefully scripted – it could be “We’re thinking about submitting a paper copy too, to make it easier for you to evaluate”, and/or a frank conversation if you really do feel inhibited by the e-process in terms of the quality of solution you could offer).
Other than that, it’s back to your knowledge of the buyer and the image you’re trying to create. That could be any/all of:
(1) simply honouring their electronic process;
(2) also sending in a nice, professional-looking overview document/ brochure (e.g. containing a glossy Executive Summary and solution overview); or
(3) sending in a full-blown printed document duplicating the e-material with the usual additional sections.
In the (risky!) absence of any other information, I’d personally probably default to (2) – being the option that is least likely to annoy the customer by being seen as non-compliant, whilst still letting you offer some creativity and demonstrate the professionalism and care that has gone into developing your proposal.
And, as BJ said in his original post, this style of process also calls out for a stronger pre-proposal planning process, to influence the customer’s specification and opinions PRIOR to the issue of their electronic template.
