Page 306 - Writing Winning Business Proposals

Reading RFPs 297

◉ The RFP was written by an incumbent, and the document reflects the incum-
bent’s rather than the buyers’ culture.

Only if the RFP is written by the buyers, or by those who correctly express
the buyers’ desires and concerns, can you be relatively sanguine that identify-
ing and analyzing the hot buttons will help you. That was the case in the RFP
we’ll talk about now, as we examine what the consultants did—or didn’t do—in
responding.
The RFP requested consulting support for a pharmaceutical company that
wanted to improve the analysis of its marketing mix (in this case, its portfolio of
drugs) so that its brand teams (those responsible for selling the drugs) could use
their resources (for example, their sales teams) to maximize sales.
The 11-page, single-spaced RFP included the following elements:

◉ the history of the existing problem and the ongoing attempts to solve it (pp.
1–3)
◉ the existing problem and its ramifications (pp. 3–5)
◉ the engagement’s objectives (pp. 5–7)
◉ the requirements to be met, divided into five sections, such as “project admin-
istration” and “products to be covered” (pp. 7–11)

Some of the possible hot buttons were “consistency,” “empowerment,” and “col-
laboration,” and they could be combined into this narrative: The consultants had
to work collaboratively with the buyers to develop a consistent framework across
the organization that would empower the brand teams to make effective deci-
sions in allocating their resources. These words and their variations (for example,
empowering, collaborative, and consistent) occurred on the following pages, none
of them among the sections listing requirements:

◉ consistency: pp. 2, 3 (twice), 4, 5, 6 (twice)
◉ empowerment: pp. 3, 4 (twice), 5
◉ collaboration: pp. 2, 3 (twice), 4 (twice), 5, 6 (twice)

You already know that such hot buttons can be developed into themes and
placed strategically throughout your proposal: for example, in the background
section, the expression of the need for consistency; in the opening P-slot of meth-
ods, a rationale for how the methodology is designed to ensure consistency; and
similarly for the qualifications and benefits sections.