Response Benchmarking Report

Transcription

1 CT G IC F IT US FOC ITIN 1 TRATE Response Benchmarking Report 2 3. S G Prepared T I QUAL For Sample Document T E P M IT Y O 4. C 2011 Tender Success U C O S 5 F E IV

2 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success Tender Success Response Benchmarking Report About This Sample Report Thank you for taking the time to download this sample report. It has been designed to demonstrate our simple, step-by-step approach to benchmarking a tender response, proposal or written pitch using industry best practice. The comments included in this report have been de-identified, but are real-life feedback provided to Australian companies in the last decade. Actual benchmark reports contain very specific feedback intended for immediate use. This document provides just a taste of some of that feedback. How An Analysis Report is Compiled After initial discussions, we are suppled with 2-3 past (or current) responses along with the corresponding RFTs/RFPs/EOIs that were issued. We also like to be given a synopsis of the company's business and sales strategies. Then, our tender experts perform a careful analysis of the supplied documents: 1. High Level Overview: An initial rapid read-through of the entire collection of documents. General impressions and messages are noted. This pass is designed to mimic the overview a time-poor decision-maker receives of each document. 2. Detailed Analysis: A detailed second-pass read-through. 7 specific areas of analysis are applied throughout: Compliance, Prospect Focus, Strategic Fit, Competitive Focus, Writing Quality, Graphics and Document Design. 3. Panel Scoring: The reviewers discuss their individual findings and agree overall scoring for each area. 4. Specific Findings: Areas for development are noted along with specific examples. A detailed report is compiled, the highlights of which are featured in this sample. Of course, you can harness the principles explored here to critically appraise your own response documents. But for deeper insights, our experts can perform a thorough analysis on your responses for you, providing a benchmark tailored to your needs. Please contact Tender Success to have your responses benchmarked by our experts. 1

3 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success Your Scoring: Radar Chart 2. P R GN ESI SCORING G IC F IT US FOC 7. DO CUM EN T T PEC OS D 1. COMPLIANCE TRATE 6. G R A P H S ICS 3 4 WR ITIN 5 G QU A LIT Y 6 OC U S 5. 1: Not Found in Document 2: Marked Improvement Needed 3: Below Average 4: Average 5: Above Average 6: Exceptional 4. CO M P ETIT F IVE High Level Overview Document design has some attractive, brand-compliant elements. Writing is accurate and businesslike manner. Some documents contain professional graphics and figures. Executive Summaries are, in fact, covering letters. The writing requires a human touch - it's currently cold and rigid. The content focuses almost exclusively on Acme, not the prospect. Several bold claims are made, but no evidence is produced. Document design needs more white space and navigational elements. Some of the figures are poorly executed and in some cases barely legible. Lots of evidence of careless copy-and-pasting in the content. 2

4 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success Detailed Benchmarking 1: COMPLIANCE What is It? How closely does the response match the requirements of the issued document (RFT, EOI, etc.)? Best Practice A highly compliant response will: Comply with stated requirements for format and length. Follow the same logical sequence as the RFT, using similar numbering. Satisfy the Compliance Checklist. Your Scoring Score: 2 (Marked Improvement Needed) Compliance Criteria was referenced. Correct document format and length. Initial checklist refers to pages in the response. No references are made to the RFT's sections by number. The document structure appears to be a template and doesn't reflect the RFT. The document sections are numbered very differently to the RFT. An alternative, non-compliant pricing model is presented without presenting a compliant model (this is likely to lead to automatic disqualification). 3

5 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success 2: PROSPECT FOCUS What Is It? What is the focus of the content: the needs of the prospect or the abilities of the tenderer? Best Practice A document with good prospect focus will: Specifically address the prospect's stated needs. Thoroughly satisfy the evaluation criteria by presenting clear evidence. Use prospect-centric language. Present benefits THEN features. Quote directly from the RFT to demonstrate a thorough understanding. Your Scoring Score: 2 (Marked Improvement Needed) Some of the covering letters acknowledge challenges and issues. Benefits are rarely (if ever) matched to specific prospect needs. References to the prospect are very rare (see word cloud below). Two documents refer to previous prospects - evidently a copy-and-paste error. Benefits are a buried in long, non-specific lists of features. Above: Word Cloud for the content of one of the analysed responses. Word count demonstrates a low prospect focus (green), and is typical of the responses reviewed. 4

6 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success 3: STRATEGIC FIT What is It? How well does the response fit with the tenderer's overall business and sales strategies? Best Practice The strategy behind each response should flow naturally from overarching business, marketing and sales strategies. Responses that do this well will: Feature previously agreed 'Win Themes' and key messages. Showcase understanding of the prospect based on a healthy, ongoing relationship with them. Accord entirely with the tenderer's wider business goals and marketing activity. Your Scoring Score: 3 (Below Average) Several key Win Themes have been included in the responses. One response refers to the tenderer's business strategy for 2010/2011. Pricing model appears to be barely inside of acceptable profit margins. 5

7 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success 4: COMPETITIVE FOCUS What Is It? Does the response clearly differentiate the tenderer from competitors? Best Practice Winning responses acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of both the tenderer and the rest of the marketplace. Responses with a strong competitive focus will: Clearly provide specific points of difference, along with supporting evidence. Minimise perceived weaknesses using clear arguments and alternative approaches. 'Ghost' competitor strengths by highlighting the advantages of avoiding these approaches. Your Scoring Score: 2 (Marked Improvement Needed) Specific facts & figures appear only in one or two documents, buried at the back. Some claims are made without any evidence or case studies to back them up. There are no client testimonials to add credibility to strengths. A few compelling claims and key strengths are detailed in most of the documents. 6

8 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success 5: WRITING QUALITY What Is It? Is the content well-written? Accurate? Persuasive? Easy to read? Best Practice Quality writing is the life-blood of any response. Responses featuring high quality writing will: Be grammatically correct and not contain spelling errors. Use short, simple sentences containing one idea at a time. Use subheadings and paragraphs liberally to break up concepts. Limit the use of jargon, clichés and 'management speak'. Focus on benefits, rather than features. Use bullets when presenting lists of ideas or features. Provide easy-to-follow cross references, if required. Your Scoring Score: 2 (Marked Improvement Needed) Writing is businesslike and accurate. There are only very few typos and errors. The writing style is sales-heavy and advertorial, rather than earnest and helpful. Tone of voice is cold, factual and detached. Executive Summary should be a punchy 'percolation' of key benefits and win themes Pricing appears inconsistently (sometimes first, sometimes last) Previous prospects names' have been left within the text- a 'cut-and-paste' give-away Sentences are often long and complex. Paragraphs are often dense and unbroken. Subheadings are used rarely and don't feature benefits. There is hardly any focus on matching benefits to client needs. Bulleted lists are used rarely. Cross-references are difficult to follow. 7

9 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success 6: GRAPHICS What Is It? Are professional graphics used to sell the solution, explain key concepts and reinforce Win Themes? Best Practice Graphics and figures do much of the heavy lifting when it comes to winning responses. Graphics should be used generously and will: Be professionally designed Where possible, be customised for the specific prospect or opportunity. Be clearly reproduced without distortion or pixelation. Feature captions that clearly outline benefits. Explain complex concepts, processes and models using simple visual language. Your Scoring Score: 4 (Average) Professional stock images are used on several front covers. One or two professionally-produced diagrams were used. Good use of shape and colour in some documents. None of the images include captions. Some images are hard to read and poorly reproduced. (See reworked example, next page) Some complex models could be illustrated visually but are not. There are no photographs of key project personnel. There appears to be little which is unique or customised to the opportunity. There are no graphics in the executive summary. 8

10 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success EXCEPTIONAL SUPPORT 24 HOUR ACCESS TO EXPERIENCED SPECIALISTS COMPATIBILITY CLOSE ALIGNMENT OF YOUR CORE VALUES WITH OURS GP PROSPECT RESOURCE NAME & LOGO POOL QUALITY CANDIDATES PSYCH TESTING, OH&S, FOCUS ON CARE LOCAL SERVICE AN OFFICE WITHIN 15KMS OF ALL OF YOUR LOCATIONS HUGE CHOICE ACCESS TO DATABASES OF CANDIDATES Above: 'Model' graphics were complicated and hard-to-read. A simple reworking concentrated on key messages supported by clear graphics. 9

11 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success 7: PAGE & DOCUMENT DESIGN What Is It? Is the response legible, attractive and skim-proof? Best Practice Winning responses look more like trade journals and annual reports than internal memos. Legible, attractive document layouts will: Be based on a professional document template featuring white space. Contain page elements designed to make for easy navigation. Feature pull quotes, boxed text and subtle but powerful use of colour. Margins and footers provide breathing space - and somewhere to make notes. Your Scoring Score: 3 (Below Average) Generally consistent use of colour, typeface and tables. Good use of branding elements in unsolicited proposals. More white space is needed on each page. Page grids and columns are used inconsistently within individual documents. There is no page furniture used to aid navigation (Chapters / Document Title, etc.) Tables span multiple pages and are poorly laid out. Boxed response content looks clumsy and amateurish. No use of boxed text, key points and pull quotes across all documents. 10

12 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success Our Recommendations for Development 1. Proposal / Bid / Tender Strategy The exact strategy for developing a winning tender is shaped by strategic inputs from the rest of the business. (See following diagram) Both the Sales and Bid Teams must work closely together in planning individual capture opportunities before an RFT is received. In this way, all responses will: Make good business sense strategically Benefit from the wider business, sales and marketing strategies Share consistent, tested win themes and success stories The samples provided suggested the need for the development of a common winning tender strategy. Workshop Suggestion: Understand how Acme's wider strategy impacts bid strategy. Discussion around a general approach for future bids. 11

13 Sample Response Benchmarking Report 2011 Tender Success 2. Executive Summaries Executive Summaries are an essential element for winning responses and should be included in all bids. They set the tone for what is to follow and are the pages most read by decision makers. The executive summaries in the supplied samples are more like cover letters. They focus little on the delivery of key benefits to address prospect hot buttons and are 'salesy' in nature. Workshop Suggestion: Crafting the 'perfect' executive summary. What to include, what to leave out, when to do it. 3. Writing to Win A convincing tender is one that talks mostly about the prospect. When discussing the tenderer, it does so in terms of prospect benefits. Bragging is done by skillful use of testimonials. The language is punchy, consistent and broken up into eye-catching sections. Whilst the language in Acme's samples is businesslike and polished, it lacks simplicity and power. The perspective is inward-focusing, presenting the AcmeAcme story - not presenting business solutions to the prospect. Workshop Suggestion: Techniques to improve tender writing. Use of a writing template. Why headings, lists, boxes and testimonials can all be opportunities to persuade. 4. Graphics & Design An inferior, well-presented proposal will often beat a superior, badly-presented proposal. Attractive, professional, easy-to-read documents are read first and remembered longest. Eye-catching and instructive diagrams and figures reinforce key messages in a memorable, moving way. Acme's current brace of template designs are brand-compliant and attractive, but can benefit from several enhancements in terms of breathing space, page furniture and overall polish. The use of quality graphics can provide further enhancements. Workshop Suggestion: Suggested improvements to the tender template. Use of InDesign as a layout tool. Development of custom, opportunity-specific graphics. The use of action captions. 12

14 61 (0) BIDS (2437)