What Evaluators Actually Look For in Competitive Bids
By Kate Egbabor
When organizations lose competitive bids, the explanation often sounds familiar. The pricing was too high. The competition was stronger. The client went in a different direction.
What is rarely examined is how the proposal was actually evaluated.
Behind every competitive procurement is a structured evaluation process that shapes outcomes long before final decisions are announced. Understanding this process, rather than speculating about it, is one of the most overlooked advantages in proposal strategy.
Women’s Rise in Venezuelan and Trinidadian Politics Amid Maduro’s US-Led Removal
Evaluators Are Not Decision-Makers in the Way Firms Assume
A common misconception is that evaluators approach proposals as decision-makers searching for the best solution. In reality, evaluators are assessors operating within clearly defined rules.
They are typically required to follow published evaluation criteria, score proposals independently, justify scores with written rationale, and defend decisions if challenged. Their primary responsibility is not creativity or personal preference. It is compliance, fairness, and defensibility.
This reality fundamentally shapes how proposals are reviewed, interpreted, and scored.
Scoring Logic Drives Outcomes
Most competitive procurements rely on weighted scoring models. Each section of a proposal contributes a defined number of points toward an overall score.
From the evaluator’s perspective, the task is straightforward. They must determine whether each response meets the stated requirement and how well it does so based on the scoring guide.
In practice, this means information placed in the wrong section may not be scored at all. Strong ideas that are unsupported by evidence receive limited credit. Claims that are not explicitly tied to requirements are treated as assumptions. Risks, even when unintentional, reduce confidence and overall scores.
Proposals do not lose points because they are unclear. They lose points because evaluators cannot confidently award them.
Ease of Scoring Matters More Than Style
One of the most underestimated factors in proposal success is how easy the submission is to score.
Evaluators often work under tight timelines while reviewing multiple submissions of significant length. Proposals that make this task easier are more likely to perform well.
This does not require oversimplifying content. It requires structuring responses so that requirements are clearly restated and directly addressed, evidence is visible and verifiable, assumptions are minimized, and potential risks are proactively managed.
A proposal that forces an evaluator to search for information or infer meaning will almost always underperform one that is clear, direct, and well organized.
Risk Reduction Is a Silent Scoring Factor
Although not always stated explicitly, risk plays a central role in how proposals are assessed.
Evaluators naturally consider whether a firm can deliver what it is promising, whether it has done so in comparable contexts, whether gaps or ambiguities exist in the response, and whether awarding the contract would require additional oversight or clarification.
Proposals that leave these questions unanswered introduce doubt. Doubt reduces scores.
Strong proposals anticipate these concerns and address them clearly, even when doing so is not explicitly requested.
https://www.pulse.ng/story/tattoo-trends-2026-according-to-tattoo-artists-2026011414215458601
Why Capable Firms Still Miss the Mark
Many firms lose bids not because they lack capability, but because they misunderstand what evaluators need in order to score confidently.
Common errors include leading with marketing language instead of directly addressing requirements, burying key information in narrative text, assuming evaluators will connect the dots, and reusing content that does not align with the current evaluation framework.
These are strategic missteps, not technical ones.
Designing Proposals for Evaluation
High-performing firms design proposals for evaluation first and persuasion second.
They recognize that persuasion in competitive bidding comes from clarity, structure, and alignment rather than storytelling alone.
By aligning proposal strategy with evaluation logic, firms move from hoping to win to systematically improving their chances. Competitive bidding will always involve uncertainty, but proposals built with evaluators in mind reduce that uncertainty significantly.
About the Author
Kate Egbabor
(Info@koteriasolutions.com), is a Canada-based consultant and founder of Koteria Business Academy, where she advises consultants and professional service firms on competitive proposal strategy.
Through its flagship advisory, The Proposal Advisory, Koteria Business Academy supports firms in developing structured, evaluation-aligned, and repeatable approaches to competitive bids across public and private sector procurements.
