AI Can Write Your Bid. That’s Not the Same as Knowing How to Win One.
There is no particularly good reason to be snooty about using AI to support bid writing. I use it. Other professional writers use it. Increasingly, organisations bidding for contracts and funding are using it too. And why wouldn’t they?
Used well, AI can analyse lengthy documents in minutes, interrogate requirements, organise information, compare drafts, identify gaps, challenge an argument and turn a rambling 800 words into a considerably tighter 500. Those are REALLY useful capabilities.
But there is a much bigger question emerging as AI becomes commonplace in bidding:
If everybody has access to increasingly sophisticated writing technology, where does competitive advantage come from?
Because it isn’t going to come from having ChatGPT..
The writing was never the whole job
For years, bid writing has been treated as though the difficult bit happens when somebody opens a blank document and starts typing. It doesn’t. Much of what determines whether a bid is genuinely competitive happens before the first sentence is written.
Should we pursue this opportunity?
What does the funder or commissioner actually need?
Where are we genuinely strong?
Where are we vulnerable?
What makes our approach different?
What evidence proves it?
What will our competitors probably say?
What matters enough to lead with?
And, perhaps most importantly:
Why should somebody choose us?
A skilled bid writer spends a huge amount of time extracting those answers from an organisation. We talk to operational teams and interrogate performance data. We find the case study everyone had forgotten about. We challenge sweeping claims and notice things such as an organisation describing itself as innovative without providing a single example of innovation. We join dots and AI can help enormously with that process but it needs dots to join.
AI is making competent writing cheaper
AI has dramatically lowered the barrier to producing reasonably competent business writing. An organisation that previously struggled to turn its ideas into a coherent response can now produce something structured, grammatically sound and professional-looking remarkably quickly - which is a good thing. However, when everybody can produce competent prose, competent prose stops being much of a differentiator.. but....
a beautifully written answer can still be strategically weak.
a polished response can still contain no meaningful evidence.
a persuasive-sounding paragraph can still avoid answering the question.
a technically perfect bid can still give an evaluator absolutely no compelling reason to choose you over somebody else.
So the value starts moving towards judgement and knowing which opportunities deserve your limited time and resources. It moves towards strategy and understanding what will make your proposition compelling to a particular commissioner, buyer or funder. It moves towards evidence and knowing which claims matter and being able to prove them. It moves towards organisational knowledge and understanding what your people, services, partnerships and experience genuinely bring that somebody else cannot easily replicate.
Most importantly it moves towards something much harder to automate: knowing what good looks like!!!
Your organisation knows things AI doesn’t
Some of the strongest material I have ever used in bids wasn't sitting neatly in a bid library, it was sitting in people's heads. The operational manager who changed a process and quietly transformed performance. The frontline colleague who understands exactly why one group of people isn't engaging. The finance lead who knows why a delivery model works commercially. The partnership somebody developed three years ago that suddenly becomes highly relevant to a new opportunity. The person who remembers why something failed last time and what the organisation changed as a result. That knowledge is incredibly valuable but organisations are often surprisingly poor at capturing it.
So we have a very interesting problem..
You can give an AI system access to every policy, strategy and previous bid you've written but it still can't use organisational knowledge that nobody has bothered to capture nor can it automatically determine which piece of knowledge is strategically important. THAT requires people who know what they are looking for.
Which means training has to change
There is a temptation at the moment to think that AI reduces the need for bid training but I think the opposite is true. AI doesn't remove the need to develop people's bid capability. it simply changes what we need to develop.
Of course people need to understand how to use AI effectively. They need to know how to brief it properly, provide appropriate context, protect sensitive information and interrogate its output. However, teaching somebody how to write a clever prompt is not the same as teaching them how to bid. The more AI does the mechanical work, the more valuable the human skills around it become. Can someone:
read an opportunity and identify what really matters?
distinguish between a requirement and a potential win theme?
challenge an assumption?
recognise where evidence is weak?
interview an operational colleague and extract the detail that makes an answer credible?
look at a perfectly respectable AI-generated response and recognise that it is strategically ordinary?
decide when AI has improved something and when it has polished all the personality out of it?
make the final judgement that matters: Is this actually good enough to win?
Those are learned skills.
The future isn't human versus AI
I don't think organisations should be deciding whether humans or AI should write their bids.
The more useful question is: What should technology do, what should people do and how do we make the combination better than either would be alone?
For me, I let AI process volume, analyse documents, compare information, test structure, interrogate drafts and remove unnecessary effort. Then invest human time where it creates the greatest value:
Understanding.
Judgement.
Challenge.
Evidence.
Strategy.
Relationships.
Experience.
Curiosity.
Ultimately - decision-making.
This doesn't make the human contribution smaller it makes it more concentrated.
There is a wider organisational opportunity here
Used properly, AI could do much more than help organisations write individual bids faster.
It could expose weaknesses in the way they prepare to bid in the first place. For example;
Perhaps the evidence isn't readily available or knowledge sits with individuals rather than the organisation, maybe teams only start thinking about differentiation when the tender lands and bid/no-bid decisions are driven by enthusiasm rather than strategy, it could be that operational expertise isn't making its way into written responses or people can describe what they do brilliantly but struggle to explain why it matters. Those aren't AI problems though, they're capability problems and fixing them will improve bidding regardless of which technology an organisation uses.
That is why I think the conversation needs to move beyond “How can we use AI to write bids?” A much better question is: “How do we build people and organisations that know how to win, then use AI to make them even better at it?” .. see where I'm going with this?.. THIS is where the next generation of bid training needs to go... It's not about replacing expertise with technology or pretending AI isn't changing the profession and it's definitely not handing somebody a library of prompts and declaring them AI-enabled. Instead, we need to develop people who understand the fundamentals well enough to use the technology intelligently and know when to accept an answer, when to challenge it, when to dig deeper and when to ignore it completely because they know something the machine doesn't.
Because AI can write - REALLY well...
The competitive advantage will belong to the organisations whose people know what is worth saying.
At The Bid Edit, this has shaped how we think about bid support and training: building the judgement, evidence and capability behind the words as well as helping organisations produce the words themselves. Because the objective is never simply to write more bids.
It's to win the right ones.
Using AI is easy. Building the judgement to use it well is the harder bit. If you want to strengthen that capability across your team, get in touch.
Comments