You must assume that the people evaluating your proposal are intelligent, focused individuals. Why? Because they usually are. They may not read the entire proposal but you have to assume they will read enough to make a judgment consistent with their political agenda and the contract's objectives. Yes, their agendas play an important role in the final decision but, in the final analysis, the decision is usually related to their aversion to risk and perception of your company's capability to perform.

In our view, many companies (usually large ones) provide proposal evaluators with content which (i) wasn't requested, and/or (ii) may actually reflect negatively on your company. Examples of worthless content include:

1. Beautifully rendered PDFs with multi-colored, complex graphics, company logos, confidentiality statements crafted by corporate lawyers, and slogans like "We strive for excellence."
2. Content that pushes the page limits, i.e., too much information
3. Complex, state-of-the-art solutions
4. Overblown puffery attempting to show technical superiority
5. Features, features, and more features with little emphasis on benefits
6. Flowery, long executive summaries that don't succinctly explain the benefits to working with your firm and the way in which your firm will reduce the procurement officer's risk
7. A regurgitation of the scope of work

In most cases, evaluators want the facts and proof that your firm provides the best value and an executive summary that allows them to skip most of the rest of the proposal and just read just a few key sections. In fact, evaluators find it very helpful if your executive summary subtly recommends the critical content or sections they should read. Isn't this what you would want if you were forced to read 20 tomes on a dry, technical subject?