The Worst Practices in Proposal Development

Written by Rafif Jouejati.

Originally published May 12, 2026.

Images have been generated using AI, unless otherwise stated.‍

P3 is delighted to provide a clear, candid summary of the worst proposal-development practices we’ve seen. These practices frequently result in losing bids, burned-out teams, and damage to our clients’ credibility with contracting officers. 

The Worst Practices in Proposal Development

(and why they help you lose work)

1. Treating the RFP as a Suggestion Instead of Instructions 

The thoughtless practice
Skimming the RFP, assuming “we know what they want,” and writing what you want to say instead of what the evaluator is required to score. 

Why it’s risky

  • Evaluators are required to score only what is explicitly written

  • Missing a required element = automatic point loss (or disqualification, even if not explicitly stated) 

  • Even strong firms lose to weaker ones that simply follow instructions 

infograph: Follow RPF instructions for proposal success

Follow RPF instructions for proposal success

Example

  • RFP asks for three risks with mitigation strategies 

  • The proposal gives a polished narrative on “key considerations” with no risks identified 

  • Evaluator cannot award points → zero score for the section  

2. Writing for Yourself, Not for Evaluators 

The thoughtless practice
Writing like it’s a thought-leadership white paper, internal strategy memo, or marketing brochure. 

Why it’s risky

  • Evaluators skim under time pressure, looking for key words and concepts 

  • If they can’t find the answer in seconds, they assume it isn’t there 

  • Dense prose hides compliance and strengths 

Example

  • Requirement: “Describe your stakeholder engagement approach.” 

  • Answer: 2 pages of philosophy about collaboration 

  • No bullets, no steps, no numbers, no methods, no proof points 

  • Evaluator writes: “Unclear how engagement will be conducted.”

3. Using Generic Boilerplate Everywhere 

The thoughtless practice
Dropping in reused text that “usually works” without tailoring it to the client, geography, or problem. 

Why it’s risky

  • Evaluators recognize boilerplate instantly 

  • Signals low effort and weak understanding 

  • Makes your proposal interchangeable with those of your competitors and offers no clear value-add 

Example

  • Proposal references “state agencies” and “county partners” 

  • Client reference is a foundation working internationally 

  • The evaluator wonders if this was recycled from another bid and deducts points for not providing a reference of similar size, scope, and complexity 

4. Saying You’ll Do Everything (instead of making thoughtful choices

The thoughtless practice
Listing every possible activity, method, framework, and tool to appear that we are providing a comprehensive approach. 

Why it’s risky

  • Signals a lack of judgment 

  • Makes delivery feel unfocused and unrealistic 

  • Raises doubts about cost, timeline, and performance 

Example

  • Workforce strategy includes: 

  • Upskilling 

  • Reskilling 

  • Credentialing 

  • Apprenticeships 

  • Policy reform 

  • Employer incentives 

  • New institutions 

  • The evaluator cannot score for prioritization, sequencing, trade-offs 

5. Confusing Credentials with Value 

The thoughtless practice
Leading with awards, logos, and firm history rather than being relevant to this problem. 

Why it’s risky

  • Past success ≠ future fit 

  • Evaluators care more about applicability than prestige 

  • Overemphasis on credentials can feel arrogant or detached 

infograph: From thoughtless to relevant

From thoughtless to relevant

Example

  • First 10 pages describe the firm’s global footprint for a local-government engagement 

  • Only 1 page addresses the client’s actual challenge 

  • Evaluator notes: “Strong firm, weak understanding of our needs.”

6. Letting Subject‑Matter Experts Write Unedited Sections 

The thoughtless practice
Allowing SMEs to submit raw content directly into the proposal. 

Why it’s risky

  • Inconsistent tone and structure 

  • Overly technical or academic language 

  • Sections answer the wrong question

Example

  • Economist writes 3 pages of methodology 

  • RFP asked for “key findings and implications for action” 

  • Technically impressive, but unscorable 

7. Hiding Implementation Details Because “That’s Obvious” 

The thoughtless practice
Assuming evaluators will take the time to infer how things will actually be done. 

Why it’s risky

  • Evaluators cannot assume anything not written 

  • Implementation credibility is often a top-scoring criterion 

  • Vague delivery language raises execution risk 

Example

  • Proposal says: “We will manage the project using best practices.” 

  • No governance, no cadence, no roles, no escalation, no tools or identified practices 

  • Evaluator writes: “Unclear how work will be managed.”

8. Treating Risk Sections as an Afterthought 

The thoughtless practice
Listing obvious, generic risks to “check the box.” 

Why it’s risky

  • Signals lack of real experience 

  • Makes the team look naïve or performative 

  • Missed opportunity to show judgment 

Example

  • Risks listed: 

  • “Stakeholder availability” 

  • “Timeline constraints” 

  • “Data limitations” 

  • No specificity, no mitigation, no ownership, evaluators cannot determine if you understand the scope of their challenges  

9. Over‑Promising and Under‑Explaining 

The thoughtless practice
Making bold claims without showing how they’ll be achieved. 

Why it’s risky

  • Evaluators discount unsupported promises 

  • Raises credibility and delivery concerns 

  • Can trigger tougher scrutiny of budget and staffing 

Example

  • “We will deliver measurable impact in year one” 

  • No metrics, no baseline, no mechanism 

  • Sounds like marketing, not planning 

10. Last-Minute Assembly (“Proposal Mad Libs”)

The thoughtless practice
Assembling sections at the last minute with minimal integration. 

Why it’s risky

  • Inconsistencies across sections 

  • Conflicting timelines, roles, or assumptions 

  • Obvious lack of cohesion 

infograph: Unveiling the risks of last-minute assembly

Unveiling the risks of last-minute assembly

Example

  • Technical approach says 6 months 

  • Staffing plan assumes 12 

  • Budget covers 9 

  • Evaluator loses confidence fast  

11. Ignoring Evaluator Psychology 

The thoughtless practice
Assuming that evaluators read carefully and generously. 

Why it’s risky

  • Many evaluators are tired, rushed, and risk-averse 

  • They look for reasons to downgrade, not upgrade – after all, who wants to read 50 proposals? 

  • Compliance, clarity, and conciseness beat cleverness every time 

Example

  • Clever narrative buried under jargon 

  • Competitor uses simple headings that mirror the RFP 

  • Competitor wins 

12. Failing to Assign a Single Accountable Proposal Lead (where is the “single throat to choke?”)

The thoughtless practice
“Everyone owns the proposal.” 

Why it’s risky

  • No one owns compliance or coherence 

  • No one enforces decisions 

  • Endless late edits and scope creep, leading to BD budget explosions and staff burnout 

Example

  • Partner A changes approach 

  • Partner B changes staffing 

  • No one reconciles them 

  • Final proposal contradicts itself 

  • It’s clear that at least four people wrote this proposal 

The Meta-Failure Behind All of These 

Almost every bad proposal practice comes down to one thing: 

Optimizing for internal comfort instead of external evaluation.

Winning proposals are not the smartest documents. 

They are the clearest, most disciplined, and most evaluator-friendly ones. 

We know that every proposal effort is unique — that’s why P3 is a flexible and agile partner that supports you at every point in the proposal process. Contact us today!

Further Reading:

Uncovering the client’s real problem before writing the proposal.

Value propositions that stand out.

What’s coordination got to do with it?

Next
Next

The Power of Storytelling in Proposals