1 / 19

Bid Writing or the “Art of Positioning ”

Bid Writing or the “Art of Positioning ”. Paula Turner: Bid Writer paula@paulaturner.co.uk. This practical session covers. A suggested model for handling research funding ideas and commercial tender returns Skills and aptitudes to speak to your audience Common pitfalls and handy hint s.

roberthaynes
Download Presentation

Bid Writing or the “Art of Positioning ”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Bid Writing or the “Art of Positioning” Paula Turner: Bid Writer paula@paulaturner.co.uk

  2. This practical session covers • A suggested model for handling research funding ideas and commercial tender returns • Skills and aptitudes to speak to your audience • Common pitfalls and handy hints

  3. Your emotional state • Flattered: someone has asked me to tender ! • Pressured: The Dean /Pro VC has sent me this... • Surprised: Quick! ESRC has a call out for ...... • Desperate: everyone else has done one.. • Smug : I have a cracking research proposal and I know where to take it

  4. Types of Bids • Competitive (OCT) v open call • Limited or restricted bidding • Competitive dialogue • Research funding proposal • Commercial • European funded (ESF/ERDF) • Others?

  5. Stages used within a tendering process • Expression of Interest • PQQ • ITT • Demonstration • ITN • Contract Award

  6. Model for handling proposal ideas and tender returns

  7. TRIAGE 1: The 5 Question Test Q1. Which core activity does it feed? Q2. Will it employ any of our innovative approaches or methodologies? Q3. Does it match an agreed area of strategic focus? Q4. Which area of our core expertise does it fit under and do we have current capacity to deliver in the timescales specified? Q5. Is it financially viable to deliver and/or will be lead to scale? Your Conclusion:

  8. In – depth TRIAGE • Who/what/where & when? • Fit with your Faculty area • Opportunities & Risks involved • Final decision? • Contract award & review – 6 months later

  9. Mobilising a Response • Academic Lead & a “Bid Champion” project manager? • Develop a response plan based upon criteria given • Briefing note for partners/contributors/peer reviewer • Form a relationship with the vendor • Keep a rolling issues log • Agree a house style • Get legals and financials dealt with early on in the process • Book administrative support /peer reviewer & proof reading at least 4 days in advance of deadline

  10. What’s wrong with these? • We have conducted similar studies and achieved high levels of employer engagement. • This research has relevance to ....... • There is a long history of research on .... • The PI is interested to compare findings related to ...... • Research capacity will be enhanced • Case study teaching material will be generated from the research.

  11. Common pitfalls • Diving in • Non –compliance • Assertion not fact • A “cut and paste” response • Costing it badly • An imbalance of your response across all areas of the bid and ( if applicable) use the scoring matrix

  12. Post submission evaluation Ask for feedback – whether you won or lost!

  13. Skills & Aptitudes • Be positive • Be persuasive • Cross the language barrier – use theirs not yours! • Perceptual positioning • Have an eye for detail • Demonstrate flexibility • Show resilience • Appear Knowledgeable AND customer relationship oriented AND a safe pair of hands!

  14. Handy Hints • Agree your critical path for turning this round • If lead partner develop clear partner briefings • Use version control & track changer • Clarify grey areas in advance of submission • “Points mean prizes” – be guided by their criteria not yours!

  15. Sample Q: Beneficiaries ( 4000 c.) • Yes - other academics/research community , but also: • International, National, Regional and Local Policymakers • Business Support and Membership Organisations • Professional and Employer Representative Bodies • ESRC itself e.g. the study satisfies the priority of more fully exploiting national longitudinal datasets ) • Study participants

  16. Golden Rules • Present the bid in a professional manner that properly identifies and substantiates your capability and capacity to add value • Is concise, relevant and demonstrates your capacity to deliver outcomes • Contains key personnel profiles that highlight their qualifications and capabilities to be able to fulfil the tender contract • Substantiates your claims against the selection criteria, proving you can carry out the contract

  17. Golden Rules Continued: • Use visual impact to impress the panel. If it is easy to read it is easier to evaluate • Identifies and substantiates “value added” services which makes your services highly competitive • Conforms to tender application requirements and aims to exceed all procurement  requirements.

  18. And finally remember..... “If you think you can or think you can’t you’re probably right.....” Thanks for listening & good luck ! Paula Turner paula@paulaturner.co.uk

More Related