Una estrategia ganadora para licitaciones: desde las especificaciones hasta la adjudicación

A good tender is not a list of what you can do — it is a convincing answer to what the contracting authority needs. Companies that consistently win public contracts do not do so because they are the cheapest, but because they approach every tender as a strategic project with a clear plan, a strong narrative and sharp alignment with the award criteria.

The foundation: specification analysis

Read the specifications three times

The first reading is for the overview. The second for the details. The third for the nuances. Many tenders lose points because the tenderer overlooked a requirement or misinterpreted an award criterion.

Focus the analysis on:

• Award criteria and their weighting. If quality weighs 60% and price 40%, invest 60% of your energy in the quality section.
• Minimum requirements versus distinguishing criteria. Minimum requirements must be met — they do not earn points. You differentiate on the qualitative criteria.
• The language of the authority. The specifications reveal what the authority considers important. Words such as “innovative”, “flexible”, “sustainable” or “proven” give direction to your response.
• Mandatory annexes and formats. Nothing is as frustrating as a strong tender that is excluded because an annex is missing or the format was not respected.

Ask questions

Most procedures provide a forum for questions. Use it. Well-formulated questions demonstrate expertise and give you additional information that your competitors may not have. Ask questions that clarify the scope, expose contradictions in the specifications or sharpen the authority’s expectations.

The bid team

Composition

A winning tender is teamwork. The ideal bid team contains:

• A bid manager who coordinates the whole, monitors deadlines and maintains the common thread.
• Subject matter experts who develop the technical solution.
• A writer who shapes the narrative — clear, persuasive and tailored to the reader.
• A reviewer who critically reads the tender from the perspective of the evaluation committee.

Planificación

Plan the tender as a project. Work backwards from the deadline:

The narrative

Tell the story of the contracting authority

The biggest mistake tenderers make is talking about themselves. The evaluation committee reads dozens of tenders — they do not want to know how great you are. They want to know how you solve their problem.

Structure your tender around the authority’s needs:

1. Demonstrate understanding. Begin each chapter with an analysis of the challenge from the authority’s perspective. This shows that you have read and understood the specifications.
2. Present your solution. Describe concretely what you will do, how, and why that approach is best for this specific contract.
3. Support with evidence. References, case studies, figures, certifications — proof that you can not only do it but have already done it.
4. Address risks. A tender that identifies risks and proposes mitigation measures scores better than one that pretends everything will go smoothly.

Write for the evaluator

The evaluation committee has little time per tender. Make it easy for them:

• Use clear headings that correspond with the award criteria.
• Put the most important first — begin each section with your strongest argument.
• Use visual elements: diagrams, timelines, organisation charts. An image says more than a paragraph.
• Avoid jargon unless the specifications use jargon. Write clearly and concretely.
• Respect the maximum page count. A tender that exceeds the limit may be declared invalid.

Pricing strategy

Price is not everything

In MEAT awards (Most Economically Advantageous Tender), price is just one of the criteria. If price weighs 40%, a tender that is 10% more expensive but scores significantly better on quality can still win.

Calculate sharply but realistically

A price that is too low is risky:

• For an abnormally low price, the authority is obliged to conduct a price investigation. If you cannot justify the price, you will be excluded.
• A price that is too low creates suspicion among the evaluation committee about the quality of execution.
• A loss-making contract is a Pyrrhic victory that damages your organisation.

Structure the pricing

Make the price structure transparent. If the specifications prescribe a price table, complete it carefully. Hidden costs (travel, overtime, licences) that surface later damage the relationship with the authority.

After submission

Presentation and negotiation

In certain procedures (competitive procedure with negotiation, competitive dialogue), a presentation or negotiation follows the written tender. Prepare this as a separate project:

• Have the bid team present, not just the commercial manager.
• Anticipate questions and objections from the evaluation committee.
• Show the people who will do the work — the authority wants to know who they will be working with.

Debriefing after award

Whether you win or lose: always request a debriefing. The authority is obliged to share the reasoning behind its decision. Analyse:

• Where did you score well? Strengthen those elements in future tenders.
• Where did you score below expectations? Identify improvement areas.
• How did competitors score? Adjust your positioning.

Common mistakes

Copy-pasting from previous tenders. Every contract is unique. A tender that is not tailored to the specific specifications misses the mark.

Focusing on features instead of benefits. The authority does not want to know that your platform has 47 modules. They want to know how those modules solve their problem.

Underestimating formal requirements. A missing signature, an incomplete ESPD, a wrong format — formal errors lead to exclusion.

No internal review. Nobody writes a perfect tender alone. A fresh perspective catches errors and improves readability.

Sources

• Shipley Associates — Guía para propuestas
• APMP (Asociación de Profesionales de Gestión de Propuestas) — Conocimientos básicos
• Act of 17 June 2016 — public procurement