Here’s an uncomfortable truth about government procurement. Your technical expertise doesn’t win tenders. Your clearly written explanation of that expertise does.
Evaluation panels don’t award tenders based on “best in field”. They don’t know if you’re the most proficient. They assess “best on paper” and reward accordingly.
I’ve worked with brilliant engineering firms, healthcare innovators, and defence contractors that do exceptional work. But they struggle to translate that capability into tender responses that score.
The problem isn’t their work. It’s their writing.
Evaluation panels don’t see your projects, your team, or your track record. They see your written response. If it’s unclear, non-compliant, or fails to strategically address evaluation criteria, you lose – irrespective of your capability.
Tenders present a writing challenge, not a technical test. The trick is to present a response in which clarity of prose convincingly demonstrates your capability.
Your engineers can build brilliant solutions. Your project managers can deliver flawlessly. But none of that matters if you submit a poorly written response.
The key is translating technical complexity into compelling, compliant responses that win contracts.
In the best part of a decade helping businesses respond to complex government procurement across departments including defence, infrastructure, healthcare, engineering, IT, and communications, I’ve learnt one thing – most companies have no idea what they’re getting into when they decide to tender.
My work ranges from small engineering firms to major defence contractors. Many had never responded to major government procurement. They all required help navigating:
- complex multi-category RFPs
- quality assurance and compliance management
- evaluation criteria analysis and strategic positioning
- safety, environmental, and methodology documentation
- the chaos that ensues when SMEs are stretched thin and deadlines loom.
The writing is on the wall when they see an RFP that looks perfect for their capabilities and think, “We do this every day. The tender should be straightforward.” Then they open the documentation.
Suddenly they’re facing 60 pages minimum of evaluation criteria, compliance requirements, safety management plans, environmental risk assessments, sovereign capability statements, and worked methodology examples. The deadline is three weeks away. Their subject matter experts are running projects and don’t have time to write. And if they do they struggle to translate technical expertise into evaluation panel language.
Panic sets in.
This is where poor writing costs you the contract. You’re better off answering the targeted questions and letting an experienced writer turn it into a compliant narrative. Together you can build a response strategy. You focus on running your business and let the writer focus on winning the tender.
And reach out early. Don’t wait until you’re three days from deadline to realise you need help.
Contact me at daccroker@gmail.com