September 12, 2024

Measuring Proposal Turnaround Without Gaming It

If you cannot say how long proposals take, you cannot tell whether a change helped. But a poorly chosen measure will do harm.

Define the start and the stop

Choose clear events. The clock starts when the request is accepted as a real opportunity, and stops when the proposal is sent. Write these down so every person counts the same way. The purpose is to learn, not to grade individuals, and staff should understand that from the start.

Do not start at the first casual chat or stop at partner approval. Consistent boundaries matter more than perfect ones. Record the date the client first asked, since that is the true start from their side.

Use the median, and look at the spread

Averages are pulled around by a few very long or very short jobs. The median and the range tell you more. Report both, and list the outliers with a short reason each. Start the clock on the same event each time, or the numbers will drift and lose value.

With a small number of proposals per quarter, do not draw firm conclusions. Treat movement as a prompt for questions. Keep the tracker to a handful of columns, or people will stop filling it in.

Separate work time from waiting time

Where you can, record when a draft is with the author, with a reviewer and with the client. You will often find the waiting share is the largest part, which points to where to act. With few proposals a quarter, one outlier can move the average a great deal, and the median resists that.

This does not require a heavy system. A few date stamps on a shared tracker are enough. Ask who owns the record, and make it one named person.

Do not reward speed alone

A team told only to be faster will cut corners. Pair turnaround with a quality signal: number of review rounds, errors found after sending, or client questions about the scope. If the reviewer wait is long, that points to scheduling and not to writing.

A fast proposal that draws corrections is not a good result. Note the reason whenever a deadline was moved, and by whom.

Compare like with like

A short renewal letter and a large tender response are not comparable. Group proposals by type or size and track each group separately. A team that is judged on speed alone will submit weaker documents, and the loss will show up in win rates later.

Without this, a mix change can look like a performance change. Look at late proposals separately, since the causes differ from slow ones.

Use it in the weekly conversation

Show the numbers in the regular BD meeting, briefly. Ask what slowed the longest proposals and what one change could shorten the next. Keep your comparison groups small in number so each group has enough proposals to say something.

The measure earns its place if it prompts a decision each month. If it does not, simplify or drop it. Share the figures with the team, and not only with management.

Start with a baseline of five

You do not need a year of data to begin. Take the last five proposals, note the start and stop dates, and calculate the median. That becomes your baseline, and it will be rough. Say so, and do not present it as more than it is.

Set a small aim for the next quarter, such as removing one day from the median for a common proposal type. Modest goals are easier to meet and less likely to distort behavior than a demand for dramatic improvement. Keep the definitions stable for at least a year, so that trends mean something. Changing the rules midstream makes every earlier number hard to compare, and the team will notice. Finally, share one example of a proposal that moved faster and say what made the difference. A concrete story helps the team more than a chart.

VIPMarketing Editorial