A go/no-go score is set once, by the people who want the deal. This framework replaces it with a short list of conditions a pursuit must meet at each gate to continue. The conditions come from confidential interviews with the people who worked on your recent pursuits, are tested against how those pursuits ended, and are checked every week on the ones you're chasing now. Each condition comes with the actions that meet it, which come from the same interviews.
Each part has a precedent. We know of no firm or tool that takes each team member's account in confidence and turns it into the conditions a pursuit must meet at each gate.
The pursuit lead, who wants the deal
Each person who worked on it, separately and in confidence
The assessment stops depending on one person's optimism.
Opinions on a 1 to 5 scale, added up to a total
Facts with proof, and no total
A high relationship score can no longer hide a meeting that never happened.
Once, in week 1
At every gate, with a weekly check in between
The decision changes when the pursuit does, not after it is lost.
A standard template, the same for every firm
Your own wins and losses, explained by the people who worked on them
Your list is built from what actually happened in your past pursuits.
A score and a bid decision
Conditions, each with the actions that have met it, an owner and a due week
The team knows what to do this week, not only whether to continue.
In the example back-test, the firm would have stopped 4 of its 5 lost pursuits under the new conditions, at a median of week 2, and saved 1,120 senior hours. It would have stopped only 1 of its 5 wins by mistake. The same conditions are what had to be true in the wins, so they are also what the team works toward on the next pursuit. See the back-test.
What's new is an independent, confidential reading from each team member, turned into milestone-based exit criteria and the actions that meet them.
Each person is interviewed before their manager, so nobody wonders what their manager already said. By the fourth interview, the team has seen that nothing bad happened to the first three. The executive who approved the pursuit goes last.
Saw the whole timeline. Rarely asked.
Knows whether the firm could staff and deliver it.
Knows what the price really was, and why.
If different from the pursuit lead.
Owns the go/no-go score.
Interviewed last, and asked about patterns across pursuits rather than individual decisions.
Each interview is 30 minutes, one person at a time, with no preparation. The sponsor's assistant books the slots on day 1; people accept a hold they didn't have to create.
I don't work for your company and I report to no one in it. This recording goes to one machine we control. Your leadership will see findings with no names and no quotes, and only after you've reviewed your own points. You can skip any question. The law sets a few exceptions, which you've read. Nothing today is about you. It's about the pursuit.
Week by week: when it arrived, when the go/no-go happened, what happened after. Facts and dates. Nobody is threatened by a timeline.
For each condition that matters at the gates: had anyone met the decision-maker, what was known about the incumbent, was the budget confirmed, was the delivery lead available, and what the client would actually decide on. "When was that meeting" is easier to answer than "how was the relationship."
This is where people describe how the pursuit changed while the score stayed the same.
Only after the first three. "In most pursuits I look at, someone knew the deciding risk early. Was that true here?"
People turn what went wrong into a condition for next time. Then: "What did you do, or what could the team have done, to make that true? Who would do it, and by which week?"
The most useful answer often comes here.
During the call: never repeat what anyone else said, never side with the sponsor, ask for dates and documents rather than feelings, let silences run. Each person reviews their own points within 48 hours, so they see how their points will be used before anything is shared.
The same gate as most templates define it, and as the framework defines it after one debrief.
The person who knew about a risk usually also knows what would have dealt with it, and who could have done it. Asking in the same confidential interview adds about five minutes. An action goes on the list when at least two interviewees name it, when it met the condition in one of the firm's own wins, or when a pursuit leader interviewed on the record has used it. Actions that were tried and did not work are dropped at the next debrief.
Nobody from the firm had met the CIO, though the go/no-go form rated the relationship 4 of 5. Raised in 4 of 5 interviews.
Gate 1. Someone from the firm has met the decision-maker before the RFP is issued. If not: no bid.
Ask the client's COO, who had worked with the CIO, for a 20-minute introduction in week 1.Owner: account executive
The incumbent renewed its support contract in week 4, and the team knew. Raised in 3 of 5.
Gate 2. The incumbent's contract end date and known problems are confirmed by week 3. If not: on hold.
Ask the client's procurement office for the end date, and ask two of the client's users about the incumbent's service.Owner: capture manager
The named delivery lead was booked through February. Raised in 3 of 5.
Gate 3. The named delivery lead confirms availability in writing. If not: no bid.
Get the start date and share of time confirmed by the delivery lead's manager, and attach it to the go/no-go record.Owner: solution lead
The weekly check is operational and shared with the sponsor. Only the debrief is confidential, and the pursuit lead knows the difference.
Illustrative figures. Five to ten pursuits show direction, not proof, and the test is rerun as pursuits close.
One recent pursuit, 2 weeks, 3 to 6 people. We show you the delta from your current go/no-go conditions and its impact.
Within 10 days of the decision, won or lost, with the same roles.
Each leader is interviewed once about 5 to 8 pursuits: what repeats, and which overrides turned out to be right. Smaller pursuits are covered this way instead of with individual debriefs.
When two quarterly reviews in a row add no new conditions, the work drops to a light quarterly check, or stops.
A condition says what must be true. The actions say how to make it true. Most come from the same confidential interviews, where each person says what the team did, or could have done. The rest come from your own past wins and from pursuit leaders we interview on the record, credited by name. The list grows with every debrief and every conversation. Three examples from other firms:
The confidentiality rules are on one page, written for the people being interviewed. Read the protocol.
Two weeks. Your current go/no-go conditions next to the ones built from your team's interviews, which past pursuits you would have stopped under each, the senior hours you would have saved, and the actions your team named for each condition.