COMMENTARY

Don't take incumbency for granted

“We can’t bid that one. There’s an incumbent and he’s the sure winner.”

It’s a fact; being the incumbent is an advantage. The incumbent knows the customer, has the people on staff already, knows the technology and represents minimal transition risk.

Depending on how you crunch the numbers (in this day of multiple-award contracts, task-order bids after you win the basic contract, schedule contracts, set asides and sole source contracts, calculating a win ratio might not be as straightforward as it once was), the incumbent wins 60 percent of the time.

But that also means that the incumbent loses 40 percent of the time. Why is that?

Any company, on any given day, can come down with a chronic case of incumbent-itis.

Sometimes it happens long before the contract is up for recompete. The incumbent gets careless and neglects the customer. Doesn’t go to visit him, doesn’t take the temperature often enough to see how things are going, doesn’t keep up with personnel changes in the customer’s organization.

The customer continues to exercise contract options, because, well it’s a real pain in the neck to decline to exercise an option. That means he has to get the recompete geared up a year or two early. His contractor isn’t really doing anything horribly wrong; he’s just not exceeding expectations.

But a relationship like this isn’t good for winning the recompete.

Any company, on any given day, can write a bad proposal.

The company starts believing its own press releases. “The customer loves me so much that he’s going to give me the award regardless of what I put in my proposal. I don’t have to worry about submitting the best proposal. This is such a lock that I can put my second team on it.”

A variation on this theme is, “They know how much better I am than anybody else can possibly be. I can afford to make my prices higher; they’ll pay more to get me because I’m so much better.”

The incumbent thinks he knows more about the requirement than whoever wrote the solicitation. “I know they asked for that type of solution, but that’s not what they need. I’m going to ignore what they asked for and propose what they need.”

Incumbent-itis can have an effect on a price proposal too.

If an incumbent has good people, over four years or so, on a profitable contract, and retains those people in part by recognizing their performance with raises greater than the escalation factor in the original, when re-compete time rolls around, he has good people working at over-market rates. He has two choices—he can do his price proposal for the re-compete based on higher salaries than the competition, ending up with a higher price, or he can entice those good people to continue by cutting their salaries. Neither of these is good for his win probability.

He really does know what the customer expects, including the additional services that the customer didn’t or couldn’t include in the statement of work. He can price to provide these services, but the competitors who don’t know that the things that aren’t in the document should be priced in, won’t include pricing to cover them. Or the incumbent can omit them potentially depriving his benefactor of the services that were the basis of his favoritism.

Actually, the source selection authority probably won’t even read your proposal. The source selection authority is usually a fairly senior official in the customer’s power structure.

Source selection recommendations are made to the source selection authority by a committee of four or five folks who have done detailed reading of all of the non-price proposals submitted. The government official who is responsible for the current contract will probably (but not certainly) be one of them. The rest of the committee will probably be officials with some technical knowledge of the relevant field, but a more important criterion is, they’re available for the period of time necessary to do detailed and thorough evaluation of multiple proposals.

If somebody wants a particular company to have the most highly rated proposal, and that proposal happens to be the best one submitted, it’s easy. There’s a lot of subjectivity to the process, and it’s probably not clear cut at the onset. If it’s close, and the individual who wants a particular company to win is a respected official, and he lobbies for his choice, the rest of the panel will probably give him the benefit of the doubt.

A key concept here is that the proposal must be good enough to justify what he wants to do. If it’s clearly inferior, he may not want to risk his professional reputation, particularly among his peers, to lobby for it. If it’s a clearly inferior proposal, even if he does, his peers may not want to risk their professional reputations to vote with him.

So the source selection panel will score the non-price proposals. What about price?

What often happens in fact is that the non-price proposals are scored fairly nearly equally. In spite of what the solicitation said about price being less important, it does become more important when the non-price proposals are pretty much equally.

Think about it this way: if you have three non-price proposals scored 85, 90 and 95, and the 95 is the lowest price, it’s easy. If you have the same three proposals, but the 95 is $1.98 more expensive, should the government pay that much more to get the bidder with the better proposal? At $1.98, it’s still an easy decision. At $1,000,000, it’s harder; (depending of course on the percentage of the total procurement) if the highest rated non-price proposal is $10,000,000, it might not be so difficult to pass on the highest rated non-price proposal.

Reader Comments

Tue, Aug 28, 2012 Don Mansfield

Time out. You just claimed that incumbents only win 60% of the time and cited nothing to support that claim. Where are you getting your numbers?

Fri, Aug 24, 2012

A bad proposal is easy to spot. A bad one turns off the evaluator. The evaluator wants to read a good proposal. The evaluator wants to read good answers to stated problems. Good proposals makes the job easy for the evaluator. Bad ones make the process a nightmare because the evaluator realizes that he still must still read it and grade it.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here
close
SEARCH
contracts DB

Trending

  • Dive into our Contract Award database

    In an exclusive for WT Insider members, we are collecting all of the contract awards we cover into a database that you can sort by contractor, agency, value and other parameters. You can also download it into a spreadsheet. Read More

  • Is SBA MIA on contractor fraud? Nick Wakeman

    Editor Nick Wakeman explores the puzzle of why SBA has been so silent on the latest contractor fraud scandal when it has been so quick to act in other cases. Read More

Webcasts

  • How Do You Support the Project Lifecycle?

    How do best-in-class project-based companies create and actively mature successful organizations? They find the right mix of people, processes and tools that enable them to effectively manage the project lifecycle. REGISTER for this webinar to hear how properly managing the cycle of capture, bid, accounting, execution, IPM and analysis will allow you to better manage your programs to stay on scope, schedule and budget. Learn More!

  • Sequestration, LPTA and the Top 100

    Join Washington Technology’s Editor-in-Chief Nick Wakeman as he analyzes the annual Top 100 list and reveals critical insights into how market trends have impacted its composition. You'll learn what movements of individual companies means and how the market overall is being impacted by the current budget environment, how the Top 100 rankings reflect the major trends in the market today and how the biggest companies in the market are adapting to today’s competitive environment. Learn More!