The first blog on this topic laid out all the ways that color teams don’t work. It would be easy to conclude that proposal teams should simply skip this step in the interest of efficiency and improved morale. This would be a big mistake. This segment explains why these reviews are absolutely critical and the underlying concepts that can make them work. And Part 3 will offer some specific suggestions for organizing and conducting effective reviews.
The primary reason color reviews are essential is a fact known to all professional writers. People cannot read their own words with objectivity or clarity. They are simply too close and too involved. Very often, the people who are writing proposals are anything but professional writers. Writing is difficult for many people, and the more difficult it is, the more effort that goes into it, the harder it is to see it the way a disinterested person might read it. This causes some proposal writers to despair over (what they perceive to be) the terrible quality of their writing, and others to believe that their prose is letter-perfect as is, with no need of revision.
Either attitude is dangerous. The writer who is under-confident needs feedback in order to understand the strong points in the text, and in order to have the motivation to keep writing. The over-confident writer must have others point out what is missing. Knowing what kind of feedback to provide to which writer is one reason why good editors are like gold, and equally difficult to find.
A second reason why reviews are important is that the time when the proposal is locked down is a chance for writers to get some time away from the document. Everyone has had the experience of not being able to figure out an approach, or remember a concept, only to find that after a night’s sleep, the answer somehow appears out of nowhere. There are sound cognitive reasons for these sudden epiphanies, which almost always occur after the passage of time, and proposal managers should pay close attention to the science and understand that sometimes you must slow down to speed up. When writers return to the document after a short break, they are often more productive than they would have been if they had kept working without the break.
A third reason for proposal reviews is that it provides a chance to make sure that the proposal is complete and accurate, which no one writer can do, and no proposal manager can do if each writer is proceeding and revising at a different pace. Sometimes the issues uncovered during a review are easy to fix, such as the use of “program manager” in one section and “project manager” in another section. Other times, the review process can identify missing parts of the solution, missing past performance references, or other items that can cause the proposal to be rejected for non-compliance.
Yes, the process can be fraught with challenges. However, it remains essential. Next time, tips to minimize the drain and improve the outcome.