Most tenders are not lost on capability. They are lost on paperwork.
I have spent more than fifteen years in procurement, much of it on the buyer's side of the table. I have sat on evaluation panels and scored bids against a marking scheme. The same pattern repeated. Firms that could clearly do the work lost to firms that wrote a better response.
There are three reasons tenders fail. All three are avoidable.
1. The bid was not compliant
Compliance is a gate. A bid that fails it may never be scored on quality at all.
Evaluators have no discretion here. If the tender asks for a document and it is missing, the panel cannot assume it exists. If an answer breaches the word limit, the extra words can be disregarded. If a mandatory requirement is unmet, the bid can be excluded before anyone reads your method statement.
The firms that fall here are rarely careless. They are busy. The director writes the tender at night, after a full day running the business, and the last hour before the deadline goes on uploading files.
What to do: Before you write a word, list every mandatory item, document and word limit in the tender pack. Tick each one off before you submit. Build this list on day one, not the night before.
2. The answer made claims without evidence
"We deliver a high-quality, responsive service." Every bidder writes this. No evaluator can score it.
An evaluator scores against criteria. Each mark needs something to point to. A claim gives them nothing to point to. Evidence does.
Evidence has numbers, dates, names and sources. It looks like a response time, measured over a stated period, on a named contract, with the report to back it up.
What to do: For every claim in your answer, ask one question. How would an evaluator know this is true? If the answer is not on the page, add it or cut the claim.
3. The copy was recycled from a previous bid
Reusing material saves time. Reusing whole answers costs marks.
The marking scheme is built from the question, so evaluators read the question closely. A recycled answer responds to a different question. It mentions the wrong service, the wrong priorities, sometimes the wrong authority.
The panel notices. An answer that was not written for this buyer will not reach the top of the scale.
What to do: Reuse evidence, not answers. Keep a bank of case studies, figures, policies and accreditations. Write every answer fresh against this marking scheme, and draw on the bank for proof.
An illustrative example
The question asks how you will keep the service running during staff absence.
A recycled, claim-led answer: "We have robust contingency arrangements in place and a dedicated team committed to delivering an uninterrupted service at all times."
An evidenced answer: "Every site has a named cover operative trained on its site-specific procedures. Across our three current council contracts, every absence in the last twelve months was covered within four hours. Our cover log is attached as Appendix C."
The first answer asks the evaluator to trust you. The second gives them a reason to.
This example is illustrative. It is not taken from a real bid.
What this means for your next tender
None of these three causes are about whether you can do the work. They are about whether the evaluator can see it on the page.
You can buy knowledge. You can never buy experience. Experience only scores when it is written down.
Lost a tender recently? Grow Smat offers a free bid teardown. Send the tender and the feedback, and you will get an evaluator's view of where the marks went. Request your free teardown
Sat on an evaluation panel and seen it differently? Or have a question this post did not answer? Join the discussion on LinkedIn, or email [email protected].