---

Скачать книгу

---

because the customer issues a Request for Proposal. We opt for that term throughout this book.

      ❯❯ Proposals that you give the customer independently of any request: These usually follow deep discussions about the customer’s business needs and are called either proactive or unsolicited proposals. Instead of the customer requesting a proposal, you ask the customer to accept your proposal. We prefer the term proactive because it indicates that you write these on your own initiative (plus, it’s easier to say).

      Both types consist of a series of textual and visual components that form an argument in support of your approach to solving a customer’s problem.

      In the following sections, we discuss the differences between RFP responses and proactive proposals – their structures and some of the rules around writing them – and then discuss the reasons why organizations issue RFPs.

       Looking at the differences between RFP responses and proactive proposals

      Before we go any further, we cover how you construct RFP responses and proactive proposals and why they’re different.

      

For all their differences, when you look closely at RFP responses and proactive proposals, you see that their deep structures are more alike than different. That makes sense, because they both argue for one solution over others. Therefore, what makes one type of proposal successful applies to the other.

      Turn to Chapter 2 to find out more about the similarities and differences between RFP responses and proactive proposals.

       Understanding the structure of RFP responses

      RFPs are the procurement method of choice for most governments and large organizations. Most RFPs, regardless of the source, have similar structures. Government RFPs have elaborate number schemes and consistent, required sections. Commercial RFPs may have these as well, but the formats and sequences can vary widely from industry to industry and from RFP to RFP.

      

RFPs always have one thing in common: Whoever releases them expects your response to follow the prescribed structure to the letter. RFPs are designed so evaluators can easily compare bidders’ various responses. They also tend to reflect whatever structure has worked before, which is why you can anticipate repeated elements when you respond to RFPs from certain customers.

      Though RFPs can have many surface differences, most contain individual sections that do the following:

      ❯❯ Describe the background of the customer and its business problem.

      ❯❯ Lay out the rules that the customer expects all bidders to follow, including any terms and conditions of a potential contract.

      ❯❯ List the specific requirements that the customer needs you to address as you solve the problem. These requirements often take the form of questions. They may cover not only how your solution will work but also how your company will implement and manage the solution.

      ❯❯ Specify pricing components (usually in separate spreadsheets, depending on the complexity of the project).

      Many RFPs instruct you to include in your response an executive summary, which you need to do whether instructed to or not (unless the RFP explicitly forbids you to). As you see in Chapter 9, an executive summary is your best chance to explain your solution and its value to the customer’s highest ranking decision maker (who won’t normally read the entire proposal). You never want to miss out on the opportunity to communicate directly to a customer’s leaders.

       Understanding the structure of proactive proposals

      Proactive proposals, more or less, also follow a standard structure. The difference is that with proactive proposals, you control the structure, although you should always use a structure that customers find comfortable, satisfying, and compelling. The standard sections include

      ❯❯ An executive summary that recaps needs and benefits, win themes, and value propositions in language that speaks to decision makers

      ❯❯ A description and illustration of the current environment or problem

      ❯❯ Your recommendation for creating a new, improved environment or for solving the problem, comparably illustrated to show the changes in the customer’s world

      ❯❯ A statement of work that describes how you’ll set up the solution and maintain it

      ❯❯ A pricing summary that focuses on benefits, value, and return on investment

      ❯❯ A final recap of benefits and an action close to outline next steps

       Adjusting your process for RFP responses and proactive proposals

      High-level differences exist between RFP responses and proactive proposals that involve how you adhere to the rules, work with time frames, and handle the competitive landscape.

       PLAYING BY THE RULES

      

RFP responses have to mimic the structure of the RFP they respond to. They echo the numbered sections and subsections (sometimes four or five levels deep) of the RFP. They populate structured forms that the customer includes for pricing information. They adhere to customer-mandated page and format restrictions. Fortunately, they don’t have to copy the normally stilted, bureaucratic language of the original, although you must be careful to repeat key terms so you sound responsive (we talk about responsiveness and compliance in Chapter 4).

      

You can insert the original RFP into your response template to put a brand wrapper around it, but you’d better not stray from the format prescribed. Read the RFP closely to see what you can and can’t do. If your RFP says “don’t use color images,” make sure you don’t. If your RFP says “insert your response directly after each question,” do as it says and highlight your response so the reader can tell the question from the answer.

      Proactive proposals have only the rules a customer sets when you offer to submit one. Your customers will hopefully be intrigued enough by your solution to put aside their hard-and-fast rules and allow you to present your solution in your preferred format. Proactive proposals can look like, well, whatever you think your customer wants them to look like: magazine articles, business letters, glossy brochures, or even (ugh) RFP responses.

       STICKING TO A TIMELINE

      RFPs are deadline driven. If you miss the deadline, you’re usually eliminated. That may sound harsh, but it’s not necessarily a bad thing. With an RFP response, at least you have an engaged customer setting a clear deadline.

      With proactive proposals, you may have nothing more than a customer’s promise to consider your idea. Your salesperson may set a date with the customer to deliver a proactive proposal, but you may find that the date slips as other sales initiatives take precedence or if the salesperson gets distracted and doesn’t provide you what you need to finish the proposal by the due date. And your customer won’t be as obligated to review your proposal when it does arrive.

       WORKING AROUND THE COMPETITION

      Salespeople try to avoid RFPs because they are, by design, more competitive than proactive proposals. By releasing an RFP, customers consciously pit competitors against each other. You present proactive proposals after you’ve worked with customers long enough to see inside their operations and discover areas where your business’s expertise can benefit them. And although a customer may entertain multiple proactive proposals to solve a problem, you usually have much less competition, if any, to worry about.

       Understanding why organizations request proposals

      Knowing

---

Скачать книгу