Focused on winning. Since 1980

Case studies win profitable contracts

Win more contracts

Winning more profitable contracts depends on finding and convincing target customers of your abilities and excellence. Given that many contracts are successfully completed, why is it that very few contractors gain leverage in advance of bidding by featuring them as a technical case study?

Setting-up your own mailing list of key people in likely organisations is a very worthwhile exercise in itself.  The list should include people with interests ranging from technical to financial and corporate.  All could be on a future evaluation team.

Text for each case study should follow a set pattern to attract and hold the attention of readers. A photo or two will add interest. The pattern should be updated from time to time to win more profitable contracts.

Message is critical to success

Deciding on the messages that the text should convey is critical to success. The aim is to expose and explain your competitive advantages in a way that presents them as attractive solutions to likely customer problems. The fact that you have already applied these solutions with success adds great credibility.

The resulting case study can be quickly emailed, or printed and posted, or both. And it can be included in contract tender bids, proposals, quotes and expressions of interest. With a few changes, the text may be published in a trade journal.

Much excellence achieved by contractors is often never described in case studies, so it becomes hidden from people who would benefit from knowing the details. People like reading about interesting jobs well done. Ongoing case studies can influence decision-makers long-term by building confidence in your abilities.

Bottom line: Technical case studies can build your reputation ahead of opportunities arising to win more contracts. Set-up, interviewing and editing for each can be rapid and success is easily tested. Why not kick off the New Year with some case studies about your most successful contracts of 2017?

(c) This Opinion by Tom Evison was first published by Tecads in December 2017

Read more tender tips
Contact Tom Evison