Why bid/no-bid is where win rates live
Most GovCon teams don’t lose because they write weak proposals.
They lose because they chase the wrong work.
My opinion: bid/no-bid is the highest-leverage “sales move” in government contracting.
It’s where you either protect focus… or quietly set fire to your calendar.
When a new opportunity hits your radar, you’ve usually got a short window to make a smart call. If you wait too long, emotion creeps in:
-
“We could stretch into it.”
-
“It’s a big logo.”
-
“We already spent time reading it.”
-
“It’s close enough.”
That’s how teams end up submitting beautiful proposals with no real path to win.
So, here’s the filter I use. It takes about 15 minutes.
And yes—if one check fails, it’s usually a no-bid (or a pause until we fix the gap).
The 15-minute filter: four checks
1) Fit
Do we match the mission, the scope, and the delivery reality?
Quick fit questions:
-
Does this align with what we actually deliver today (not what we wish we delivered)?
-
Are we strong on the customer’s outcomes, not just the technical tasks?
-
Does the contract type work for us (IDIQ, BPA, task order, full-and-open, set-aside)?
-
Can we execute with our real staffing model and timelines?
Rule of thumb:
If you have to “invent” capability to pursue it, that’s not a growth plan. That’s a gamble.
Red flags
-
Scope requires tools/clearances/credentials you don’t have (yet)
-
Customer outcome is vague, and the win criteria isn’t clear
-
You’re forcing a new delivery model just to make the RFP “fit”
2) Access
Do we have real access to the buyer and influencers?
A GovCon bid/no-bid call without access is mostly guesswork.
What “access” looks like in the real world:
-
You’ve spoken to the COR, PM, program staff, or user community
-
You understand the “why now” behind the requirement
-
You can validate the pain points before writing the solution
-
You have a credible partner who can open doors (not just say they can)
If your only “intel” is the solicitation and a hunch, slow down.
Red flags
-
No relationship, no meetings, no champion
-
Incumbent is strong and quiet, and you can’t shake info loose
-
You can’t explain what the customer values beyond boilerplate
3) Proof
Can we prove we’ve done this before—credibly and defensibly?
Proof isn’t marketing language. Proof is:
-
Past performance that maps to the mission
-
Resumes that match the actual work
-
Examples you can defend under scrutiny
Quick proof questions:
-
Have we delivered the same mission under similar constraints?
-
Do we have comparable scale (budget, complexity, schedule)?
-
Can we show outcomes, not just activities?
Red flags
-
“We’ve never done this exact thing, but…”
-
Resumes don’t align with the statement of work
-
Past performance is adjacent, not comparable
4) Terms & math
Do the terms work—and does the margin make sense?
This is where “wins” turn into delivery disasters.
Check the basics:
-
Risk allocation: LDs, warranty, acceptance terms, reporting burdens
-
Schedule reality: can you staff it without breaking other work?
-
Subcontractor terms: flow-downs, exclusivity, team agreements
-
Pricing rules: LPTA, price realism, cost-plus constraints, rate caps
-
Margin: is it worth the opportunity cost?
My opinion: a win that breaks delivery is still a loss.
It just arrives later… with interest.
Red flags
-
Unrealistic ramp-up or staffing requirements
-
Rate caps that force low-quality staffing
-
You’re “buying” the work with margin you can’t survive
Make it defensible, not emotional
The best bid/no-bid decisions are easy to explain in 60 seconds.
Here’s the format I like:
Fit: We match scope, outcomes, and delivery.
Access: We have real touchpoints and usable intel.
Proof: We can defend comparable past performance and resumes.
Math: Terms work, risk is manageable, margin is acceptable.
If you can’t say it cleanly, it usually means the pursuit is running on hope.
Wrap-up
If you want higher win rates without burning out your team, get ruthless about fit, access, proof, and math. Fast decisions aren’t reckless—they’re disciplined.
If you want, I can also format this into a clean one-page “team standard” PDF-style layout you can drop into your capture process.