Proposal Evaluation

Procurement technique · See it on the map

Runnable here

Scoring the proposals actually received against a set of criteria to compare them fairly.

When to use it

Whenever more than one vendor has submitted a real proposal and you need a defensible way to compare them — especially when a quality-and-cost-based selection method was chosen and more than price is on the table.

When to avoid it

Don't build formal weighted scoring for a purchase where lowest cost was already the chosen method, or where only one vendor responded — there is nothing to compare. And never let the criteria or their weights get set after proposals are already in hand: weights chosen after seeing the submissions aren't evaluation, they're justification for an answer already picked.

Steps

1. Set the evaluation criteria and their weights before opening a single proposal — write them down and date them.
2. Score each proposal against the same criteria, by the same people, using the same scale.
3. Total the scores and rank the proposals; note any large disagreement between evaluators as a signal to discuss, not to average away silently.
4. Document the result, including proposals that scored poorly and why — a rejected vendor's file is as important as the winner's.

What it produces

• A scored, ranked comparison of the proposals received against fixed criteria

Common pitfalls

• Setting or adjusting the weighting after the proposals are read, so the scoring quietly reverse-engineers a decision that was really made on gut feel.
• Scoring criteria that sound objective but are really proxies for 'the vendor we already like' — years in business, or a familiar company name.
• Letting one evaluator's score dominate without anyone else's input being recorded or reconciled.

Worked example

A small manufacturer requests proposals from three packaging vendors and sets weighted criteria in advance — 40% price, 40% sample quality, 20% lead time. After opening the proposals, the evaluator notices the incumbent vendor scores lowest on price but is the personal favourite of the buying committee, and floats reweighting toward relationship history. The evaluation lead rejects the change: the criteria were fixed before proposals were opened, and changing them now would be scoring backward from a preference, not forward from evidence.

Source

• PMBOK-6 §12.2.2

Where it comes from: this technique is named by the PMBOK Guide, 6th edition.