About Amerisurv| Contact    
Magazine | Newsletter    
Flickr Photos | Advertise    
HomeNewsNewsletterAmerisurv DirectoryJobsStoreAuthorsHistoryArchivesBlogVideosEvents
 
advertisement


Subscriptions
Sponsored By

Software Reviews
Continuing Series
     RTN
An RTN expert provides everything you need to know about network-corrected real-time GNSS observations.
Click Here to begin the series,
or view the Article PDF's Here
76-PageFlip Compilation
of the entire series
Test Yourself

Got Answers?
Test your knowledge with NCEES-level questions.
  Start HERE
Meet the Authors
Check out our fine lineup of writers. Each an expert in his or her field.
Wow Factor
Sponsored By


Product Reviews
Partner Sites

machinecontrolonline 


lbszone.com

GISuser.com

GeoJobs.biz

GeoLearn

 

Spatial Media LLC properties

Associates

ASPRS

newsnow 

Home arrow Archives   The American Surveyor     

Vantage Point: Why Your Bid Failed Print E-mail
Written by Wendy Lathrop, PS, CFM   
Saturday, 04 January 2014

A 661Kb PDF of this article as it appeared in the magazine—complete with images—is available by clicking HERE

Recently I've been part of two different evaluation teams to hire contractors for two different kinds of work related to recovery from Superstorm Sandy. In each instance I had to rate applicants on a form requiring evaluation of various aspects of technical experience and abilities. And each time I was torn when I knew more about the applicants (either positive or negative) that didn't appear in the responses to Requests for Qualifications (RFQ).

So today I want to help you nail that next job or at least get on the list for work by addressing some of the problems I have seen over the years that have either totally eliminated firms from consideration or simply depressed their ratings beyond salvation. Let's start with the qualifications side of it, the RFQ that allows you to progress beyond Square One to have a shot at some very good job opportunities.

Number One: Read the Request for Proposal. Yes, it's boring, but read ALL of it. Then create a checklist of what the request asks for. Add any items that are clearly lacking from the RFQ but would help make your response stronger and crystal clear, and thus possibly stand out from the competition. But don't go overboard and add irrelevant information that busy evaluators will consider a waste of their time. While it is important to add information about certified hydrographic surveyors for an RFQ relating to water boundaries that only asked how many licensed surveyors are on staff, the number of structural engineers in the firm is extraneous.

Number Two: Address every single item on that checklist, even to say if the item is not applicable. Omitting any response can be interpreted in many ways unimagined by the one omitting the response. Does it mean the responder doesn't care to address a sticky topic? Does it mean lack of attention to detail? In many instances leaving out any kind of answer will automatically put your paperwork in a pile of "non-responsive" applicants from which you will never be removed--at least not for this round of projects. In some instances an explanation of why the item is not applicable shows you understand the project needs better than those who compiled the RFQ.

Number Three: When sample work is requested, just do it. Don't assume the organization or agency is so familiar with your work that this step is not necessary. Failing to do so will either immediately categorize you as non-responsive, or at the very least eliminate so many points from your technical qualifications score that you will never get on the short list. And provide something related and relevant. If it is an RFQ for boundary work relating to conveyance, sending bridge construction drawings will not impress the evaluation team no matter how detailed and beautifully drawn they may be.

Number Four: Supply responses and sample documents in the format requested. If the materials are sent in a format other than what was requested, the evaluating team may not have the time (or ability) to convert them to something that all team members will be able to access. This is especially true for nonprofits. Aside from implying a lack of attention to details, I've heard some evaluators term this approach "arrogant", as though such applicants expect the world to bend to their own preferences.

Number Five: Supply the number of responses and sample documents requested. Don't assume someone at the other end with have the time and ability to make the missing copies for you so that everyone on the evaluation team with have an opportunity to examine these stellar examples of your expertise.

Number Six: Provide meaningful qualifications of those who are named as part of the project team. Being president of a professional society by itself is not enough without some description of technical background and expertise. It's great supporting information to show community and professional commitment and perhaps organizational ability, but it doesn't say you can do the work involved in this particular contract.

Number Seven: When asked for experience on similar projects, provide more than the name of the project. The world at large may not be familiar with it. Provide at least a sentence or two describing what the project entailed in terms of type of surveying or other particular expertise required. It can be helpful to include information about the size of the project, its specific location, utilization of particular expertise, and difficult aspects of the sample project with a description of how these were addressed--especially if you were able to surmount these obstacles on time and under budget. Examples of teamwork and communication to resolve tough situations can be impressive. Provide a reference for each project noted, with a means of contacting that individual (phone, email).

Number Eight: Make sure your readers, some of whom may be non-technical, can understand your responses. Don't expect your readers to understand some of the jargon and abbreviations you use on a daily basis. The first time you want to use an abbreviation, make sure you spell out the words first and then parenthetically add the abbreviation.

Number Nine: Use good English! Eliminate extraneous commas, break down run-on sentences into discrete thoughts, and focus on answering each question separately.

Number Ten: Proofread, proofread, proofread! How impressive is a response signed by the firm's "Presdient" (typed in bold capital letters, no less)?

This is, of course, just a general outline of how to get into the pool for qualifications-based selection, and there are many other ways to blow your chances that I haven't addressed. Once you've made the list of qualified contractors, a new set of opportunities await both to succeed brilliantly and to fail miserably, with the latter often related to some of the top ten faux pas listed here. Once having made it past the RFQ into the Request for Proposals (RFP) stage, there is much more opportunity for creativity and flexibility in describing your proposed approach to advertised projects, especially if you can suggest approaches that will save time and money. But again, everything must be spelled out clearly enough that a general audience can understand what it is you are proposing to do.

Wendy Lathrop is licensed as a Professional Land Surveyor in NJ, PA, DE, and MD, and has been involved since 1974 in surveying projects ranging from construction to boundary to environmental land use disputes. She is a Professional Planner in NJ, and a Certified Floodplain Manager through ASFPM.

A 661Kb PDF of this article as it appeared in the magazine—complete with images—is available by clicking HERE

 
< Prev   Next >

 American Surveyor Recent Articles
Marc Cheves, PS 
Editorial: A Great Year to be a Surveyor
Some magazines have what are called "theme" issues. That is, most of the content is focused on one particular subject. In my 22+ years of survey magazine publishing, my philosophy has always been to have a little bit of everything in each issue, thereby eliminating the possibility that ....
Read the Article
Jason E. Foose, PS 
Decided Guidance: Case Examinations: Halverson v. Deerwood Village
Whew! We really beat the snot out of Bryant v. Blevins and practical locations. Well this month we're back on new case that hit the Minnesota Supreme Court's docket in 1982. We've got the familiar gymnastics of jurisprudence featuring an extraordinary array of flying rope stretchers ...
Read the Article
Michel Philips 
Extreme Environment Surveying
A Franco-Chilean team of cave divers used the Nautiz X8 rugged handheld for marine cave surveying, gathering data to classify the inaccessible northern half of Madre de Dios for UNESCO World Heritage. The team of cave divers used the Nautiz X8 ....
Read the Article
Erik Dahlberg 
The Original Green Engineers
Sometimes, it's best just to leave things as you found them. That's the lesson shared by Dr. Richard Miksad and his students at the University of Virginia. As a result of studies covering nearly a decade, Miksad's teams have developed detailed ....
Read the Article
Dave Lindell, PS 
Test Yourself 49: No Dimensions
In square A-C-D-B with side S, C-E is tangent to the semicircle Q1 with diameter B-D. Q2 is the inscribed circle of A-C-E. The tangent to Q1 and Q2 meets the sides of the square at F and H and intersects C-E at t G. Q3 is the inscribed circle of C-G-H. What is the ratio of the radii of circles ....
Read the Article
Jerry Penry, PS 
Discovery on Grizzly Peak
When First Lieutenant Montgomery M. Macomb arrived in Carson City, Nevada, from Washington D.C., on July 28, 1878, his assigned survey crew from the 4th Artillery was waiting and ready for the new field season. At age 25, Macomb was the leader ....
Read the Article
Wendy Lathrop, PS, CFM 
Vantage Point: Fighting City Hall Over Land
Once upon a time (1989 to be exact) in a place not so far away from where I live, a man (Francis Galdo) bought a home across the street from a vacant parcel owned by the City of Philadelphia. That parcel, along with others, had been acquired by condemnation back in 1974 subsequent to a 1956 ....
Read the Article
Patrick C. Garner, PS 
Book Review: Boundary Retracement: Processes and Procedures
When I was in my mid-twenties and learning the honorable profession of land surveying, I was lucky to be guided by a mentor who would grab a book off his office shelf and say, "Every surveyor should have a copy of this!" The first example he waved at me was Davis, Foote and Kelly's Surveying ....
Read the Article

deliciousrssnewsletterlinkedinfacebooktwitter

Amerisurv Exclusive Online-only Article ticker
Featured Amerisurv Events
List Your Event Here
please
contact Amerisurv


Google
 
AMERISURV TOP NEWS

Geneq Introduces
Net20 Pro Receiver

GOT NEWS? Send To
press [at] amerisurv.com
Online Internet Content

Sponsor


News Feeds

 
Subscribe to Amerisurv news & updates via RSS or get our Feedburn
xml feed

Need Help? See this RSS Tutorial

Historic Maps
Careers

post a job
Reach our audience of Professional land surveyors and Geo-Technology professionals with your GeoJobs career ad. Feel free to contact us if you need additional information.

 

Social Bookmarks

Amerisurv on Facebook 

Amerisurv LinkedIn Group 

Amerisurv Flickr Photos 

Amerisurv videos on YouTube 

twitter

 




The American Surveyor © All rights reserved / Privacy Statement
Spatial Media LLC
7820B Wormans Mill Road, #236
Frederick MD 21701
301-620-0784
301-695-1538 - fax