Proposal Land

Better RFP Responses & Management
 
Proposal Land

Term: Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRBs)

Benefits accruing to defined regions of Canada from a Canadian government policy requiring a contractor awarded a defence or security contract to award subcontracts to Canadian industry to the same dollar value as the prime contract.

Also used to mean the dollar value of said subcontracts.

Also used to refer more loosely to requirements to commit to such a benefit in an RFP.

Drive what looks to the uninitiated like onerous reporting, both in the proposal and throughout the contract term.

Acronymized as IRBs; pronounced by spelling it out.

How to Handle Page Limits: Tip #1

Page limits: They make life easier for evaluators, and help to separate the sheep from the goats, procurement-wise.  After all, those who are best at delivering a service or designing a product or building or software system are also best at explaining themselves succinctly, right?  Well, maybe.  Maybe not.  But whether you love ’em or hate ’em, page limits are more and more the way of government procurement, so it behooves bidders to get better at handling them.  Herewith, the first tip.

Let’s say the RFP asks any of the following:

  • Submit a preliminary project management plan – 10 pages
  • Describe your project experience – 2 pages/project
  • Explain your approach to risk management – 5 pages

And let’s suppose your experts are outraged!

After all, the company’s standard project management plan is 100 pages.  How can they possibly cut it to 10?

After all, the projects in question are worth tens of millions of dollars and involve, you know, rocket science.  How can anyone do justice to them in just 2 pages?

After all, the folks doing risk management (or quality control, or performance management, or logistics, or . . . ) each have five industry credentials.  Do you really think they can explain what they do in 5 pages?

Stop.  Breathe.  And focus.

Focus?  On what?

Forget what you want to tell the customer.  Forget what you think they need to understand about you.  Forget about all the push communication from the experts.

Flip it.

That is, pretend for a minute that you’re the customer, trying to select a contractor.

What would you want to know?

What factors would help you differentiate between bidders?

What facts or data or credentials or stories or concepts or principles would convince you to spend your money?

Now go and write those answers. Write what the customer is trying to pull.

And you know what?  It’s never a 100-page project management plan.  If it were, they would have, you know, given you 100 pages to write that very thing.

 

How to Talk to the Contracting Officer

First, a word about their legitimate interests.  Well, three words: a good competition.

What is a good competition?

For a contracting officer, it’s one that does not require them to explain to their bosses any of the following:

  • Why their RFP attracted just one bidder
  • How their evaluation criteria produced just one qualified bidder
  • Why the lowest qualified bidder didn’t win the award
  • Why an unsuccessful bidder is suing

Is a good competition one that generates best value or the best technical solution?  Not necessarily.  Those aspects are more the purview of the technical authority.

What does that mean for you, as a bidder?

Do not confuse the contracting officer’s genuine commitment to keeping bidders in the hunt with a guarantee of a level playing field.  Evaluate your chances of winning for yourself.

Do not waste time trying to get them to do things against their interests:

  • Restricting competition by demanding experience levels only your company can meet
  • Setting personnel qualifications unreasonably high

For best results, align your suggestions with their interests and feel free to comment, respectfully, on the following:

  • The probable effect of existing RFP terms (SOW, draft contract, procurement methodology) on your decision to bid
  • The apparent fairness or objectivity of an evaluation criterion
  • The link between the procurement methodology and some stated client policy, especially in government procurement