A while back I helped someone by observing a video meeting of a tender interview. The state of play was as on a final shortlist of two.
Six attendees; two seller side with four buyers.
The Tender Response doc was 34 pages of mainly beautifully formatted tables. Chiefly detailing how each spec requirement would be met. Along with a handful of more diagrammatic entries. Which included timelines, organograms and the blast from the past that was an example of Porter's Value Chain.
As those involved have mainly moved on, I can now report on the glaring, yet all too common thematic oversights. Such as;
- the typical hour-long slot was planned in
- no agenda was sent through ahead of time
- the session quickly fell into and never escaped from the line-by-line spec run through
My sense then was shaped by being on countless such calls.
One summing up can be from the wisdom that the highest tender score seldom wins the deal. On which I've blogged before [most recently with the current UK Lottery bid].
Totting up marks will rarely make the ultimate progress desired happen for you.
I prefer to start with what they want to see happen.
If asked in two to three years time what had come out of this project, what would they then want to be able to say?
Think in terms of their personal reputation, and the organisation's reputation. The actual delivery process, and the 'gain' as expressed in a sentence of simple language.
Truly get on their side of the table.
Lead with Legacy.