Solution 03 · Red team review for EPC proposals
See your offer
the way they will.
A red team review of your proposal: your offer read, scored and questioned the way the client’s evaluation committee and its lenders will, before submission, while it can still change.
Evaluator perspective · mutual NDA
Scroll ↓
The same offer, twice
Before the red team.
After it.
Switch between the two to see what an adversarial read changes before filing. The same review applies to any EPC tender or bid (technical, commercial or both), weeks before submission.
Compliance with the tender
line-by-line check
87% · 14 gaps
Technical score
against stated criteria
61 / 100 · weak
Risk as the panel reads it
declared vs perceived
High · understated
Evaluator verdict
Likely ranked 3rd of 4
Revise before filing
Compliance with the tender
line-by-line check
100% · gaps closed
Technical score
against stated criteria
82 / 100 · strong
Risk as the panel reads it
declared vs perceived
Managed · addressed
Evaluator verdict
Competitive for award
Ready to file
Illustrative example. No client data.
What happens
An outside, adversarial read.
We take the evaluator’s chair: compliance, scoring, risk perception and the strength of the story.
01
Compliance & scope gaps
Checked line by line against the tender requirements and the compliance matrix.
02
Scoring logic
The structure of the offer tested against the stated criteria and their weights.
03
Risk perception
Where declared risk may read as understated, unanswered or pushed back to the client.
04
Story & differentiation
Whether the win themes really come through, in the document and in the room.
Scored the way the panel scores
Five areas where offers lose points.
The same grid an evaluation committee uses, applied to your offer before it leaves the building.
Area
What the panel looks for
Typical weakness
Red-team output
Compliance
The panel looks for
Every requirement answered, where the panel expects it.
Typical weakness
Deviations buried in appendices; unanswered clarifications.
Red-team output
Gap list with page references
Technical approach
The panel looks for
A credible, specific solution that matches the scoring grid.
Typical weakness
Generic method; claims without evidence.
Red-team output
Scoring gaps by criterion
Execution & risk
The panel looks for
Risks owned, priced and mitigated, not pushed back.
Typical weakness
Understated interfaces; qualifications that read as exclusions.
Red-team output
Risk-perception findings
Commercial & price
The panel looks for
A price consistent with scope and risk transfer.
Typical weakness
Unexplained variances; caveats that break conformity.
Red-team output
Commercial red flags
Presentation & oral
The panel looks for
Senior people who own the offer and answer directly.
Typical weakness
Rehearsed slides, weak answers on hard questions.
Red-team output
Oral-defence coaching points
How it runs
A structured challenge, weeks before filing.
Prepare
Document review
Offer, compliance matrix and evaluation criteria, redacted where needed.
Challenge
Red-team session
Live, evaluator-style questioning on the points that carry the most weight.
Debrief
Ranked findings
Weaknesses and suggested revisions, section by section.
Revise
Final pass
A last review of the corrected sections before submission.
Better to hear it from us than from the committee.
Book the red team early: the most useful findings need a few weeks before filing to be fixed.