A Practitioner's First Government 2.0 Experience -- Ugh

Comment

Comment by Chris Treadaway on March 18, 2009 at 2:39pm

All's well that ends well... we were awarded the contract!!! We'll be working with a government agency to help small businesses market themselves better. Can't wait... but I'm glad we have our first major Government 2.0 deal in place. Will have to write a bit as we go... along with a post-mortem.

Comment by Carolyn Shannon on March 10, 2009 at 11:18am

Hi Chris,

Well, I've been on both sides of this equation. On the side of the bidder, it does get easier as you do more of them and can boilerplate some of it. Trouble is, this is such new territory that in many instances these are pilot programs, and pilot programs are notoriously susceptible to budget cuts.

Also remember that city budgets rely on incoming tax revenues (property tax/federal and state distributions/sales tax revenues) - sometimes these allocations are delayed, which delays other decisions. And remember that city budgets provide services like fire, police, road maintenance, and other critical stuff, so if budget shifts or delays do need to happen, gov 2.0 is going to move down the list of priorities.

Now all you need to do is add a local election to that mix and you can have some significant possibilities for distractions and delays. That's not to say the project won't happen, but yes it is possible that things might get delayed.

If you're looking for clues, look at the local news. Is the city facing a budget deficit? Is there an election? You can use a lot of these to tailor a sales message as well, to help improve your case. Local governments are a unique kind of service organization. I know it doesn't lessen the frustration (and poor communication is frustrating no matter the reason), but maybe you could look at this as an opportunity. These are tough times for cities as well as their residents.

Comment by Chris Treadaway on March 8, 2009 at 11:35pm

Kimberly - great... I hope this is a rare occurrence.

Ari - I approached them about something & they sent me a copy of the RFP. I think they were looking for companies to do the project.

Comment by Ari Herzog, MPA on March 8, 2009 at 11:22pm

Why was a government agency approaching YOU vs you approaching THEM? If the RFP was out, why would they take an extra step?

Comment by Kimberly Keith on March 7, 2009 at 7:38pm

Hi Chris,
My experience with government contracting has been positive in terms of stated timeframes and notifications from state government. I can feel your pain on those long weekends of proposal writing. I agree with Darren's assessment of the obstacles on both sides; especially for small businesses, that's a lot of time spent unproductively. It sounds like this city is where most are, not too 2.0.

Comment by Dennis McDonald on March 6, 2009 at 5:34pm

Chris - back when I was doing nothing but Government contract research, a rule of thumb I quickly learned was "It costs as much to sell a $10,000 contract as it does to sell a $100,000 contract," given all the hoops to jump. I wonder if that has changed given the specialized procurement methods targeting small businesses?

Comment by Darren Buck on March 6, 2009 at 5:16pm

Thanks, and good luck, Chris. It will never be easy, but with your first proposal under your belt, it will likely be easier next time around.

Comment by Chris Treadaway on March 6, 2009 at 5:07pm

Darren - thanks for your balanced perspective... very interesting. We learned our lesson with regard to the time & effort required for a government RFP. I want to do more of this kind of work, but at the same time we can't do it if we'll burn our margin on proposal preparation costs. I'm sure a lot of other folks feel similarly.

Comment by Dennis McDonald on March 6, 2009 at 4:42pm

I hear you Chris and share your frustration. It's especially frustrating when you're an independent and they ... just ... don't ... tell ... you ... what's ... happening.

Along the lines of the same topic, I was interviewing a sales manager today for a white paper I'm developing for Social Media Today and Oracle about using Web 2.0 methods to support improved communication and collaboration in the sales process. He told me quite sincerely that he was concerned that some purchasers might use "web 2.0" collaboration methods to keep vendors at arms length until they are ready to have face to face meetings, which is where the real scoop about competition and budget, he felt, would be accessible. In other words, use techniques that should increase transparency of a process to control and/or reduce the transparency of a process. I admit I hadn't thought about that angle before but it's worth thinking about.

Dennis
--------------------------------------------------
Dennis McDonald, Ph.D.
Alexandria Virginia USA
http://www.ddmcd.com

Comment by Darren Buck on March 6, 2009 at 4:38pm

I've been on both sides, initially as a Federal contracting officer, and then preparing bids for a very small business (an owner, a bookkeeper, and I dropping our day-to-day responsibilities and working through weekends to get proposals and revisions in). A few over-generalizations:

--Like many situations where one hasn't experienced it firsthand, most in government probably don't really fully appreciate the proposal prep process. Or the impact of delays, or the time to decode RFPs and contract documents.
--Most in private industry don't appreciate that getting the award done doesn't carry the same life-or-death urgency on the other side. A company may be relying on award as an entree to a valued new customer, or a prestigious boost to their customer list, or even necessary cashflow to keep the doors open. Your fortunes are greatly improved or worsened by the award decision. The stakes are rarely that high on the other side. In fact, there's often little up- or downside, other than a check in the box that an award was made. Doesn't excuse non-communication, of course, but something to keep in mind.
--People work hard to develop their business, their methods, their processes. What may seem to the government to be necessary to evaluate is for the bidder a big risky nerve-wracking leap of faith, and that is never fully appreciated. Requirements folks ought to critically examine what they really truly need, and not just what they want, to fairly evaluate a proposal.
--Everybody needs to write their proposal with cool emotions. The government is picking the low bidder, or the evaluated best value bubba, or whatever. If you really poured your heart and soul into the bid, really feel that you could deliver a first-class product, and bid with a big discount off your normal price, don't expect gratitude, or relief from the torrent of administrative demands and hassles that come with a government contract. Price the downside in, and take your emotions out of your bid.
--Delays, especially delays off of promised milestones, are obviously bad. But the same cumbersome system that can stretch the simplest procurement into an ordeal also affords the bidder a level of merit-based protection that most other customers don't. The award delayed due to a protest is cause for howling, until you're the losing bidder with a complaint.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page