# Sales Proposal Assembly > Assembles a proposal or RFP response around explicit win themes tied to the buyer's stated evaluation criteria, with a compliance matrix, an evidence-sourced claim register, a named answer owner per requirement, and a go/no-go decision before writing starts. Use when responding to an RFP, RFI, ITT, or tender, or when writing a solution proposal after discovery; trigger on 'respond to this RFP', 'write the proposal', 'bid/no-bid', 'tender response', 'put together a quote and scope for X'. Not for preparing the discovery meeting that produces the inputs (use sales-discovery-preparation), not for evaluating an incoming vendor's bid — that is the buy side (use operations-vendor-evaluation) — and not for substantiating individual claims in isolation (use marketing-claim-substantiation). - Skill: `alihusains/sales-proposal-assembly` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add alihusains/sales-proposal-assembly` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/alihusains/sales-proposal-assembly/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Product & Planning - Author: alihusains (https://skillmd.com/u/alihusains) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/alihusains/sales-proposal-assembly --- # Proposal and RFP Response Assembly ## Purpose Proposals lose on avoidable mechanics: a requirement answered nowhere, a claim nobody can source, a win theme asserted in the executive summary and abandoned in the body, and a submission deadline missed by an hour. This skill imposes the compliance matrix, the win-theme structure, and the ownership and gate schedule that prevent those losses. It also insists on a bid/no-bid decision, because the cheapest way to win more is to enter fewer unwinnable bids. ## Prerequisites - **Inputs:** the full request document including every appendix, the evaluation criteria and their weightings if published, the submission format rules, the deadline with its timezone, and the question-clarification deadline. - **From discovery:** the confirmed problem, sized impact, decision process, and known objections — normally supplied by `sales-discovery-preparation`. - **Access:** your approved content library or previous responses; pricing authority and current rate card; legal owner for terms; the named subject experts for technical and security sections. - **Runtime:** none required, though a spreadsheet is the practical home for the compliance matrix. If the evaluation criteria or the deadline rules are not available, ask through the formal clarification channel before writing. Guessing the format is how compliant answers get scored zero. ## Data classification **Confidential.** Request documents are usually issued under confidentiality terms — check and honour them, including any restriction on using the buyer's name. Pricing and margin detail is Confidential and restricted to the bid team. Never include another customer's data, named reference, or identifiable case detail without that customer's written permission. If the buyer supplies personal data or account records within the request, handle them under your data protection obligations and do not copy them into the response. ## Procedure 1. **Run the bid/no-bid gate first.** Score honestly; a maybe is a no. | Test | Bid | No-bid | | --- | --- | --- | | Do we know the buyer before the request landed? | Yes, engaged | First contact is the document itself | | Can we meet the mandatory requirements? | All of them | Any mandatory unmet | | Do we know who wrote the requirements? | Yes, and we influenced them | Written to another vendor's capability | | Is the commercial shape viable? | Within our pricing model | Requires below-cost or unbounded liability | | Do we have the capacity to deliver if we win? | Confirmed with delivery | Unconfirmed | | Is there time to produce a quality response? | Yes | Deadline forces a template dump | Record the decision and who made it. A no-bid with a short, courteous explanation preserves the relationship for the next cycle. 2. **Build the compliance matrix before writing a sentence.** One row per requirement, taken verbatim from the document — including appendices, which is where requirements hide. Columns: requirement ID, verbatim text, mandatory or desirable, evaluation weighting, response location, answer owner, evidence needed, status. This matrix, not the document, is the plan of record. 3. **Assign an owner and a date per row.** A section with no named owner is unwritten. Set internal deadlines that land before the review gates in step 8, not before the submission deadline. 4. **Derive win themes from the buyer's criteria, not from your product.** A win theme is: the buyer's stated priority, plus your specific differentiated capability, plus the evidence, plus the benefit in the buyer's terms. Three to four maximum. A theme that any competitor could also assert is not a theme. Test each against what you know from discovery — a theme contradicted by what the buyer told you is worse than none. 5. **Thread the themes through the response.** Each theme appears in the executive summary, is carried in the relevant section answers, and is supported by at least one piece of named evidence. Themes stated once at the front and dropped are read as marketing. 6. **Answer requirements in the buyer's structure and language.** Use their requirement IDs and their headings. Answer the question asked before adding context. Where a requirement is partially met, say what is met, what is not, and what the plan is — an evaluator who finds one overstatement discounts the whole response. 7. **Run the claim and evidence pass.** Every performance figure, comparative statement, certification, uptime or security assertion, and reference customer needs a named, dated source. Anything unsourced is flagged and removed rather than softened. Route the register through `marketing-claim-substantiation`. Verify certifications are current and quote their identifiers accurately; an expired certificate named in a bid is a disqualification risk. 8. **Hold the review gates, in this order, with time between them.** | Gate | Reviewer | Blocks on | | --- | --- | --- | | Compliance review | Bid owner | Any matrix row not answered, any format rule broken | | Solution review | Delivery or technical lead | Anything proposed that delivery has not agreed to build or support | | Commercial review | Pricing authority | Price outside authority, unmodelled assumptions | | Legal review | Legal owner | Liability, IP, data protection, and termination terms | | Evidence review | Claim reviewer | Any UNSOURCED claim, expired certification, unpermitted reference | | Executive read | Someone who has not seen the draft | Answers only comprehensible to the author | 9. **Price with the assumptions written down.** State what the price includes, what it excludes, what it assumes about volume, environment, and buyer-side effort, and how long it is valid. Unstated assumptions become disputes at delivery. 10. **Submit early, through the specified channel, and confirm receipt.** Portal uploads fail, file sizes are capped, and formats are rejected. Target completion at least one working day before the deadline and keep a copy of the submission confirmation. 11. **Debrief either way.** Request the buyer's feedback and record which themes scored, which requirements were weak, and which reusable content should be corrected in the library. Uncorrected library content propagates the same weak answer into every future bid. ## Failure modes - **Library dumping.** Pasting prior answers without re-reading the question produces responses that answer a different buyer's requirement, often with the wrong company name still in them. - **Requirements missed in appendices.** Step 2 is only complete when every appendix and schedule has been walked. - **Delivery not consulted.** Committing capability the delivery team has not agreed to is a win that becomes an escalation. - **Themes without evidence.** An unsupported differentiator scores no higher than a competitor's identical unsupported one. - **Late legal review.** Terms raised after submission cannot be renegotiated from a position of strength. - **Deadline arithmetic.** Timezone errors and portal cutoffs disqualify complete, winning responses. ## Boundaries - Preparing the discovery conversation that produces the inputs — use `sales-discovery-preparation`. - Evaluating and scoring incoming supplier bids as the buyer — use `operations-vendor-evaluation`. - Substantiating a specific claim or reviewing marketing copy — use `marketing-claim-substantiation`. - Contract negotiation and redlining after selection — route to your legal owner. ## Hand-offs - **Receives from:** `sales-discovery-preparation` (confirmed problem, impact, decision process, objections). - **Routes to:** `marketing-claim-substantiation` for the claim register, `operations-sop-authoring` when the debrief in step 11 identifies a process fix, and the delivery owner with the accepted scope and assumptions on a win.