2014 Bid Cost Survey Blog 4

Bid cost as % of project value

The average bids costs were calculated at £60k in 2014 for contractors and £24k for consultants. However as those average bid costs cover a broad range of project values from <£2m projects to >£250m, looking at bid costs as a percentage of the project value gives an alternative and more revealing perspective.

The bid cost worked out, across winning and losing bids, to be 0.57% of the total project value. 

Overall this data set indicates that when consultants and contractors invest more in the work-winning process on a bid, they are more likely to win. In this sample, the investment in bids that won is 25% greater than for bids that lost, with the average cost of bidding for losing bidders being 0.48% and for winners 0.65%.

Whilst these percentages may not seem significant at first glance, where contractors sub-contract a large proportion of the construction work, these figures can make a significant impact on the retained operating turnover. For consultants the key number is how much of the project value is actual fee. It would be worthwhile for consultants to look at the cost of bidding in the context of fee income as the project value does not give a true picture. 

For smaller projects (less than £5m) the proportion of bid cost to project value is highest. Here the win rate will have a considerable influence on the pipeline/ cost to win/ processing systems, especially if there are many, smaller bids. Clearly, efficiencies and a methodical approach to selectivity are crucial to avoid unfocused activity and unnecessary spend.

Equally it is vital that all companies manage their opportunity pipeline; the number and nature of the opportunities and the likely costs to win them, but particularly so where there are many, smaller bids. Companies have to be sure that they have the necessary processes, systems and tools in place, with people mobilised, empowered, enthused and with the right skills to create winning bids.

These results challenge the industry as to whether it is still a relevant strategy to have so many bidders.

The more bidders, the greater the cost to the industry as both winning and losing bids represent a significant investment by the industry.

For the bids submitted to this survey, the median number of bidders is five, which aligns with the typical length of a tender list (between 4 and 6). There are slightly fewer competitors in the private sector and more bidders (and therefore more losing bids) in the public sector.

This may well be challenged by procurement advisors, but if the industry genuinely wants to lower costs, then exploring viable alternatives to current approaches would be advisable as there would be a significant saving for the whole industry and its customers in having only three bidders.

In our opinion, it is a concern that so many respondents were unable to identify how many competitors they faced as this would be expected to be part of a bid selection decision.

Given the cost of winning work, the single most important tool organisations should deploy or revitalise is one that dynamically enables more effective selectivity.

It is a timely reminder that, whereas the focus of companies in the recessionary market had been on managing a diminished number of opportunities, as the number of opportunities increases, the industry is now facing more complex choices and decisions. The activities undertaken to win bids also need to adapt accordingly.

Bid selection will become increasingly complex, with many variables, so companies need to evaluate further their own specific markets, processes and governance to manage this effectively. There is a huge opportunity to better manage this investment in the industry, but from this sample we can only make general statements across a broad range of project types and sizes, of organisation types, of sector types etc.  (Read more on the MarketingWorks Selectivity Tool.)

The survey outcomes suggest that organisations should delve deeper into the cost of bids and where time is being spent on various elements of a bid, especially if it can be related to or taken together with the information on reasons for winning/losing bids. This will help the organisations and the industry to identify areas for improvement.

We encourage our clients to capture this data rather than relying on isolated surveys. We provide them with tools and processes to capture this important data as, when analysed, it delivers invaluable information at company level. For this reason, we are looking for more contractors to provide us access to their internal metrics so we can explore this potential for them. This knowledge would equip them to make more consistent bid/ no bid decisions and inform them where best to focus their investment.

MarketingWorks offers a range of solutions to help our clients achieve these objectives including:

• Bespoke easy-to-use bid selection tools that help contractors and consultants to quickly evaluate their bidding opportunities, enabling consistency and transparency in decision taking.

By using MarketingWorks’ Selectivity and Reporting Tools you will be able to avoid waste by refocusing resources and effort on enhancing the quality of those bids where they have the highest chance of winning. Read More.

• Creating bespoke win work flow processes and guidance that supports company-wide adoption of a work winning culture with embedded client centric behaviours and attitudes that improve win rates and work winning efficiencies.

MarketingWorks works with you to identify desirable changes in behaviours and processes and then works with your teams to uplift their capability, achieving rapid buy-in to desired behavioural change resulting in dramatic and immediate improvement. Read More.

Notes on the sample

The sample represents a large proportion of the construction work carried out last year in the UK and is a good representation in the key areas of measurement:

·         Sample value vs market value: £8bn costed bids submitted in £11bn total value of bids submitted

·         Total value of contractors’ (only) winning bids with bid cost data is £4.09 billion - 3.7% of 2014 construction market value (£110 billion quoted as the 2014 value of the industry. Source: Office for National Statistics Output in the Construction.)

·         179 respondents; 118 with cost data.

·         Almost even mix of won / lost bids in the sample.

·         Good spread of procurement routes, project values, selection methods, sectors (broadly in line with planning data* for new starts by sector 2014)

The fact that 61 of the participants who provided a great deal of data nevertheless were unable to provide estimates of time and cost invested in the bid indicates that many construction companies probably don’t have enough data easily available to contribute to a survey such as this. This may be because they do not consistently capture what overhead is being spent (and where) on work-winning activities.

There were also other gaps in data provided by some contributors, for example, how many competitors they had on the bid; the sector; procurement routes. The assumptions being that either not enough was known or that this information about the bidding environment was not shared. This is surprising, as this information should have been captured as part of a bid selection decision.

“Possibly due to the accessibility of the data, we had to invest a good deal of time and effort, directly and through the survey supporters, to persuade companies to complete the questionnaire. However, it is hoped that the strong results relating to the financial efficiencies that can be made in the bid process and profit improvement potential, will make the industry more responsive to help us to explore further in the future.”  Jan Hayter, Marketing Director, MarketingWorks 

MarketingWorks Training & Consultancy Ltd

MarketingWorks is a leading business development management consultancy, specialising in work winning in the construction industry. The company provides an array of tools, guidance and mentoring support that helps construction organisations to embed client-centric work-winning behaviours, processes and culture which ensures they win more work.  MarketingWorks has provided services for over 1000 construction firms, including 9 of the top 20 contractors and 5 of the top 10 consultants. www.marketingworks.co.uk

2014 Bid Cost Survey Blog 3

Focusing our Investment in bids

We have looked at feedback on why bids have been won or lost and how bidding behaviours influence bid outcomes. The survey also shows that winning bidders invest more in their bids. However, losing bids still consume significant amounts of staff hours and other costs. 

Within the survey, participants were asked to break down their estimates of the total time their company spent in the different stages of work-winning activities. These hours were then converted to a value and added to other costs identified at each stage, giving a total cost for a bid.

As the survey results indicate that the median number of bidders is five (four losing bids plus one winning bid), the projects submitted to the survey may account for only one in five of the total number of bids entered, meaning the actual cost to all of the bidders who put in submissions will be significantly higher. 

From the survey results, it is not just the gross amount of time or money spent that result in winning bids. It is also important that this investment is focused on the activities identified as creating a winning bid.

Looking at the sample, differences in behaviours between those that won bids and those that lost bids are evident

Apart from strategy and PQQ, the winning contractors spent significantly more across the board than the losers, but especially on:

• Decision to bid (double the time)
• Selecting/briefing bid manager; strategy setting
• Planning and pursuit; intelligence gathering; meetings to distil client objectives; relationship building
• More time but less external inputs on identifying proposal requirements
• editing boilerplate, and writing bespoke content and more external inputs
• finalising CVs, case studies, graphic design and document production
• internal reviews/governance; post bid evaluation; dissemination of lessons learnt
• interview rehearsal; interview/negotiations
• Slightly more time on identifying/ agreeing cost requirements, final review

Losing bidders spend more externally, possibly due to winning bidders investing in in-house resources, or possibly the former are more likely to put increased emphasis on “production qualities” than research and bespoke content, i.e. style over substance.

For consultants, the winning bidders spent more overall on:

• Strategy
• Intelligence gathering
• PQQ (slightly)
• Meetings to understand needs
• Appointing bid team
• Understanding proposal requirements

For consultants, the winning bidders spent less spend on:

• Graphics, refining CVs and case studies
• Interview
• Shaping generic content, etc.
• Internal reviews
• Rehearsals + interviews

Several of the points mentioned in the narrative, like graphics, refining CVs, etc., are not seen in these numeric tables, due to the this level of detail being consolidated into broader groups to aid analysis

This data deals with headline results across a complex industry with a lot of variables and different behaviours may result in different outcomes for diverse project types. This supports the MarketingWorks approach to work winning:

• It is important to understand your market and how your organisation's success is influenced by your approach:
• Bidders need to understand the relative importance of early engagement vs presentation, for example, and use this information to prioritise their efforts, in their work winning planning, bid selection and bid management decisions.
• In effect to budget the cost of winning.
• The tremendous diversity of the industry means that it’s not as simple as to say everyone should put more effort into X or Y. However, we can say from this data that consultants who won invested more than those who lost and, significantly, contractors who won invested on average 25% more on their bids in this sample than those who lost.

The MarketingWorks programme Facilitating Improvement of Work Winning Processes, Behaviours and Cultures follows a very practical approach and has helped many clients to achieve significant improvements.  We break down the complete process of work winning into inter-connected stages and apply inclusive diagnostic approaches to identify opportunities for improvements in each stage that beneficially impact the process as a whole. Through involving the work winning teams, buy-in to new approaches is generated and once companies have immersed themselves in the MarketingWorks programme, they achieve impressive business improvements:

Example of improvements when using a weighted bid/ no bid selectivity tool and applying improved, client-centric work winning approaches and behaviours

A UK regional contractor has shared their own bid cost analysis that underpins the impact that focusing on bid selection and work winning behaviours and focus had on their 2013-2014 results vs 2012-2013 results. Win rates improved from 1:5 to 1:2. Bid costs were only captured towards the end of the 2012-13 period, but were captured throughout 2013-14.

To Participate Further

MarketingWorks helps our clients to capture this data through online tools and processes that, when analysed, delivers invaluable information at company level. For this reason, we are looking for more contractors and consultants to provide us access to their internal metrics so we can explore this potential for them. Whilst there is a one off bespoking cost and an ongoing monthly fee per user this resultant reports equip them to make more consistent bid/ no bid decisions and inform them where best to focus their investment. 

To discuss this opportunity further please contact philipcollard@marketingworks.co.uk

MarketingWorks is a leading business development management consultancy, specialising in work winning in the construction industry. The company provides an array of tools, guidance and mentoring support that helps construction organisations to embed client-centric work-winning behaviours, processes and culture which ensures they win more work.  MarketingWorks has provided services for over 1000 construction firms, including 9 of the top 20 contractors and 5 of the top 10 consultants. www.marketingworks.co.uk

Active Supporters of the Bid Cost Survey 2014

Barbour ABI, Building Magazine, CIOB, Construct UK, Constructing Excellence, Construction News, Designing Buildings WIKI, Glenigan, KMS, RIBA, RICS, Satellite mpr. Simon White, Head of Business Development, Arup; reviewer and contributor to the analysis and interpretation for the 2003 and 2014 Bid Cost Surveys.

2014 Bid Cost Survey Blog 2

Improving the win rate

When in 2014 MarketingWorks, in association with Professor Will Hughes of the University of Reading, updated their 2003 research assessing how the bid cost investment affects work winning within the construction industry, we found that  differing behaviours and approaches influenced whether a company wins or loses the bid. So, as different behaviours may result in different outcomes for different kinds of project, it is vital to create and manage the bid process to capture good feedback, learn from past mistakes and apply the knowledge gained to maximise success in future bids.

In the survey, we asked ‘What reasons were given as to why you won or lost the bid?’ As this was an open question, we took the reasons given and grouped them under broader headings (Graph 1) and where a combination of factors was given, we then analysed them further in Graph 2 (below). 

Comparative reasons given for bids won and lost

The survey found that for 11% of bids won and 15% of bids lost, the reasons for winning or losing are apparently unknown (See Graph 1 above). It is our experience that, without a clear, fact-based understanding of why bids succeed or fail, companies cannot make improvements for the future. Losing bidders may repeat mistakes and may be bidding for projects they could never win. Winning bidders may not be proactively applying the factors that have in the past led to success.

Long-standing government guidance advises governmental bodies to provide feedback to both winning and losing bidders as a matter of good practice. Anecdotal examples from the industry suggest that in some cases clients do not provide clear and accurate feedback whilst in others the bidders fail to ask. This leads to the conclusion that the industry as a whole (both sides of the work-winning process) are not valuing the role that feedback plays in improving the efficiency of work-winning approaches and behaviours.

Half of reasons given for losing the bids in this survey were price related (Graph 1).  In practise, the suggestion is that price is often a default position: if all bidders are aiming to win on price or are differentiating in similar ways, then clients will revert to price as the most clearly defined way of choosing the winning bid. This result could also imply that these bids were lost because the bidders’ focus was purely on price.

Whilst there were other single, overriding reasons given for losing, it was extremely interesting that 21% of responses identified a combination of factors. The picture is quite different when reviewing the reasons given for winning.  Here, whereas single, overriding factors were also mentioned, with almost a third of responses being price related, in almost 40% of responses, a combination of factors were given as the reason for winning.

We have broken down the responses mentioned within the category ‘combination of factors’ in Graph 2, to see the frequency with which different factors are mentioned. When we drill down into the combination of factors we can see that whilst price was mentioned in 25% of cases for winning bids and 27% for losing bids, many other reasons were also given.

The important thing to take away is that contractors and consultants shouldn’t try to win on one single thing, but that a better winning strategy would be to focus on a combination of winning factors, which requires an empowered and enthused team focused on understanding their clients’ needs and objectives and developing the right combination of key themes that will be successful for that client and project. This will not only significantly improve win rates, but reduce the number of abortive bids and their associated costs. 

MarketingWorks offers a range of solutions to help our clients achieve these objectives including creating bespoke win work flow processes and guidance that supports company-wide adoption of a work winning culture with embedded client centric behaviours and attitudes that improve win rates and work winning efficiencies.

MarketingWorks works with you to identify desirable changes in behaviours and processes and then works with your teams to uplift their capability, achieving rapid buy-in to desired behavioural change resulting in dramatic and immediate improvement. Read More

By using MarketingWorks’ Selectivity and Reporting Tools you will be able to avoid waste by refocusing resources and effort on enhancing the quality of those bids where they have the highest chance of winning. Read More

2014 Bid Cost Survey Results

2014 Bid Cost Survey

It has been my mission over many years to help construction organisations to be more effective in their work-winning activities and enhance their win rates, which play a significant role in improving win work efficiencies.

In 2003 MarketingWorks undertook research assessing how the bid cost investment affects work winning within the construction industry.

In 2014 I decided to invest MarketingWorks’ resources in updating this research, in association with Professor Will Hughes of the University of Reading. I wanted to see what we could usefully learn about successful work winning behaviours and how we could use that insight to help our clients.

The data was collected by reference to actual projects and was analysed to discover what can be learnt, not only in the cost of bidding for work, but also how differing behaviours and approaches have influenced whether a company wins or loses the bid.

In addition to providing some interesting indications on how and why a bid is successful, the survey also highlights that many companies fail to capture bid cost information and to fully evaluate their own specific market and processes. This has a real and clear impact on the profitability of the company and is an issue from which the industry could greatly profit, if addressed.

Improving the win rate

As there are many variables influencing how effort or bid spend affect outcomes for different types of project it is important for contractors and consultants to be analytical of their market and rigorous in the management of their work-winning and bidding behaviours. The resulting knowledge can be applied to enhance work-winning effectiveness.

The research reinforces our view that there is enormous potential for this type of data to help in decisions which could identify:

o    Where to invest effort (in activities that will win the work)

o    How this varies by client/ sector/ procurement route

o    How to exploit selectivity to maximise profitability

o    How this would influence strategic organisation

In most cases activities focused on the specific client (i.e. client-centric, aligned activities) win the most work, in the most cost effective manner.

Work winning efficiencies are achieved through a combination of improved effectiveness (resulting in fewer abortive bids) and increased rigour in selectivity and focusing of available resources. The 2014 survey gives pointers on where winning bidders focus their resources and the MarketingWorks Work Winning Solutions help organisations to apply this learning for greater work winning effectiveness.

Key Findings

• The total project value of the bids submitted with data is £11.3 billion of which £8 billion has full cost data. Significantly this includes £4.3 billion of winning bids.
• The sample represents a large proportion of the construction work carried out last year in the UK and is a good representation in the key areas of measurement.
• The approximate cost of a contractor’s average winning bid is £60k in 2014 and consultants average £24k.
•  In 11% of bids won and 15% of bids lost, the reasons for winning or losing are apparently unknown.
• Price was given as the single reason on 50% of losing bids but only 30% of winning ones.
• Almost 40% of winning bids identified a combination of factors as the reason for the win, compared with 21% of losing responses citing a combination of factors for the loss.
• Winning bidders invest more in their bids.
• The investment of time or money needs to be focused on the activities identified as creating a winning bid.
• The activities identified as helping create a winning bid are importantly those that are client-focused.
• The bid cost worked out, across winning and losing bids, to be 0.57% of the total project value.
• The bid cost percentage has significant impact on a contractor’s retained operating turnover.

Conclusion

The survey data deals with headline results across a complex industry with a lot of variables. This highlights the opportunity for an ongoing research programme addressing bid assessment in the context of a company’s own market situation, thus offering benefits in achieving greater effectiveness and efficiency in work-winning tools, processes and behaviours.

MarketingWorks offers a range of solutions to help our clients achieve these objectives including:

Creating bespoke win work flow processes and guidance that supports company-wide adoption of a work winning culture with embedded client centric behaviours and attitudes that improve win rates and work winning efficiencies.        

• MarketingWorks works with you to identify desirable changes in behaviours and processes and then works with your teams to uplift their capability, achieving rapid buy-in to desired behavioural change resulting in dramatic and immediate improvement. Read More. 

Bespoke easy-to-use bid selection tools that help contractors and consultants to quickly evaluate their bidding opportunities, enabling consistency and transparency in decision taking.

• By using MarketingWorks’ Selectivity and Reporting Tools you will be able to avoid waste by refocusing resources and effort on enhancing the quality of those bids where they have the highest chance of winning. Read More.

To discuss the outcomes from the survey further, contact philipcollard@marketingworks.co.uk

To Participate Further

MarketingWorks helps our clients to capture this data through online tools and processes and, when analysed, the outputs deliver invaluable information at company level.

For this reason, we are looking for more contractors and consultants to provide us with access to their internal metrics so we can explore this potential for them.  There is a one-off bespoking cost and an ongoing monthly fee per user, but the resulting reports will equip participating organisations to make more consistent bid/ no bid decisions and inform them where best to focus their investment. To discuss this opportunity further please contact philipcollard@marketingworks.co.uk

Encouraging Ongoing Debate

As we wish to open up debates surrounding the cost of bidding and how differing behaviours and approaches have influenced whether a company wins or loses the bid, we will be promoting this research at industry events where we can present and then debate these survey findings.

The survey results go some way to answering our initial questions, but also raised new ones. These results should make the debates around bid costs and overall work winning approaches tools and behaviours more factual.

We will be using these results to improve client centric alignment which is a core theme of this analysis. We welcome comments on our blog or email us directly at: enquiries@marketingworks.co.uk