Understanding scoring levels is one of the most overlooked aspects of bid writing.
Many organisations consistently achieve “Good” scores.
Fewer understand how to move into “Excellent.”
The difference is not always obvious—but it is consistent.
What “Good” looks like
A “Good” response typically:
Answers the question
Provides some relevant detail
Includes limited evidence
It demonstrates capability.
But it often leaves questions unanswered.
For example:
We will deliver the service in line with the requirements and ensure quality standards are met.
This is acceptable.
But it is not compelling.
What “Excellent” looks like
An “Excellent” response goes further.
It:
Fully addresses all elements of the question
Provides strong, relevant evidence
Demonstrates clear understanding of the client
Introduces added value
For example:
We will deliver the service through [method], supported by [resource], achieving [measurable outcome]. This approach has delivered [result] on comparable contracts, and will further improve [client-specific objective].
This response:
Is specific
Is evidence-led
Is aligned to the client
It reduces doubt.
The role of evidence
Evidence is often the deciding factor.
Two organisations may describe similar approaches.
The one that proves it:
Scores higher
Builds confidence
Reduces perceived risk
Strong evidence includes:
Quantified outcomes
Relevant case studies
Demonstrated results
Without this, responses rely on assertion.
Understanding client priorities
“Excellent” responses are not just well written.
They are aligned.
This means:
Reflecting the client’s objectives
Addressing their risks
Demonstrating understanding
For example:
If a client prioritises sustainability,
a response that integrates measurable environmental outcomes will score higher than one that treats it as a secondary point.
Added value
This is where many responses plateau.
They meet requirements—but do not go beyond them.
Added value should:
Be relevant
Be deliverable
Be beneficial to the client
For example:
Introducing improved reporting, faster response times, or efficiency savings.
Not generic statements, but tangible enhancements.
Clarity and structure
Even strong content can lose marks if it is poorly presented.
“Excellent” responses are:
Easy to read
Clearly structured
Logically organised
Evaluators should be able to:
Identify key points quickly
Follow the response easily
Score confidently
The step from “Good” to “Excellent” is not about writing more.
It is about writing better.
More relevant.
More specific.
More evidence-led.
We’ll benchmark your responses against scoring criteria—get in touch.
