Instead of an arbitrary page length, include a scoring element for "presentation of appropriate information". If a proposal is unneessarily verbose, it will score low. If it is concise - or if additional information adds to the value of the proposal - it will score high.
Posted by: Alan Sibert, C.P.M., CPPO - Friday, August 29, 2014 11:56 AM
The length of technical proposals should not be considered, It is contents of the technical proposals that should be considered.
And no the excessive proposal "may" be disqualified should never be used.
Posted by: Janet Quinn - Friday, August 29, 2014 12:01 PM
Verbose submissions benefit neither the proposer nor those tasked with reading them. Disqualification or rejection as an answer to verbosity is the wrong approach. When faced with limited time and patience to review, those soliciting proposals need to be succinct and to-the-point in terms of identifying the information most critical to the selection. The only proposals which merit disqualification or rejection should be those whose content is non-responsive to the requests made for information. Those submitting verbose proposals do so at their own risk, as there are relative few things in life where bigger means better!
Posted by: George Mulligan - Friday, August 29, 2014 12:07 PM
Executive summaries, two pages in length, to highlight key points that the proposer thinks their offering represents. This provides the respondent the opportunity to direct the reader focus to the unique characteristics that make their proposal worth reading. If a company cannot present their ideas in two pages, it is highly unlikely that a lengthy proposal will generate any attentive reading or consideration.
Posted by: Bill Herring, jr. - Friday, August 29, 2014 12:14 PM
It can be challenging/burdensome for responible evaluators to review 80 page submittals on 20 submittals.
Posted by: Dianna White - Friday, August 29, 2014 12:21 PM
I have been on both sides of this discussion. As a government reviewer/evaluator and as a contractor's proposal writer.
Government technical evaluation boards are typically pulled away from other tasks to devote limited time away from their regular jobs. Wading through lengthy verbose documents searching for the pearls of information "relevant" to the subject project is a sure way to have a board find a way to move the proposal toward the bottom of the pile. Boards review proposals one element at a time moving down the solicitation in the order displayed. We used to call it an "easter egg hunt" if that information is out of order or buried in fluff.
As a proposal writer I have never had a problem keeping within the prescribed page, font, and margin limitations. I even use 1.15 line spacing and New Courier 12 point to make it easy to read. Quite often we do it in less pages. We have been as successful in winning proposals as anyone else. 95 % of the time even those with the "best value" clause, price still wins. The tech proposal just gets your price looked at.
Posted by: Ronald Vietmeier - Friday, August 29, 2014 1:07 PM
Proper preparation of a request for proposals (RFP)should dictate specifically what is expected as a response to that RFP. To that end, the RFP generator should know specifically what they want for that response and clearly indicate it in the RFP. The RFP should include a copy of the "scoring sheet" which indicates the different elements and there respective 'scoring' weight. This is probably the most efficient method which automatically eliminates 'guessing' what is germane.
Posted by: Rod McAllister - Friday, August 29, 2014 1:21 PM
just put out a performance spec proposal and let the proposer submit their proposal with no (page) limitations along with all the required insurance and bond.
Posted by: Bryan - Friday, August 29, 2014 1:30 PM
As a person who has reviewed proposals, prepared and submitted proposals I can say this
YES, limit the number of pages. As it is now, most Public Authority's staff find it hard pressed to read and fully comprehend the bulk of the proposal information they receive. Limiting submission size, will reduce fluff and puff materials.
Posted by: Robert Gagne - Friday, August 29, 2014 4:13 PM
Quite often the proposal is long because of all the ridiculous information requested in the RFP. For instance, provide a detailed work plan, tell me every item you are going to do over the course of the project, tell me exactly who is going to work on the task and how long they are going to take. And, by the way, give me all that info on 2 pages. Then tie that into your fee. In the first instance, the information provided in an RFP is never sufficient to develop a good, customized work plan - there are too many unknowns at that point. In the second instance, if you did speculate and put an accurate assessment of the time in, you'd never get the project. The fee would be way too high.
Posted by: Michele Camacho - Tuesday, September 2, 2014 9:32 AM
