Blog UPDATE: We ran a webinar on April 10th where Jim Creutz (subject of this post) showed what he is doing. You can get the presentation slides here to see if using automation to help with a bid manager with bid / no-bid decisions.
During early 2011, FIT systems, a Florida based SDVOSB (service disabled veteran-owned small business) asked these questions. Can we:
- Quickly determine whether to bid / no-bid or team
- Save time and avoid reading poorly qualified solicitations?
- Compare multiple opportunities for ‘good fit’ in a few minutes?
In February 2012, Jim Creutz, Business Development Director at FIT Systems and I got chatting. Jim shared what they were doing with VisibleThread to support these efforts. I was intrigued.
Of course, they were using VT for the normal stuff; making better quality props with readability analysis, generating starter compliance matrices in minutes, and driving more efficient pink and red team reviews. But, Jim showed me how they were also using VisibleThread to augment the very early stages of Capture Planning too to help bid / no-bid and teaming decisions. Now this was new!
They had started using language analysis to scan solicitation docs for what Jim called ‘affinity’. Basically, he was identifying the right opportunities to bid or team on with language indicators. As I blogged here on win themes, it is always amazing to see how customers apply VisibleThread, so this was another really interesting case.
So, if you are a Capture Manager or Proposal Manager involved in Business Development at all, you will find this post useful. If you want to see this technique in the flesh, Jim shared what he is doing in a webinar we ran on the 10th April. Click here for the slides.
I am very interested to hear whether you have attempted to analyze solicitation docs using a similar approach? If so, how did it go? Let us know your thoughts on this approach. Do you think it can work in your case? Is it helpful? Would it save time? Post comments and let us know.
So, let’s get back to Jim. Here’s how he did it.
Step 1: Define Affinity Characteristics & weightings
Jim set up what he calls affinity characteristics in a spread-sheet.
Here are three categories he defined:
- Business Attributes
Under each category, he listed phrases and terms that would indicate ‘fit’ or ‘lack of fit’. Here are a sample of some of the characteristics he defined:
|Java||DUNS||Austin Automation Center|
|JAVA EE||CAGE||Benefits Delivery Network|
|REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFICATION||Florida Management Services Contract||C&P|
|Mercury Interactive||Minority Business||Compensation Pension|
|OLTP||Service Disabled Veteran Owned||Shared Corporate Database|
|Transaction Processing||SDVOSB||VAA tools|
|knowledge management||541511||VBA Corporate|
|IT services||541513||VBA Applications Architecture|
|Oracle Data Base||541519||VETSNET|
|skill transfer||Facility Clearance||Veterans Benefits Administration|
|test data||top Secret|
In total, Jim defined a total of 77 technical indicators to scan for, 23 individual business indicators, and 15 experience indicators.
Next, for each indicator, Jim assigned a weighting. Positive weightings between 1 and 5 indicate good fit, with 5 as best fit.
Negative weightings indicate poor fit. These ranged from -1 to -5, with -5 as worst fit. So, now Jim had an Excel spread-sheet with categorized indicators and weightings.
Jim also defined a categorized ‘Concept List’ in VisibleThread so that he would be able to scan for the indicators. The concept list will allow us to explicitly scan the documents later as part of step 3. So, onto the next step, uploading docs…
Step 2: Take your docs from GovWinIQ or FedBizOpps and upload to VisibleThread
Jim’s company subscribes to GovWinIQ from Deltek. This means they have a steady stream of solicitations coming in on a daily basis. For those not using Deltek’s product, you can still get your solicitations from FedBizOpps of course.
So, Jim takes the solicitation docs that are worth a second look and uploads them to a VisibleThread folder.
He tends to name his folders either by date range or, if a large number are coming at him from a specific agency/dept., he’ll add the agency name. So he might have folders called ‘2012 Week April 2 – Solicitations’ or ‘Army Solicitations – April 2012’ or ‘Navy Solicitations – April 2012’ etc.
By adding to categorized folders like this, over time he can assess trends also. But that’s a separate benefit.
Step 3: Run a Scan
Next Jim runs the scans against the doc. You might recall back in step 1, Jim had defined a ‘concept list’ holding his technical, business and experience indicators. So, a scan is really a way to uncover any references to those indicators.
So, scanning is pretty simple. He does this:
- He selects the folder. He clicks ‘Run Concept List Analysis…’, selects his ‘affinity’ concept list and then.
- He reviews Concept Coverage across the uploaded docs. In other words he is presented with a matrix type view.
The screenshot below is an example of how this looks in VisibleThread. Listed across the top are the documents; RFPs, SOWs and PWSs for candidate solicitations.
The left shows the indicators; technical business and experience. Each column represents a solicitation document. The numbers indicate coverage (number of hits).
Step 4: Crunch the numbers in Excel
Finally, Jim now takes the above information and exports it to Excel.
He places it in the context of a detailed spread-sheet he has developed.
Jim’s final output is what he calls a ‘normalized score’. This is a calculated number based on the sum of each attribute’s Frequency Density X Weighting.
Now this may sound a little tricky, but here’s how he did it:
- Take the weighting as outlined earlier, 1 to 5 for positive, -1 to -5 for negative.
- Calculate Density by taking the total word count in the document and devising a % based on (number hits / total word count *100). This gives him a density percentage value.
- Multiple the weighting against the density percentage value to give a normalized score for each attribute.
Here’s an example Excel report for one of Jim’s solicitations:
Jim has also developed a bunch of excel sheets that can show how all the solicitations compare graphically.
Here we see 6 solicitations compared by ‘Business Attributes’ using one of Jim’s comparisons. The green checks should be considered further. The ‘question’ one may be worth a read. We should likely pass on the red x solicitations.
If you want to learn more on this, Jim shared what he is doing in a webinar we ran on the 10th April.
What has changed for Jim and his team?
The business benefits for Jim are very clear:
- Time savings – Every day one of Jim’s colleagues had been spending between 1 and 2 hours reviewing new opportunities. Now that time is cut, because 1.) they are reading fewer more qualified solicitations and 2.) it is faster to identify exactly where the hot buttons are.
- Improve Win Rate – Better decisions around the right bids to pursue – using objective metrics for ‘apples to apples’ comparisons of multiple opportunities.
- Pass Fast on inappropriate stuff – Faster turnaround time in determining when to dig deeper and when to pass. If you know when to pass it allows you focus on better qualified opps.
- Better win theme development – This is a side effect from Jim’s work. Because he’s got a more detailed sense of what the hot buttons in the solicitations are, he can now do a much more accurate job of establishing win themes and items to emphasize in the response.
I will leave you with some of my own summary observations:
- Jim has shown how automation can drive very quick qualification cycles. While his math skills are to be applauded, any proposal shop could apply this with VisibleThread. Drop us a note if you want help.
- Jim has evolved one way to do the task that is performing well ‘under fire’, and in very timeframes of under 5-7 minutes for collections of quite large docs.
- The business benefits of chasing the right opps are profound.
So, to see it in action, see Jim’s webinar slides and recording.