The No. 1 way to strike a consistently
high win rate with your bids and highstakes proposals is simply this:
Make it a top priority to understand
why you won, or why you lost, all
those that came before the one
you’re currently working on.
Clearly, the client-delivered debrief is the
most obvious way to achieve a first-hand
understanding of whether and where a
submission hit the mark, or whether and
where it didn’t – and (also, hopefully) how it
stacked up against the competition.
The value of the information and insights
obtained from such an exercise, however,
is almost always directly proportionate to
how effectively each side prepares for, and
participates in, the debriefing session.
The “trick” to using the debrief as your “
secret weapon” in your quest to consistently
pip the competition at the post, lies in
extracting high-potency intelligence; frank,
no-holds-barred, painstakingly detailed
commentary… “news you can use” to
mastermind quantum leaps of continuous
improvement in your processes. Even when
you’re already submitting winning bids.
Assumptions Make Dangerous Allies
Don’t let a successful bidding track
record blind you to the merits of working hard
to extract valuable feedback on all aspects
of your most recent bid: To repeat success
wilfully, you must know exactly what created
it. Assumptions make dangerous allies.
In my opinion, one of the greatest quotes of
all time was uttered by Napoleon Bonaparte,
when he said: “The greatest danger occurs at
the moment of victory.”
When being enlightened as to why it won,
many a jubilant winning team has had its
proverbial bubble burst by learning that it was
a completely different factor that won it the
bid, than that which it had assumed.
(It goes without saying, of course, that if
you’re on a losing streak you have an even
greater incentive to find out all you can from
a debrief, to help steer you towards success.)
How to avail yourself and your team of a
high-value debrief, then?
Corral the Horses: You Want It from
Their Mouths (Not Third-Hand)
First and foremost, you want the feedback
to come from “the horses’ mouths” i.e. the
members of the tender evaluation panel
. . . not second-hand, from personnel who
weren’t directly involved in the evaluation,
and who (worse still) may never had read
your submission in detail.
Getting the right people at the debriefing
table is critical. You’ll greatly increase your
chances of this by targeting your (formal) email
request/s to the most senior client organisation
representatives, conveying the importance, to
you and your team, of the debrief.
If applicable and appropriate, ensure the
probity auditor of the bidding process is
included in, or cc’d in on, these communications.
Don’t try to achieve this objective through
phone calls, or “whipped off”, informal
emails. This risks downplaying the significance of your request and of the debrief per
se. Don’t be timid on this point.
You should (politely, of course) state that
you’d appreciate the client-side debrief
participants include those directly involved
in the evaluation process. This transmits the
message (in an acceptable manner) that
you’d appreciate the client-side preparing
adequately for the debrief, as you’ll be
expecting accurate and detailed feedback.
This latter point is particularly important. In
the case of a major project, it could be four or
five months post-decision before a debrief is
held. Thus, the evaluators need to be prompted
to refresh themselves with regard to the
detail of your bid documentation.
End With the Start in Mind
Secondly – plan, plan, plan.
To turn an old saying on its ear, when
planning your own approach to the debrief,
end with the start in mind. That is, set out to
learn as much as you can about the strengths
and weaknesses you exhibited in the current
bid, in order to start out on a stronger footing
with your next bidding performance.
When I’m preparing a bid team to attend
a submission debriefing session with one of
its prospect or client organisations, I work
with it to do what I’m about to recommend to
you here:
(1) Plan your approach and questioning
outline in the same detailed manner as
you’d approach preparing the outline
for a bid strategy formulation workshop,
(2) Exercise both tact and strategy when
framing the questions, and
(3) Practice “proactive” listening skills –
and exhibit an open mind and broad
shoulders.
Let’s address these three points in turn.
Mapping Out Your Approach
You don’t enter into a bid strategy
workshop with no prior planning whatsoever, so why would you enter into a debrief
with no pre-determination of the desired
result . . . and without a roadmap to exercise
your optimal level of influence over the quality
of output?
If you’re thorough in identifying all the
areas in which you want detailed feedback, chances are you’ll come up with more
questions than you can ask in the time
allotted for the debrief.
My advice is to prioritise these in
accordance with the degree of value they
afford you, in terms of:
(a) (if your bid lost this time) winning
another similar bid or another bid with
the same client, or
(b) (if your bid won) performing in a manner
throughout the contract, that will ensure
you of success in your project/product/
service delivery, and favourable and
robust positioning for future business
with the client in question.
SPECIAL REPORT
by Jordan Kelly
www.bidstrategist.com
28 Australian Concrete Construction – September / October 2014
Framing the Questions
To derive accurate, detailed information, and the frankness
of client commentary that might otherwise have proved too
uncomfortable for the parties, you must frame your questions
sensitively and productively.
One of the most important considerations you can make in mapping
out your questions, is to be cognisant that there are three categories
of information in any given “debriefing” environment and the
associated dynamics:
1) Conscious and willing to share.
2) Conscious and not willing to share.
3) Unconscious, so can’t share.
It’s easy to get the Category 1 information. That’s what the client
has prepared, and has come there ready to offer.
Category 2 is tricky . . . but this information is particularly valuable.
Here’s how to extract it – as painlessly as possible:
Minimise the evaluation team’s discomfort by framing your
questions, and pre-establishing the tone of the evaluators’ responses,
such that observations are delivered as constructive criticism. Make
it easy and comfortable (or as comfortable as possible) for the
client-side executives to speak their minds.
Here’s an example in which a bid team that tabled a losing bid is
dealing with one of the trickiest issues of all: whether or not they lost
on price. And whether or not the client is prepared to admit it.
“Obviously, when we prepare our estimates, our pricing is based on
delivering the optimal result in every aspect of the project. It follows
then, that in some projects there might be a connection between
price and what we believe it will take to deliver that optimal result.
It would be valuable for us to understand, from your perspective, how
valuable (or otherwise) you feel that extra guarantee of satisfaction
is, when we’re up against someone that comes in with a lower price.”
Category 3 requires a different type of prompt.
In this example, the bid team is endeavouring to determine where it
hit the right hot buttons and where it didn’t:
“We carried out extensive background research into this project
and your stakeholders’ issues, and we worked hard to pinpoint what
appeared would be your top concerns and priorities. Then we worked
our methodology and general approach around these. Could you
give us some specific feedback on where we were correct with our
assumptions? Could you give us some indication of where we focused
on things that weren’t as important to you?”
You may or may not agree with these hypothetical questions.
Perhaps you’d craft them a little differently. That’s fine. The point is,
it’s critical to determine the specific insights you’re after, and each
of the aspects of the bid in which you want those insights, and then
to frame up some questions that will draw out the most instructive
answers, in the most productive manner.
Australian Concrete Construction – September / October 2014 29
Testing the Answers
As politically incorrect as it may be to write this, there will be times (especially in the case of a loss) when you feel you
want to be “extra sure” the feedback you received was “kosher”. I’m sure I don’t need to elaborate.
The way to deal with this is to find a polite and acceptable way to ask the same question from more
than one angle and, preferably, to ask it of more than one of the panel members.
Listening & Implementing
Be sure to exhibit strong listening skills, demonstrating your appreciation
of the insights being delivered and ensuring your full understanding of
them (this client will now be less than impressed if your future
proposals ignore the advice they’ve just imparted).
And take detailed notes. The more detail
you can capture from the client
team’s answers,
About Jordan Kelly
Jordan Kelly is a bid strategist,
writer and trainer/coach. She
is also the author of a range of
specialist how-to books on
high-value bidding and tendering,
including ‘Think and Win Bids:
Winning High-Value, HighStakes Bids through Superior
Questioning, Listening & Thinking
Skills’ and her latest, ‘50 Essential
Bid-Writing.
SPECIAL REPORT
the more useful direction you can
provide back to your organisation when
you debrief the broader team back at home base
(you do undertake this all-important second-level debrief, of course, don’t you?)
In conclusion:
Bid teams often claim clients don’t give them the valuable answers and
feedback they’d have liked. I say: The responsibility for asking quality
questions is yours i.e. the bidder’s.
Likewise, the responsibility for milking the most value out of the
information you gather from a debrief, is yours also.
Follow these fundamentals and you’ll be well ahead of
the competition when it comes to positioning your organisation for a
win next time (if you lost this time) or, if yours was the winning bid,
a win by a larger margin of certainty next time
