Partner News

With the UK job market becoming ever-more competitive, candidates need to bring their ‘A game’ to interviews and ensure their CVs are as strong as possible. Qualifications and experience help candidates to stand out, but there’s a growing requirement – especially for younger candidates – to demonstrate a commitment to their continuing professional development. “You’ve graduated, got a year or two under your belt, but now what?”

APMP Foundation Certification

One way to demonstrate a commitment to your career, and prove that you keep your knowledge up to date, is through membership of the APMP – the Association of Proposal Management Professionals. More employers are asking for candidates to be APMP certified, and APMP Foundation is a mandatory requirement for some companies.

Recent figures from the APMP show that there are now over 7,000 people worldwide that are certified to Foundation level. This is great news for our industry, but what percentage of bid and proposal professionals does this represent? If you have Foundation, it’s possible that you are part of the elite club – the ones with the advantage at interview. But if you don’t have it, then you’d better think about adding it to your CV.

Nigel Hudson is a Senior Professional Development Consultant for Strategic Proposals – one of only three APMP Approved Training Organisations (ATOs) in the UK. An APMP Professional, he’s worked his way through each level of certification and will be co-delivering the APMP Foundation training at this year’s APMP UK Conference. We asked him what he thinks about the growing need for certification. Here’s what he said:

“The trend is inevitable. Employers seek the best talent, especially people who can bring best practice into their company. Research conducted on behalf of APMP demonstrates that organisations that employ ‘appropriately competent professionals’ in proposal management roles win significantly more business than those that do not. But demand has to start with individuals realising that they own their development, that they should proactively be seeking new skills and knowledge.”

He continued:

“With APMP Foundation, we’ve run six public courses in the UK this year, and many more in-house sessions. The thing I’ve noticed most is the attendees’ proactivity, maturity, energy and desire to perform. They’re markedly more ‘switched on’ than people who shy away from proving or bettering themselves. They know that certification gives them the edge. They’ve honed their skills, topped up their knowledge, and understand how to recognise and demonstrate best practice. Which has to be appealing to their current or would-be employers. And it’s motivating for them, too. Gaining tangible proof of competency as a proposal professional attracts respect and credibility from colleagues. Which is a good thing on a great many levels.”

Nigel concluded by saying that the new APMP syllabus is encouraging the uptake of latest best practice. Places for Strategic Proposals’ September public course sold out in record time, but places are thankfully still available for their pre-conference Foundation course at Wokefield Park on 18^th October. Tickets are priced at £495.00 plus VAT, and can be purchased here.

To learn more about bid training, click here.

Thousands of bid and proposal professionals across the globe have boosted their salary and improved their influence in their organisations by achieving APMP Foundation training (Association of Proposal Management Professionals). Bid Solutions recent salary survey showed that certified members earn an average of 15% more than their peers.

Previously in the UK, the one day course and exam was almost always held in London but as a new ATO (Approved Training Organisation), Sixfold think the event should be more easily accessible to those who do not live in the South East.

Dates for APMP Foundation workshops in Manchester are listed below and we would urge you, if you wish to benefit from the increased status of certification, to sign up for one of these dates.

• Tuesday 5th July
• Thursday 13th October
• Thursday 8th December
• Tuesday 7th March 2017

Author: Peter Lobl APMP Director, Sixfold International

To discuss training please contact the team on 020 8158 3952 / enquiry@bidsolutions.co.uk

To learn more about bid training, click here.

Do you have too much information, too many sources of data and too many entangled ideas for your bid? How do you tease out your Win Themes?

As a bid professional you are only too aware that creating win themes is a key part of developing a winning solution. A solution that excites your in-house bid evaluators, and then excites your client even more once your bid is flashing on their screen.

You already know there are very many ways you can collect information – client engagement, stakeholder consultation, workshops, Blue Skies thinking, top-down input, bottom-up data, trends and patterns from elsewhere. You also know that the most creative (sometimes wacky) ideas come from the most surprising members of your team, and the best ideas from the most surprising combinations of possible ideas.

So far, so good. But when you reach the “too much data” stage – when it looks like the rope in the picture – which maybe is how it feels right now – it’s colourful and pretty – but how do you tell which are the winning themes, how they connect, and how they join up into the whole picture? And also importantly, which are the themes to leave behind for a different bid, a different solution or a different day?

When it’s all entangled as you know the bid team needs to have great skills in stepping back, seeing what’s happening and trusting their judgment. When expectations are high, pressure from above is looming and anxiety is starting to raise its head, this can feel a lot easier said than done.

I’ve worked with bid, sales and leadership teams for over twenty years. I’ve learned a lot from working with high caliber professionals such as you. This is what I’ve seen you do. Let me know what else works too:-

• You expect interconnection. You know that the interdependency and impact of the winning themes on each other can be more important than the themes themselves. You know, with all of your being, that interdependency can be such a rich source of new ideas, quality, and opportunity for cost reduction.  It’s a highly exciting as well as a necessary place to be. You make sure everyone knows to think this way and look for a new perspective.

•  You allow for emergence. You know that vital information can be late or need re-working and that winning themes or combination of themes continue to show themselves over time. You allow early ideas to step aside gracefully as their successors and nuances emerge. You give your team permission to talk to each other as many times as they need to, to create the best ideas. You know it’s the conversation about the technical expertise which is essential, helping to clarify the wheat from the chaff.

• At the end of the day, you trust yourselves. You stay true to yourselves, firm in your own judgment and understanding of client focus. You trust your gut and intuition as to what will genuinely be the winning themes – for this bid, this client, this time. After listening to everyone you know it is your job to draw out and hold the “Aunt Sally”, the framework of win themes and move to bid production from there.

• You thank your full team. You know that they all contribute to the creation and clarity of winning themes. Acknowledging their contribution keeps them working hard in the next stage, describing the themes in full and glorious detail in the bid, writing in a compelling way to win.

Author: Gill How, Director Buonacorsi Consulting

If your bid team would benefit from some extra facilitation challenge, support and perspective when all you can see is entangled rope, do get in touch on 020 8158 3952 / enquiry@bidsolutions.co.uk.

For more expert advice to help you write winning bids and proposals, check out our Ask the Expert page.

We have seen some recent case law which may give organisations more leverage to get the information surrounding the activities of the evaluators in a Public Sector procurement decision. Although not directly concerned with procurement, a Court of Appeal case involving Denbighshire County Council decided:

• A public authority under a duty to give reasons for a decision must provide adequate reasons within a reasonable time and in any event, before the issuance of judicial review proceedings.
• Reasons given later in the context of the litigation will be viewed with skepticism and will not cure the original deficiency.
• The court found that to discharge such a duty, the reasoning must be “such as to enable interested parties to decide whether to appeal against the determination in question, taking into account any factors which might subsequently be brought to their attention”.

It also decided that even in judicial review proceedings, cross-examination will not be ruled out if there are questions raised by the evidence submitted.

In a procurement competition, there will be a number of situations where contracting authorities have a duty to give reasons for a decision within a reasonable time. Where this is the case, e.g. the Standstill period, their reasons should be given at an early stage to allow competitors to consider whether they have grounds for a claim. The court case makes the point that providing reasons in subsequent proceedings will not be sufficient.

We think that this case will allow more ability to get the information we need when considering challenging a questionable procurement decision.  If the reasons given by the authority are found to be inadequate later, they will have difficulty in bringing additional information to prove their case.

Author: Andy Haigh PPM APMP Director and Public Sector Bid Consultant, Sixfold International Ltd

This is a complex area so if you are considering challenging a procurement decision and you are within the timescales, please contact us immediately for a no-obligation discussion on 020 8158 3952 / enquiry@bidsolutions.co.uk

For more industry news and expert opinion, visit our Bid Hub

Andy Haigh, Director, and Consultant at Sixfold explores what motivates a bid team to go the extra mile:

As a Bid Director, I have been interested for a long time in what it is that motivates bid team members to work extended hours (sometimes 24 hours and longer without a break).  Despite being under high pressure they perform willingly, enthusiastically and usually for no financial reward above their normal salary.  Of course this does not occur in every case, however as any Bid Manager knows, it happens surprisingly often.  It can be accompanied by some grumbling about the poor performance of others who have created the “situation” – but it is usually not as a result of poor performance on their own part.  It seems that the individual feels that he or she has a personal responsibility to put the situation right and get the bid completed, no matter what level of effort is needed from them.

Representatives of partner and sub-contractor companies, seconded into the bid team, can show this characteristic as well.  They will “go the extra mile” to make sure their element of the bid response is as good as they can get it.  Their contribution will often contrast with the minimalist response of some staff within your own company who are required to provide bid text (because of their specialist role, e.g. HR, Legal or Quality Management) but who do not feel part of the core bid team.

Take any of these extraordinary people away from the bid and they can revert to type.  They will frequently go back to giving an adequate performance in their day-job, but will not shine.  So what is it in this stressful bidding environment that motivates them to give exceptional levels of contribution?  What can we learn from this which might be harnessed to increase productivity across other environments?

I don’t have all the answers.  Nevertheless, I have uncovered some pointers which seem to underlie the boost in personal engagement levels a bid situation brings out.

How the Bid Management Process Boosts Engagement

Finite Problem

A bid has a very clear deliverable, both in content and in quality.  One without the other will cause the bid to be lost and the entire team effort wasted.  So, members of the bid team usually have a clear understanding of the top level objectives they must respond to from the outset.

This clarity of contribution required and the knowledge that the individual’s bid content really matters seems to generate a high level of individual engagement.  Perhaps, if we can provide such clear direction and precision in the value of their contribution to a bid, it ought to create the same motivation if used elsewhere?

Defined Timescales

A bid has a real (and usually short) deadline.  Miss the deadline and you have thrown away all the bid work that has been done.  Everyone understands that there is little chance of any extension of the time to respond and so makes personal plans accordingly.

Of course, we are all used to working to deadlines and we know that setting deadlines can improve productivity.  All too often, however, we also know if the timescales are not met, we will get away with it.  We can use an excuse that something else was more important and our experience tells us that it will be accepted by our peers and superiors.  In the bid room, knowing that missing the deadline will be a disaster for everyone, can provide the impetus we all need, particularly as the bid deadline approaches.

Nevertheless, I believe that deadlines should only be set if they are truly deadlines.  If we set deadlines arbitrarily or without giving the justification for them, the motivation deadlines can create is diminished.  So perhaps more contribution will be achieved by stating and explaining deadlines and then not allowing them to be missed?  Moreover, if we set artificial deadlines we will be found out.  Then, the value of us setting the next deadline will be greatly diminished.

Measurement

Only one bid from the various competing companies will result in a contract.  Every element of each bid will be contrasted against the other bids and the best overall submission will be selected by the evaluators.  This means that the bid team is not being measured internally within the business; it is being measured against the best “out there”.

For some people, being the best is important and winning the bid proves they are the best.  I believe that if, through the bid development we can give people the opportunity and the support to prove that they “are the best”, we will improve their motivation and commitment.  I think that for some people, this ability to prove themselves is what drives them to become involved in more bids so that they can repeat the demonstration.  If we can tap into this motivation, an enhanced contribution must surely follow?

Part of the Team

In the final hours before a bid is handed over to the courier or is uploaded on to some secure web site the pace can become frantic and everyone “mucks in” to do whatever is needed to get the submission completed.  When it is all over, there is a real sense of “team” and tired elation.  This bonding can continue as enhanced relationships long after the particular bid activity is finished.

Teams formed at short notice to tackle difficult problems can bring out the best in some (but not all) people.  I think if we want more from our employees we should identify the ones who are motivated by the challenge and weigh the advantages of task-orientated teams over function orientation more carefully.

Conclusion

Of course, many people cannot be placed in the environment a bid team creates and nor would they want to be.  However, I have seen exceptional performances from otherwise average individuals so many times when they have been in a bid team, there has got to be something special going on.

For a business getting the bulk of its work from the Public Sector, it has to have a successful bid team.  For the team to be successful, overall levels of contribution must be high.  This will be achieved if the best people in the business are on the team.  Then the amount of business won will improve and the recognition this brings the team will elevate the status of everyone in the team.

As this happens, two other things will occur:

• A culture of excellence and high contribution will emerge within the bid team
• Other people in the company will aspire to join the bid team

If you get it right, this will then become self-reinforcing and your win rate will soar.

However, there is one clear danger: if left unchecked some people will become so immersed in striving for more and better bid results that they can “burn out” and everyone loses.

If you can start to generate the culture of a successful bid organisation in your business on the back of your next big win, our recommendation is to invest in keeping and increasing the momentum you have generated.  The rewards can be spectacular.  However, you need to rein back a little from time to time to keep these special people at the top of their game.

Is this only applicable to bid teams?  No, I don’t think so.  I think it will work anywhere where there is a clear combination of an expert team and complex tasks.  However, nowhere else in a business is this so starkly presented as in the bid room.

Author: Andy Haigh PPM APMP Director and Public Sector Bid Consultant, Sixfold International Ltd

We believe that Public Sector bid success comes from both the bid team members and the environment they are in. If you would like to discuss improving your bidding team’s effectiveness, please contact us on 020 8158 3952 / enquiry@bidsolutions.co.uk

Looking for the right people to join your team? We can connect you with permanent staff, or freelance bid writers who can help you go the extra mile. Click here to find out more.

Unfair or improper procurement decision? Just because you don’t object in the standstill period, doesn’t mean you can’t later mount a legal challenge.

If you are thinking of challenging an unfair or improper procurement decision following submission of your tender, you will already know that it is going to be difficult. Not only will the procurement team close ranks but the timescales are short in which you can launch your challenge.

Challenging a Procurement Decision

Not so long ago, a procurement team from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority took a challenge against it to the Court of Appeal on the basis that as the challenge was not lodged within the standstill period, it should be invalidated. In other words, their claim was that if you don’t mount your legal challenge within ten days of the award notification, you should not be able to do anything more. Having weighed all the facts, the Court of Appeal took the view that whereas the contract award could not be automatically stopped after the standstill period had expired, that did not affect the claimant’s 30-day window to pursue compensation for damages.

Moreover, the procurement team suggested that any damages which could be awarded should be strictly limited by a set of stringent EU case law conditions.  Again, the Court disagreed and ruled that the award of damages should be based on UK law, discretionary and dependent on what position the challenger would have been in if the procurement had not gone wrong, e.g. loss of profit.

These decisions by the Court of Appeal will be welcomed by all bidders in public sector procurement competitions. They make it clear that a bidder who is unsuccessful because of an aberration of the process can decide not to invoke the automatic suspension provisions of the standstill arrangements. However, they can then pursue a damages claim later without running the risk that their arguments will be weakened because of this decision and that if successful, their damages will be proportionate with their losses.

If this decision in the Court of Appeal had gone the other way, this would have meant that in practice we only have a 10-day window in which to mount a formal challenge to an inappropriately awarded public sector contract. This is now clearly not the case. Of course, normally it would make sense that if you are going to challenge a procurement result, you do so as soon as there is sufficient information to give grounds to the challenge. However, there could be situations where as a result of this judgement it may be tactically better for you to wait until the standstill period is over, the contract awarded and then claim damages?  In any case, if you are badly treated by the procurement process and your complaint stands the test of a legal challenge, you can expect fair compensation.

Author: Andy Haigh PPM APMP Director and Public Sector Bid Consultant, Sixfold International Ltd

This is a complex and possibly high-risk area and one that our partners at Sixfold have experience of. If you are thinking of contesting an unfair or improper procurement decision get in touch with them 01227 860375.

For more expert advice, industry news and more, visit our Bid Hub.

John Fernau of Sixfold looks at the future of government procurement.

I was at an event recently when the Minister for the Cabinet Office, Matt Hancock, raised a really interesting prospect.  He said that one of the things his team, presumably the Crown Commercial Service, are working on is a Crown Marketplace.  In essence, this is the extension of the GCloud concept into non-ICT categories.  According to Civil Service World, these would be what CCS calls common goods and services, which can cover all generic requirements of departments.

As I am a huge fan of the GCloud concept, this is a really exciting development.  Most importantly for me, the GCloud has lowered the barriers to entry for public contracts, allowing new market entrants and SMEs to create a sales channel to the public sector, which would have been very difficult before.  I think the transparency of the GCloud has been a revelation and has the potential to drive the GCloud market to make itself more competitive as it iterates.

Advantages to the GCloud model of Government Procurement

Another reason to be excited about an extension of the GCloud concept is that it goes some way towards solving a systemic problem in public procurement.  This problem is that the prescriptive nature of the procurement process prevents the public sector buying innovative products and solutions because they weren’t aware of them when their need was defined.  Even thorough market testing doesn’t address this, as the generic form of the solution is already formed by that point.  The GCloud approach allows buyers, and most importantly end users, to see what is available in the market before any form of process begins, preventing barriers to new solutions being put in place.

It’s not all sweetness and light though.  I saw some resistance from procurement teams over the use of GCloud.  This was partly due to genuine concerns over how diligently vendors are tested in the GCloud procurement, and partly due to reluctance to cede their role in the process as buying activity moves to end users.  All of these elements will apply in the same, or potentially more, ways to a roll-out of the GCloud approach beyond ICT.  Therefore from a vendor’s perspective, we need to be realistic about how long it would take for this approach to be generally adopted.

A potential solution is for procurement teams to behave more like the very best consultants, who are always seeking to transfer their knowledge and to put themselves out of a job.  In this way, procurement teams would focus on helping and training their end-user colleagues to buy fairly and to get the best value, leaving the end-user teams to conduct their own procurement under the GCloud type approach.  This would bring the end-users closer to the market which is where they need to be if the public sector is to access the innovation and new solutions it desperately needs.

Before joining Sixfold, John was the Home Office Group Commercial Director and previously the Head of Procurement of the Olympic Delivery Authority.

For more expert advice, industry news and more, visit our bid hub.

We all know that a good, wide-ranging framework contract coupled with a supportive relationship with a willing Public Sector client can lead to contract opportunities that may be well beyond the scope of the original framework contract.  However, after a recent court decision, that freedom may well be about to be curtailed.

On 1 December 2015, a UK court used its statutory power to void a public contract that had not been concluded in accordance with the public procurement rules.  This is the first time that a UK court has taken such action and although the judgement will probably be appealed, it signals a shift in the way Public Sector framework bids may have to be handled in the future.

Background

In this case, Amey held a Crown Commercial Service framework contract through a limited company within its group.  In another part of the group, it part-owned a separate company in partnership with North Lanarkshire Council.  In response to a framework Invitation to Tender, this partnership bid for a street lighting contract by Inverclyde Council and was awarded the contract.  The other bidder challenged the decision on the basis that this company was not a party to the framework contract and therefore, that the contract had been directly awarded without proper competition.

Judgement

The judge agreed with the challenge.  He found that the defendant had broken the Framework Agreement conditions as technically, this was a new public contract which could only be awarded in accordance with a prior advertisement and competitive tender under the procurement rules.  As no such steps had been taken, he declared the contract ineffective.

What this means for framework bids

We cannot say why Amey took such a risk with its bid when there would seem to have been some ways in which this situation could have been avoided, e.g. running the contract through the company on the framework.  However, we think that because of this action, the scope of framework awards will come under increased scrutiny in the future.  As a result, framework suppliers will have to carefully consider their strategy for framework competitions whenever opportunities arise that are not clearly in the centre of the original framework scope.

Author: Andy Haigh PPM APMP Director and Public Sector Bid Consultant, Sixfold International Ltd

If you would like to discuss the strategy for your next framework bid submission, or if you think you have grounds to challenge a framework award please contact the team on 020 8158 3952 / enquiry@bidsolutions.co.uk

For more expert advice, industry news and more, visit our bid hub.

Our partners, twentysix2, are researching the industry’s attitude to Ghosting prior to the APMP UK London Event on 23rd May and they would like to ask you a question ahead of the event.

Take Part in the Ghosting Survey

Which of these four statements is most true for your organisation?

1. We do not understand Ghosting
2. We understand Ghosting but do not use it in our proposals
3. We understand Ghosting and use it in selected proposals
4. Ghosting is an organisational strength which we use in every proposal

Please reply to enquiry@bidsolutions.co.uk with the number of the statement that is most true for your organisation. Alternatively, please complete this anonymous and confidential online survey: http://survey.sogosurvey.com/k/SsVQVSVsQsPsPsP

The survey will close on Thursday 31st March and the results will be reported at the APMP Meeting on 23rd May.

To view our latest vacancies for bid and proposal professionals, follow this link. To help us connect you with a winner to add to your team, follow this link.

Tips from an ex-Home Office Commercial Director

John Fernau was previously Commercial Director at the Home Office and recently joined our partners at Sixfold International to help its clients win public sector contracts.

He draws on his experience to provide an insight into the way Whitehall engages with small business suppliers and shares advice on how to win work from both national and local government.

Here he shares his experience and this is what we learned:

What did you learn about small businesses and public procurement during your time at the Home Office?

I learned a lot about it! As well as being the Commercial Director I was also the Home Office’s SME champion so I was very heavily involved in setting out the direction for the department’s strategy for small business engagement. My strong view was that the only way to really increase SME spend was to make changes on the buy-side, rather than just having lots of SME market engagement which looks good but doesn’t deliver much. This meant that the Home Office’s SME strategy focussed on breaking down large ICT packages into smaller chunks which SMEs could contract for, mainly using the SME friendly GCloud framework where the Home Office is still the biggest user.

SME success is seen as excellent news by civil servants and ministers (including the prime minister) and they like to see new and innovative SME suppliers breaking through. Sometimes, unfortunately, the machinery of government can impede small businesses. My sense was that complex public tenders favour the big established firms as they already understand how government decisions are made and who makes them, and also they have dedicated bid teams who have developed strong techniques and know how to ‘play the game’.

I wanted to personally work to change this beyond what I could do as a civil servant, so I left the Home Office to set up Fernau Solutions and help to ‘level the playing field’ for SMEs and give them some of the understanding and bidding acumen that the established suppliers have.

What are the key things business owners need to bear in mind when pitching for public sector contracts?

There are a lot of things to consider: in strategic terms about which bodies within the public sector to aim for and in what order, through to tactical bid skills such as understanding what is important to the buyer (as shown in the evaluation weighting) and making sure your bid effort reflects this.

I think it is really important that businesses think hard about which areas of the public sector their offerings are most relevant and to target those public bodies. There is a balance here though, as although government is increasingly encouraged to buy ‘off the shelf’ solutions rather than bespoke ones, public sector bodies are parochial and smaller businesses must tailor their marketing and language to be specifically relevant to the those they are targeting.

Although small businesses want to grow and may want to present themselves as bigger and perhaps more credible operators, it is important that they play to their strengths. If you are a UK based SME, then say so very clearly. Small businesses are perceived as being flexible, disruptive and innovative; and these are rare and required qualities in government, especially given the unprecedented efficiency challenges which will emerge over the next five years. Although public buyers can’t formally favour small suppliers why not take advantage of this positive perception?

What are the common mistakes small business owners make when pitching for public sector contracts?

Firstly, I think small businesses often decide not to bid for opportunities as their turnover doesn’t meet the minimum required, meaning they are too small. However, especially in competitions for framework agreements, the turnover requirement is often excessive compared to the resulting contracts, meaning that smaller businesses could have delivered them. To meet the requirement on turnover, small businesses often forget that they can partner with, or sub-contract other small businesses and count all of their attributes, including turnover in their bid and the government likes to see this collaboration.

Successful bid technique is like good exam technique; you have to answer the question. Too often, bidders provide answers that are easy for them to put together, as perhaps they can recycle a response or policy, rather than submitting the right answer. Given their limited bid resources, it is vital that small businesses are disciplined and honest with themselves in making their bid / no bid decisions and preparing their bids. There is nothing to be gained in submitting a weak bid.

I think small businesses can also get a lot more out of debriefing sessions with government buyers. If a small business is unsuccessful in a tender I would recommend insisting on a debriefing meeting and clearly stating that this is about improving your next bid and certainly isn’t about disgruntlement or challenging the decision. This will help the buyer to open up and give a candid steer on how to bid better and small businesses will find this feedback ‘from the horse’s mouth’ invaluable.

How can business owners who win government contracts ensure that they deliver on them and maintain a good relationship with their client so that they get more work?

This is really important as having gone through all the hurdles of winning a contract, small businesses need to deliver really strongly to build their reputation in government and capitalise on the effort they have made. However, I have seen even major multinationals come unstuck once they get into a contract with the government for the first time!

I think the most important thing to understand is the need to build confidence with your new client by setting out very realistic plans on how and when you will deliver. It is more important to the government that you reliably keep your promises than to aim for very quick delivery and fail. This requires self-discipline, as naturally small businesses will be keen to please their demanding new client.

The media loves a bad news story about the government and this drives the government to be very risk averse with its programmes. Ministers and officials need to believe that you will deliver and this trust is built by steady and on-time delivery. Proposing to ‘throw everything at it’ and ‘it will be alright in the end’ simply aren’t acceptable. Especially in a new relationship, it is important to start building trust and credibility by delivering as promised from the outset.

If your business could benefit from the experience of John and the Sixfold team, please contact us on 020 8158 3952 or enquiry@bidsolutions.co.uk

For more expert advice, industry news and more, visit our Bid Hub.