Posted by BJ on 29 September, 2009 under Word play & writing | 
Reading my morning newspaper today I came across three different things that I refer to as “speed bumps”. Though perhaps minor to some people, these not only caught my eye but literally derailed my reading.
The first was coming across the word “funnest”, as in, “This was the funnest thing I had ever done.” If I had read this in the “Letters to the editor” I might have been able to let this pass. However, I came upon this “not a word” within a column that is nationally syndicated (actually internationally as I’ve read it when I’ve been in Europe) and read by millions. This bothered me enough to cause me to check www.dictionary.com to see if perhaps this had become an accepted word. I did find “funest” (pronounced Fyoo-nest), meaning boding or causing evil or death; fatal; disastrous but this certainly wasn’t what the writer intended as they wrote.
In that same paper, I read a piece in the “Goings on about Town” about a spat of burglaries in a nearby town. I then read the exact same article under “Our Neighbors”. (I read about 1/3 of the article before I realized I had already read it. I then went back and checked to see if I was just tired and hadn’t had enough coffee or if in fact this article had been duplicated.
My morning reading was less than enjoyable at that point. And then I came across a picture with what was obviously the wrong caption. I did get a good chuckle out of this as the picture was of a family at a picnic and the caption read, “Town meeting results in clash of ideas.”
Will this make me cancel my subscription? Probably not. Has it changed my opinion/impression of the paper and the people that publish it? Yes, it has.
I’ve no doubt that “speed bumps” have a similar impact on the people reviewing/evaluating proposals.
Posted by Jon on 25 September, 2009 under Musings |
Ever get impenetrable text from the supposed experts in your business – the sort of folks who are far too senior, or far too technically able, to feel that you have the right to critique, challenge or (worst of all) edit their words of wisdom?
I was reminded of some of these by Malcolm Gladwell’s article on the credit crunch in the New Yorker of 27 July. He quoted a passage from “Bear Trap: The Fall of Bearn Stearns and the Panic of 2008”, co-written by Bill Bamber (a former senior managing director at the company concerned) and Andrew Spencer. Bamber observed:
“When we finally got more capital to replace the capital we’d lost, people took that as a bad sign and pointed to the fact that we’d had no capital and had to get a loan to cover it, even when we did have the capital they said we didn’t have.”
I’m sorry?
So, how to handle said difficult colleagues? As ever, prevention is better than a cure. Picture the difference. Scenario A – “Expert” writes content; thinks it’s perfect; sends it to proposal manager; thinks job is done; is shocked when they (a) comment on it, and (b) suggest changes. Or scenario B – clear definition up-front of the respective roles and expertise of the contributors and proposal manager; the iterative review and editing process clearly explained.
And if you can’t get your retaliation in early? That’s where your influencing skills really come to the fore. “Your content’s impenetrable and atrociously written” rarely works; try honouring the good stuff, showing you’re impressed with their insights, acknowledging that they’re the expert and have final approval, but explaining that it the proposal needs to tell a consistent story and “read with one voice” for a group of evaluators who might not grasp more advanced concepts.
Posted by Proposal Panda on 23 September, 2009 under Proposal Panda |
Thankfully the nice folk at Sanborn Map Company upgraded my flight from the States to Scotland – it’s a long time to spend in the hold you know.
I eventually arrived in Perth, Scotland. I am here to spend some time with the proposal team in within Aviva Insurance UK. My first impressions were very good – the views are beautiful …
But there’s no rest for the wicked and they soon set me to work…
Aviva has offices all over the UK, so they’re are big fans of teleconferencing. They invited me to sit in on a couple of them – it was so interesting to hear how they coordinated all of the different parts of their company to deliver insurance solutions to some pretty big customers.
After all of that hard work I decided to explore a bit about the Scottish culture, I did a bit of research…(check out my wee kilt, by the way – they wrestled me into it the moment I arrived)
I sampled a drop of whisky. The beginning of the night was excellent, although I’m not sure what happened after the first hour.
I was feeling rather the worse for wear the following day so the team put me on to another local delicacy – it’s called Iron Bru. It’s bright orange with enough sugar to keep a narcoleptic up all night. It certainly sorted me out.
I spent the day proof reading a few of the proposals that the team are currently working on and reviewing some of the successes the team have had.
So that concludes my time here are Aviva – it’s been a blast but I must press on with my journey. Here’s a picture of me and some of the team…
Farewell…
Proposal Panda travels the world visiting proposal professionals. Click here for more details. If you’d like Panda to visit you, just email us at panda@theproposalguys.com
Posted by Jon on 21 September, 2009 under Musings |
To dinner recently at Envy, one of my favourite restaurants, whilst across in Amsterdam to run an event with our Dutch colleagues. A family appears at the next table – son in his 20s, parents in their 50s. They read through the menu, then call the waiter over.
The mother speaks up. “See, we all want to try the same thing, but my son’s vegetarian, my husband’s allergic to dairy products, and I don’t eat mushrooms. So we wondered – could you do us the ‘Creamy mushroom risotto’ without the cream or mushrooms?”
The waiter – just – restrained herself from checking whether any of them had an allergy to rice, heading off to the kitchen to consult with chef, and returning to explain – very politely – that there really wouldn’t be much left of the dish. At which said family decided to leave and find another restaurant.
We’re all regularly faced with similar challenges when bidding: our organisations often have standard offers, which they can flex to an extent to meet the needs of the individual client. And, as good proposal professionals, we’re great at demonstrating how this fully-tailored solution completely meets the client’s needs.
But there is a danger in this. Had the waitress followed the approach of many bid teams, she’d presumably have brought out a plate of the regular creamy mushroom risotto, and hang the consequences. “Cream? No, sir, that’s very thick stock. Mushrooms, madam? Of course not: have you never tried Dutch beans?”
Posted by BJ on 17 September, 2009 under Musings |
I recently saw a poster which read, “Listen and Silent both contain the same letters and you can’t do one without the other.” This is a great reminder.
To listen effectively, that is, to actually hear what is being said, you have to be silent. Said differently, if you’re talking, you sure ain’t listening! :)
A technique I suggest to the team I work with is to mentally count to 3 after asking a question. This silence allows the person responding to think about their answer and prevents you from jumping in before they have had a chance to answer (stepping on their respond as it were. In this way, they will be able to impart information to you. (They’ll also think you’re incredibly polite, be flattered that you’re listening to them and will be more inclined to speak with you, now and in the future.
Whether it’s working with an SME, a fellow member of your proposal group or even a friend, spouse or child, if you allow for a bit more silence, you’ll listen more effectively and ultimately receive more information.
Posted by Jon on 15 September, 2009 under Word play & writing |
I guess that BJ and I might ever stand accused of schadenfreude, as we delight occasionally in others’ mistakes in various documents. But I couldn’t help but note the recent article in the Times about an annual ‘exam howlers’ competition.
Here are but a few examples:
- the politics student at Bristol who remarked that the US had the most advanced fighting forces in the world, possessing “highly developed and powerful marital equipment”
- the biology student at Staffordshire University, who submitted a paper on “The Science of Gnomes” – when the topic was supposed to have been “The Science of Genomes”
- the final-year student’s commentary on a medieval French poem, which observed “that all of the sentences end in a coma”.
I’m sure we’ve all had similarly dismal content contributed for our proposals in the past! Do share any examples in the Comments section…
Posted by BJ on 11 September, 2009 under Musings |
Jon and I have often talked about the need to “hit the Client’s hot buttons” and “cut through the noise level”. I saw a sign in a store recently that did this well and is a great example of how to hit a hot button and get the reader’s attention.
Most of us have been in a store, especially a store with items which are easily broken, reminding parents of their responsibilities regarding the behavior (Jon would spell that behaviour) of their children while in the store.
Some of these signs are very direct – “Parents are responsible for any breakage caused by their children.”
Other take a gentle approach – “Parents are kindly reminded to keep their children with them at all times.”
Still others take a humorous, light hearted approach – “Unattended children will be sold.”
I saw a sign recently that took a different approach. It went right to what, for most parents, would be a “Hot Button”.
This particular sign read, “Unattended children will be given a double shot of espresso and a free puppy.” I suspect this caused more that a few parents to keep a very close watch on their children while in that store.
