How do you train and coach your proposal reviewers to provide constructive and actionable feedback?

I get the best results when I limit reviewer assignments to what can be reasonably accomplished in 2 hours or less. What this looks like: 1. One Objective/Multiple Sections: You can assign someone a single objective to review across the entire proposal or volume (ie review the Technical Volume for compliance) Or 2. Multiple Objectives, One Section: You can assign someone multiple objectives over a defined section or smaller area of the proposal (ie review past performance for alignment with task areas, substantiation and against eval criteria) When reviewers get overwhelmed with multiple objectives and multiple sections, quality goes down. Make sure you have enough reviewers and that you align assignments with expertise.

I would always highlight what I believe to have been done well, followed by problem areas where I need assistance. It is important to explain why certain things have been written and why. The last thing the bid team needs is their great work being steam rollered, by people with less understanding. Explain to people (something very directly) what you actually need from them. It is not a read through, but applying to sales logic to find any holes in the explanations. Not an easy task.

It begins with an initial draft review, where stakeholders and subject matter experts provide feedback on content, clarity, and alignment with objectives. This is followed by a revision phase where feedback is incorporated, and the proposal is refined for coherence and completeness. A final review ensures all requirements are met, language is polished, and formatting is consistent. Throughout these stages, there should be checkpoints for quality assurance and alignment with organizational goals. Each review stage aims to enhance the proposal's persuasiveness, accuracy, and adherence to guidelines, preparing it for successful submission.

Firstly, I only permit reviews of a single centralised document, or a master passed between reviewers in an agreed order. No hard copy reviews with scribbled comments. Review within a strict timescale. Next.... if they add anything, they need to suggest what can be removed or reduced to create space for the addition. Then, no spelling or punctuation corrections. Review the content, not the format! No duplication of comments. If another reviewer has already spotted something, add your perspective to their comment. If you disagree with them then contact them and agree on the guidance. Don't give the author an impossible task. Finally, any reviewers ignoring the rule will be ignored.

The Shipley proposal review process is a structured method for evaluating and improving proposals before submission. It involves a series of clearly defined steps, including a Red Team review, where an independent group rigorously challenges the proposal's assumptions and strategies; a Gold Team review, focused on ensuring compliance and alignment with customer requirements; and a White Glove review, conducted by senior management to provide strategic guidance and final approval.

Help reviewers understand the purpose of the proposal and the goals it aims to achieve. This context will enable them to provide feedback that aligns with the proposal's objectives. Encourage reviewers to focus on providing constructive criticism that highlights both strengths and areas for improvement. Emphasize the importance of maintaining a positive and supportive tone in their feedback. Provide training sessions or workshops to teach reviewers effective review techniques. Topics may include how to analyze content, identify inconsistencies, offer suggestions for improvement, and prioritize feedback.

Ensure that the review team is available for the duration of their assigned tasks. Sometimes they will agree to do the work but forget to mention they’ll be out of the office or unavailable, and that a secondary contact/back up needs to be assigned.

Define the Review Process: Before assigning reviewers, establish a clear review process. Here’s my recommendation: 1. Purpose and Scope: Define objectives for each review stage. 2. Roles and Responsibilities: Assign clear roles and tasks to each reviewer. 3. Evaluation Criteria: Set standards for compliance, clarity, and alignment. 4. Feedback Format: Use structured templates for consistent feedback. 5, Timeline: Set deadlines for each review stage. 6. Manage Workload: Limit tasks to 2-hour reviews at most, focusing either on one objective across sections or multiple objectives in one section. This organized approach ensures high-quality, actionable feedback.

Begin by conducting workshops and training sessions that cover the fundamentals of effective feedback, emphasizing clarity, specificity, and objectivity. Provide reviewers with guidelines and checklists that outline key aspects to evaluate, such as content relevance, clarity, grammar, and adherence to proposal guidelines. Use real examples to demonstrate the difference between vague criticism and actionable feedback. Encourage a positive and solution-oriented mindset, focusing on how suggestions can improve the proposal rather than just pointing out flaws. Regularly review the feedback provided and offer additional coaching or peer reviews to ensure consistency and effectiveness.

Conduct practice exercises where reviewers can practice giving feedback on sample proposals or sections. Provide feedback on their feedback to help them refine their skills. Emphasize the collaborative nature of the review process and encourage reviewers to engage in discussions with each other and with the proposal authors. Collaboration often leads to more comprehensive and insightful feedback.

Provide Training and Coaching: Even experienced reviewers benefit from training and coaching. Here’s my recommendation: Principles and Best Practices: Cover fundamentals of proposal writing and common pitfalls to avoid. Constructive Feedback: Teach techniques and tools for providing actionable, constructive feedback. Etiquette and Tone: Emphasize the importance of delivering feedback respectfully and positively. This training enhances reviewer skills, builds confidence, and fosters a collaborative learning culture within the team.

Start by demonstrating AI's potential for streamlining the RFP process, emphasizing its ability to generate initial drafts, brainstorm ideas, and enhance content quality. Then, provide hands-on training on utilizing AI tools, guiding colleagues through the process of inputting RFP requirements, generating responses, and refining the output. Encourage them to experiment with different prompts and iterate on AI-generated content to ensure accuracy and alignment with the RFP. Offer ongoing coaching and support, addressing any questions or challenges they encounter while using AI. Finally, foster a collaborative environment where colleagues can share their experiences and best practices for leveraging AI in RFP responses.

Training and coaching should ideally take place prior to the drafts being sent out for review, however, be open and flexible to offering ad-hoc support during the review process. Sometimes reviewers learn best with the draft in front of them. You are also setting them up for future success by having these impromptu sessions where you can guide and manage their expectations through this process.

Implement a systematic process for evaluating feedback by establishing clear criteria, such as specificity, relevance, and constructiveness. Use tools like feedback forms or online review platforms where reviewers can submit their comments, making it easier to track and analyze. Regularly review the feedback given on proposals to assess adherence to these criteria and identify areas for improvement. Conduct follow-up sessions with reviewers to discuss the effectiveness of their feedback and provide additional guidance if needed. Additionally, gather input from proposal writers on the usefulness of the feedback they receive.

Encourage reviewers to consider the potential impact of their feedback on the overall quality and effectiveness of the proposal. Emphasize the importance of providing feedback that contributes to achieving the proposal's objectives. Offer feedback templates or frameworks to guide reviewers in structuring their feedback. Templates can help ensure consistency and completeness in the feedback provided. Provide ongoing support and guidance to reviewers throughout the review process. Be available to answer questions, address concerns, and provide additional training as needed.

A lot of proposal team managers and sales team managers forget to thank proposal reviewers because it's 'part of the person's job.' But great leaders thank quality reviewers with a specific call-out email to the person's manager and skip-level manager; they award whatever company incentives are available, and they contribute to helping that person get a promotion or a pay raise when the time arises. If it seems like something the reviewer would like, the team leader should also ask the reviewer to give a sales team training on how to do a great review, so more people can give useful feedback on proposals.

Remember, the most effective recognition and rewards are tailored to the individual and reflect their specific contributions and preferences. By showing your appreciation, you not only incentivize ongoing participation but also cultivate a culture of continuous improvement within your team.

One way to recognize reviewers for their contributions is to induct them into a “champions” program and as part of participating in this program as a Champion, follow through with an email to their manager and skip level manager thanking them for their participation, detailing the impact they had to the success of others. This can really help foster a culture where reviewers want to participate and give quality feedback because they know recognition of their contribution will be made visible to their leadership. This can be really valuable to them during performance review cycles.

Implement a system where exceptional feedback is acknowledged publicly, such as through team meetings, newsletters, or internal communication channels. Highlight specific examples of well-crafted feedback that helped improve proposal quality or address critical issues. Consider integrating feedback quality metrics into performance evaluations or recognition programs to incentivize consistent high-quality feedback. Encourage peer-to-peer recognition and nominations for outstanding feedback contributions.

Acknowledge and appreciate reviewers who consistently provide valuable feedback. Recognize their contributions publicly and consider incorporating feedback into performance evaluations or rewards programs. Encourage reviewers to provide feedback on the review process itself, including the clarity of guidelines, effectiveness of training, and overall satisfaction. Use this feedback to continuously improve the review process.

There are sales reps or other SMEs that go above and beyond what we’ve asked of them to review and that’s appreciated and valuable. This is an excellent opportunity to forge relationships and an excellent way to build your network.

Pro tip is to define the method to assign reviewers. Select relevant reviewers to review the sections for ex: the technical part of the proposal can be reviewed by the technical experts and the executive summary and initial statements can be reviewed by the sales capture. Request to underpin the shortcomings and contribute in a track change mode. Set a deadline to ensure the task is completed within timeframe and set up discussion calls to understand the details with the relevant stakeholders. There are fair chances of criticism, resolve the conflict by sticking to the agenda which is to identify the areas of improvement and work collaboratively to make it better.

- Agree an approach for dealing with conflicting comments/recommendations from different reviewers - especially important if it's a consortium or Joint Venture opportunity. - If you have access to a closed AI system, consider asking it "how would you improve this answer?"https://accionvegana.org/accio/0ITbvNmLulGZltmbpxmL3d3d6MHc0/"what have we missed?"

Even though the review process may be limited (i.e. two rounds of draft reviews), some sales reps will want more and expect that the proposal writer obliges to the request. I think this can be accommodated only in certain situations based on a selective criteria, so as not to disrupt the workflow of the process and also not jeopardizing other RFPs in flight.

Leveraging AI for proposal review offers several significant advantages: 1. Unbiased Feedback: AI provides precise, unbiased feedback based on your criteria, without worrying about personal feelings. 2. Limitless Criteria: AI can review virtually limitless criteria, offering comprehensive improvement suggestions. 3. Instant Feedback: AI delivers immediate feedback, eliminating delays and speeding up the review process. Utilizing AI can significantly enhance proposal quality and efficiency.

Definitely consider a role that arbitrates comments and reaches agreement with all the reviewers. This enables the writer and SME to be clear about the actions they need to take to close out the comment and develop the response.

Show that you appreciate and value your stakeholders’ feedback throughout the RFP process. It can be as easy as sending them a Teams or Zoom message, an email, or if your company has a rewards platform/program, send them the acknowledgment that way.