Technical experts placed in the position of making the oral presentation must strive to demonstrate they are a confident, competent, and coordinated team. Forging this unity and cohesiveness is achieved with thorough planning and rigorous preparation.
III. Introducing the "Team"
Because of the strict time limits imposed for oral presentations by the RFP, there is a tendency for many presentation teams to jump immediately into the substance of their presentations by immediately “answering the mail” requirements of the RFP. While this is understandable, it is also a mistake.
Evaluators are human beings, and want to know about the consortium of companies presenting, and the individual presenters. This is especially so for small companies without a “brand” name. For example, an IT firm that started up in the dot.com boom of the 1990s, and is still flourishing in 2006, is a story worth telling. It sends the signal to the evaluators that this company is resourceful and operates on a solid business model.
The lead presenter should in his/her opening remarks provide a brief profile of each presenter, highlighting the skills and experience of these presenters as they relate to the RFP requirements. In effect, this permits the presenters “shake hands” with the...
evaluators and make them comfortable with the prospect of working with this consortium of companies. This is where you fuse the macro––the companies and their history of accomplishing requirements for the Government similar to what is required by the RFP––and the micro, where the evaluators learn about the individual skills and personalities of the presenters.
IV. Competing Against Incumbents
One of the most difficult challenges for any company or team of companies responding to an RFP arises when one of the companies competing is the incumbent already doing the job. How does this situation come up? It could be that the contract originally won by the incumbent was for a fixed period, and it must now be awarded anew.
The incumbent has every right to submit a proposal, and it has the advantage that it is intimately familiar with the Government's requirements. It is also “on the ground” performing the work.
Factor in that the evaluators are Government employees who are risk-averse. They will make the same money each month no matter which company is awarded the contract. Even if the Government agency is not completely satisfied with the work done by the incumbent, the...
