By B. Michael Berger, Vice President, Advantage Consulting, Inc. It used to be that there was essentially one way to bid on Federal
government and a lot of commercial work. After all the relationship
building, personal interaction and mind-share (the condition when
you and the potential client are in general agreement that you
understand their requirements and they understand your approach to
meeting those requirements), you read through the final RFP (if you
don't know that means Request for Proposal we need to talk), you
and your staff beat your brains in for about 30 or 40 days, and you
prepared and delivered the prop ("proposal" for you new folks) on
time. Times have changed. The first part (relationships, et. al.) is as
important as ever, but it's becoming a lot more common these days
that the proposal is delivered orally - standing in front of some
variant of a Source Selection Board (SSB). Now you must pray (1)
that you figured out all the right things to say, (2) they don't
ask questions you or your team isn't prepared to answer, and (3)
that no one on the team embarrasses themselves in front of the
group receiving your presentation. Proposals Are an Art Form Traditional written proposal are tough to do right, which is why
most companies will do almost anything to keep a top notch prop
manager or writer. Written props have a formal structure, usually
dictated by the agency or firm for whom it is being written. A good
prop manager assembles a team of comprised of subject matter
experts, additional writers, graphics people, the legal staff, the
Chief Financial Officer, an editor, and other necessary support. Based on instructions in the RFP and a detailed checklist, the team
sets out to prove to the prospect that you understand the
requirements, have a killer solution, have the background and
experience to take on the work, can support the program with a
strong administrative and management team, and can offer a price
that has the prospective client drooling. They write to the anticipated audience using simple graphics,
descriptive captions, bold conclusion headlines and lots of other
techniques to ensure that their prop flows like the Mississippi.
However, in spite of all this structure, would you believe, for
example, that many proposals submitted to the government ARE NOT in
compliance with the RFP? But What About Orals? Well, the government (and perhaps commercial firms as well) say
they are asking for more oral proposals because they are (1) easier
and less expensive for you to develop, and (2) faster to evaluate.
It almost goes without saying that half of that is not exactly
correct. Orals are NOT easier and less expensive to develop. If fact, an oral prop may take more of your resources and just as
much time to develop, and, frankly, there's a great deal more
uncertainty because unlike a written proposal, you have no real
idea about what the competition's submission will look like or what
techniques they may employ once they are in front of the selection
officials. In addition, we've come to learn that the government and commercial
firms are asking for orals because they want to meet, face-to-face,
the people who will actually do they work. They've determined that
people are sometimes as important as solutions and further, in an
oral a bad company can't hide behind cleverly presented
phraseology. There Are Other Differences as Well Unlike written proposals, orals are usually not scored in the
traditional sense. An oral presentation may follow a written
proposal with which it must dovetail exactly. Your technical people
will likely have to participate, which means training, practice and
rehearsal for all those who will present. It may require you to
bring in people otherwise engaged in on-going work to put together
and prepare for the presentation, graphics may be very specific and
other media may be required (such as video) and difficult to
accomplish. All of this preparation may need to be completed in a very short
time. How Tough is an Oral Really? Wel | 
