Why RFP Analysis Is Draining Your Sales Team's Time
Your team receives a 120-page government tender document for a multi-million dollar contract opportunity. Someone needs to extract the technical requirements, compliance criteria, submission deadlines, evaluation weightings, and mandatory qualifications—then distill it into a 2-page decision brief for your proposal team. This reconnaissance work takes 4-6 hours of a senior salesperson's time, pulling them away from actual selling. Multiply this across 8-12 RFPs per quarter, and you've lost weeks of revenue-generating capacity to document analysis.
Time saved: Reduces 4-6 hours of manual extraction to 15-20 minutes of AI-assisted analysis with human review
Consistency gain: Standardizes requirement identification across all RFPs, ensuring your team never misses hidden evaluation criteria, mandatory submission formats, or disqualifying constraints buried in appendices
Cognitive load: Eliminates the mental fatigue of parsing dense procurement language and cross-referencing scattered requirements, freeing senior sales talent to focus on win strategy and relationship development
Cost comparison: A $150K/year sales engineer spending 6 hours per RFP costs your business $450+ per analysis; scaling this across enterprise sales teams means tens of thousands wasted on mechanical extraction work that AI handles in minutes
This task is perfect for AI delegation because it requires systematic information extraction (identifying patterns across unstructured documents), logical categorization (grouping requirements by type), and structured synthesis (presenting findings in decision-ready format)—exactly the analytical heavy lifting where AI excels when properly directed.
Here's how to delegate this effectively using the 5C Framework.
Why This Task Tests Your Delegation Skills
RFP summarization reveals whether you understand the difference between data extraction and strategic intelligence. A junior analyst can highlight every requirement mentioned in a tender document; a competent business developer knows which requirements actually impact your go/no-go decision, resource allocation, and competitive positioning.
This is delegation engineering, not prompt hacking. Just like briefing a proposal coordinator, you must specify:
- Prioritization logic (which requirements are disqualifying versus nice-to-have?)
- Business context (how do these criteria map to your capabilities and differentiators?)
- Output standards (what makes a summary actionable for executive decision-making versus just a list of extracted text?)
The 5C Framework forces you to codify these judgment calls into AI instructions. Master this SOP, and you've learned to delegate any complex document analysis task—from contract reviews to competitive intelligence synthesis to compliance assessments.
Configuring Your AI for RFP Summarization
| 5C Component | Configuration Strategy | Why it Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Character | Proposal strategist and procurement analyst with experience evaluating bid requirements across government, enterprise, and commercial RFPs | Ensures AI applies procurement domain knowledge—recognizing mandatory vs. preferred criteria, identifying evaluation scoring mechanisms, flagging compliance traps—not just extracting bullet points |
| Context | Your company's service offerings, typical deal size, geographic constraints, past win/loss patterns, and specific capability gaps or competitive advantages | Different RFPs require different lenses—a capabilities assessment matters only if you understand what capabilities your company actually has; AI needs your business model to filter signal from noise |
| Command | Extract and categorize all submission requirements, evaluation criteria, mandatory qualifications, and commercial terms; structure as executive decision brief with go/no-go recommendation rationale | Prevents generic document summarization and ensures output directly serves your bid decision workflow—AI should synthesize findings into strategic insights, not just compress the original text |
| Constraints | Flag any disqualifying requirements immediately; distinguish between mandatory "must-haves" and scored "evaluation factors"; identify ambiguous criteria requiring clarification questions; exclude boilerplate legal terms unless they contain unusual risk | Stops information overload and ensures your team focuses on decision-critical elements—procurement documents bury important constraints in appendices, so AI must surface red flags and strategic considerations first |
| Content | Provide examples of strong vs. weak requirement summaries from past RFPs, including your company's standard go/no-go criteria framework and preferred decision brief format | Teaches AI your organization's decision-making language—whether you evaluate by "Red/Yellow/Green" capability scoring, required vs. available resources, or competitive win probability assessments |
The Copy-Paste Delegation Template
<role>
You are a proposal strategist and procurement analyst specializing in RFP evaluation. You understand how to distinguish between mandatory requirements, weighted evaluation criteria, and administrative submission rules. Your expertise includes identifying hidden disqualifiers, ambiguous specifications requiring clarification, and strategic criteria that reveal customer priorities.
</role>
<context>
I need a strategic summary of an RFP/tender document for our bid decision process. Our company profile:
- Industry: [Your sector, e.g., "Enterprise SaaS," "IT Services," "Construction"]
- Core offerings: [2-3 sentence description of what you sell/deliver]
- Typical project size: [$X-$Y range]
- Geographic coverage: [Regions where you can deliver]
- Key differentiators: [What you're known for vs. competitors]
- Known capability gaps: [Services/credentials you lack]
Our go/no-go decision framework prioritizes: [List your top 3-4 decision factors, e.g., "contract value >$500K, no bonding requirements >$2M, at least 60-day proposal timeline, fits our cybersecurity certification portfolio"]
</context>
<instructions>
Follow this analytical sequence:
1. **Perform initial qualification scan** to identify immediate disqualifiers:
- Mandatory certifications, licenses, or credentials we lack
- Geographic restrictions outside our service areas
- Incumbent advantages or set-aside programs excluding us
- Submission deadlines impossible to meet
- Financial requirements (bonding, insurance, capitalization) we cannot satisfy
- Technical requirements clearly outside our capability scope
If ANY hard disqualifiers exist, flag them immediately before proceeding.
2. **Extract submission requirements** in three tiers:
- MANDATORY (must include or proposal is rejected): Document formats, page limits, required forms/certifications, submission method/deadline, number of copies
- EVALUATED (impacts scoring): Narrative requirements, technical approaches, past performance examples, staffing plans, pricing structures
- ADMINISTRATIVE (procedural): Registration portals, Q&A deadlines, site visit schedules, proposal conferences
3. **Map evaluation criteria** by creating a scoring breakdown:
- List each evaluation factor with its point weighting (or percentage if point values not specified)
- For each factor, extract the specific sub-criteria the customer will judge
- Identify any "knockout" criteria (minimum scores required to advance)
- Note evaluation method: Lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA), best value tradeoff, qualifications-based, or other
- Highlight any criteria where our company has known strengths or weaknesses
4. **Catalog technical and operational requirements:**
- Performance specifications (What must the solution accomplish?)
- Deliverables and milestones (What tangible outputs are required, when?)
- Staffing requirements (Roles, qualifications, clearances, key personnel)
- Compliance standards (Regulations, certifications, industry standards)
- Contract terms (Duration, options, payment structure, warranties, IP rights)
- Identify any requirements that are ambiguous or contradictory—these need clarification questions
5. **Synthesize strategic intelligence:**
- Customer priorities: What does the evaluation weighting reveal about what they value most?
- Competitive landscape: What type of incumbent or competitor does this RFP favor?
- Win themes: Which of our differentiators align with their highest-weighted criteria?
- Risk factors: What elements create delivery risk or pricing uncertainty?
- Resource demands: What level of effort will proposal development require?
6. **Structure output as executive decision brief:**
**OPPORTUNITY OVERVIEW**
- Customer, contract value, period of performance
- Procurement type and evaluation method
- Submission deadline and anticipated award date
**GO/NO-GO ASSESSMENT**
- Immediate recommendation with rationale
- Disqualifiers or major barriers (if any)
- Capability fit score (Strong/Moderate/Weak match to requirements)
- Win probability estimate with key assumptions
**CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY**
- Top 5 mandatory qualifications we must demonstrate
- Top 5 evaluation criteria (by point value)
- Top 3 risk factors or capability gaps requiring mitigation
- Key dates and milestones
**STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS**
- Customer priorities revealed by RFP structure
- Recommended win themes based on evaluation weights
- Clarification questions to submit (if RFP allows Q&A)
- Required proposal team composition and estimated LOE
**DETAILED REQUIREMENT APPENDIX** (for proposal team reference)
- Full compliance matrix: All requirements with RFP section references
- Evaluation criteria breakdown with point allocations
- Submission checklist with page limits and format rules
Present this summary in a format ready to brief executives and proposal teams.
</instructions>
<input>
Paste the full RFP document text below, or provide the document in an uploadable format.
**Company Context (if not specified above):**
[Paste any additional context about your capabilities, past performance, or strategic priorities relevant to this opportunity]
**RFP Document:**
[PASTE FULL RFP TEXT HERE OR UPLOAD DOCUMENT]
</input>The Manager's Review Protocol
Before using AI-generated RFP summaries for bid decisions, apply these quality checks:
- Accuracy Check: Cross-reference AI's extracted requirements against the original RFP sections—did AI correctly interpret mandatory vs. optional criteria? Verify that evaluation point values, deadlines, and technical specifications match the source document exactly. Confirm that any "disqualifiers" identified are genuine showstoppers, not AI misinterpretations of conditional language.
- Hallucination Scan: Ensure AI didn't invent requirements that don't exist in the RFP or fabricate point weightings for unscored criteria. Verify that the "customer priorities" analysis is derived from actual RFP content (evaluation weights, statement of work emphasis, Q&A responses) rather than AI assumptions about what procurements "usually" prioritize. Check that recommended "win themes" genuinely connect to stated evaluation factors, not generic best practices.
- Tone Alignment: Confirm the strategic assessment matches your organization's risk tolerance and decision culture—some companies pursue any qualified opportunity, others only chase high-probability wins. Verify that capability fit scoring reflects your actual delivery capacity, not AI optimism. Adjust the go/no-go recommendation language to match how your executives actually make bid decisions (ROI models, strategic fit assessments, competitive win rates).
- Strategic Fitness: Evaluate whether the summary highlights the decision-critical intelligence your team actually needs—does it surface the compliance traps that killed your last proposal? Does it identify the evaluation criteria where your competitors have natural advantages? Strong delegation means knowing when AI correctly prioritized ambiguous requirements that need clarification versus when you need to override based on your procurement domain expertise. The summary should enable a confident 30-minute bid decision meeting, not create more questions than it answers.
Build your SOP Library, one drop at a time.
We are constantly testing new ways to delegate complex work to AI. When we crack the code on a new "Job to be Done," we send the SOP directly to you, fresh from the lab.
Our Promise: High signal, low noise. We email you strictly once a week (max), and only when we have something worth your time.
When This SOP Isn't Enough
This SOP solves single-RFP analysis, but sales teams typically face opportunity pipeline management—tracking dozens of potential bids simultaneously, coordinating proposal resources across competing deadlines, and building institutional knowledge about customer buying patterns. The full 5C methodology covers workflow integration (connecting RFP analysis to CRM opportunity scoring and proposal scheduling), custom evaluation frameworks (building weighted scorecards that reflect your company's strategic priorities), and competitive intelligence synthesis (analyzing requirement patterns to predict customer preferences and incumbent positioning).
For standalone RFP reviews, this template delivers immediate value. For managing enterprise sales pipelines, building reusable proposal content libraries, or developing win strategy playbooks across customer segments, you'll need the advanced delegation frameworks taught in Sorai Academy.