Red Team Debriefing: Evaluating Proposal Effectiveness
In this presentation, the Red Team led by [Red Team Leader's Name] reviews the proposal to provide valuable feedback from an outsider's perspective. The Red Team aims to predict scoring, ensure compliance, assess quality, and recommend improvements for the proposal's success. Operational approaches, review types, member responsibilities, and more are discussed to enhance the proposal's overall quality.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
[Proposal Name] Red Team Debriefing Presented by: [Red Team Leader s Name] [Organization] [Date] 1
Debriefing Agenda Purposes of the Red Team review Red Team operations Red Team results Completing the proposal 2
Purposes of the Red Team The Red Team evaluates the proposal from the customer s perspective. It provides the proposal team valuable feedback from people not involved with writing the document. 3
Purposes of the Red Team Emulate source selection evaluation process to predict proposal scoring Determine compliance to solicitation and responsiveness to customer hot buttons Conduct independent assessment of proposal s quality and effectiveness Recommend detailed improvements 4
Red Team Performs Three Tasks WE ARE HERE 5
Red Team Operations To maximize benefits to the proposal team, the Red Team followed a proven, structured operational approach. This approach standardizes scoring, risk assessments, and feedback formats to increase utility of the critique. 6
Two Types of Review Were Conducted Vertical Section by section Primary and secondary reviewers Numerical scores Proposal and performance risk assessments Horizontal Evaluates use of style and emphasis tools Determines consistency across document 7
Red Team Member Responsibilities Responsibility Vert. Hor. Review assigned section(s) Evaluate strengths and weaknesses Evaluate compliance and responsiveness Identify deficiencies Identify areas needing clarification Recommend specific improvements Provide numerical score and risk assessments Check for inter-volume compatibility Prepare debrief for proposal team 8
Form for Vertical Review Reference information Strengths and Weaknesses Comments and Problems Recommendations Scoring Disposition 9
Scoring Guidance for Compliance and Responsiveness Compliance and Responsiveness Scoring Color Numbers Adjectives Compliance and Responsiveness Criteria The section is compliant and responsive and clearly substantiates added value beyond requirements. The offering is clearly superior and is well presented. The section is compliant and responsive, with no deficiencies and only minor weaknesses. A minimally compliant section just meeting requirements earns a 5. The section is only partially compliant or responsive, fails to fully address requirements, or does not adequately substantiate claims. It contains weaknesses in several areas or a significant weakness. The section is non-responsive or non-compliant to specific requirements. The response is largely or totally unsubstantiated or exhibits one or more deficiencies. Blue 8-10 Outstanding Green 5-7 Good Yellow 3-4 Marginal Red 0-2 Unsatisfactory 10
Scoring Guidance for Proposal and Performance Risk Color Scoring Proposal Risk Criteria Performance Risk Criteria Unlikely to cause disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance; normal offeror emphasis and normal customer monitoring will probably overcome difficulties. Can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance; however, special contractor emphasis and close customer monitoring will probably overcome difficulties. Likely to cause significant, serious disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance, even with special contractor emphasis and close customer monitoring Little doubt exists, based on the offeror s performance record, that the offeror can perform the effort. Green Low Some doubt exists, based on the offeror s performance record, that the offeror can perform the effort. Yellow Moderate Significant doubt exists, based on the offeror s performance record, that the offeror can perform the effort. Red High 11
Form for Horizontal Review (p. 1) Reference information Questions Theme statements Visuals and action captions Outline and section headings 12
Form for Horizontal Review (p. 2) Questions (cont.) Outline and Section Headings (concluded) Callouts Comments and disposition 13
Red Team Results The Red Team presents its findings and recommendations to the proposal team, which then determines how to improve the proposal. Proposal management decides which recommendations to implement. 14
Red Team Wrap-Up [Commend proposal team s hard work] [List major impressions] [Mention strong points] [Discuss significant weaknesses] [Identify all deficiencies] [Summarize recommended improvements] [Describe procedures for author follow-up with Red Team members] 15
Completing the Proposal The Red Team evaluates the draft proposal, but the proposal team must decide which changes to incorporate and how. 17
Procedures to Complete Proposal [Proposal manager presents this section] [Explain who will make disposition of recommendations] [Disseminate final revision team and schedule] [Explain assignment and tracking tools that will be used] 18
