Skip to main content
Skip to main content

Go/No-Go Decision Process (Expanded)

Document Type: Procedure
Version: 1.0
Last Updated: February 2026
Distribute To: Executives, Estimators, Business Development


Purposeโ€‹

Establish a comprehensive process for evaluating bid opportunities to focus resources on winnable, profitable work.


Why Go/No-Go Mattersโ€‹

The Math:โ€‹

  • Average estimating cost: 0.5-1% of bid
  • Win rate: 20-35%
  • Bad bid decisions waste resources and damage profitability

Benefits of Discipline:โ€‹

  • Higher win rates
  • Better margins
  • Less wasted effort
  • Improved focus
  • Stronger portfolio

Go/No-Go Processโ€‹

Stage 1: Initial Screen (Day 0-1)โ€‹

Quick Assessment: Does this fit our basic criteria?

CriterionCheck
Project type we performโ˜
Geographic area we serveโ˜
Size we can handleโ˜
Timeline achievableโ˜
Client we wantโ˜

If NO to any: Decline immediately

Stage 2: Detailed Analysis (Day 2-3)โ€‹

Complete Full Go/No-Go Assessment

Stage 3: Pursuit Decision (Day 3-5)โ€‹

Review with leadership and decide:

  • Go (pursue)
  • No-Go (decline)
  • Monitor (watch for changes)

Detailed Assessmentโ€‹

Part 1: Strategic Fitโ€‹

================================================================
STRATEGIC FIT ASSESSMENT
================================================================

Project: ___________________________________________________

================================================================

CLIENT FIT (Weight: 25%)

Client name: _______________________________________________

โ˜ Existing client (Score: 10)
โ˜ Target client (Score: 8)
โ˜ Known, good reputation (Score: 6)
โ˜ Unknown (Score: 3)
โ˜ Known issues (Score: 0)

Score: ___/10

Previous relationship:
โ˜ Repeat work (Score: 10)
โ˜ Previous bid, didn't win (Score: 5)
โ˜ No relationship (Score: 3)

Score: ___/10

================================================================

PROJECT TYPE FIT (Weight: 20%)

โ˜ Core competency (Score: 10)
โ˜ Adjacent to core (Score: 7)
โ˜ New but strategic (Score: 5)
โ˜ Outside expertise (Score: 2)

Score: ___/10

================================================================

SIZE FIT (Weight: 15%)

Project size: $_______________

โ˜ Sweet spot (Score: 10)
โ˜ Slightly above/below (Score: 7)
โ˜ Stretch but doable (Score: 4)
โ˜ Too large/small (Score: 1)

Score: ___/10

================================================================

TOTAL STRATEGIC FIT: ___/40 = ___%

================================================================

Part 2: Competitive Positionโ€‹

================================================================
COMPETITIVE ASSESSMENT
================================================================

KNOWN COMPETITORS:
1. _________________________ Advantage: โ˜ Us โ˜ Them โ˜ Even
2. _________________________ Advantage: โ˜ Us โ˜ Them โ˜ Even
3. _________________________ Advantage: โ˜ Us โ˜ Them โ˜ Even

OUR ADVANTAGES:
โ˜ Client relationship
โ˜ Recent similar experience
โ˜ Specialized capability
โ˜ Geographic proximity
โ˜ Pricing position
โ˜ Availability
โ˜ Other: _______________________________________________

COMPETITIVE SCORE:
โ˜ Strong advantage (Score: 10)
โ˜ Moderate advantage (Score: 7)
โ˜ Even (Score: 5)
โ˜ Slight disadvantage (Score: 3)
โ˜ Significant disadvantage (Score: 1)

Score: ___/10

WIN PROBABILITY ESTIMATE: ___%

================================================================

Part 3: Risk Assessmentโ€‹

================================================================
RISK ASSESSMENT
================================================================

PROJECT RISKS:

Schedule risk:
โ˜ Reasonable (Score: 10)
โ˜ Tight but achievable (Score: 6)
โ˜ Aggressive (Score: 3)
โ˜ Unrealistic (Score: 0)

Score: ___/10

Contract risk:
โ˜ Standard terms (Score: 10)
โ˜ Some concerning provisions (Score: 6)
โ˜ Significant risk transfer (Score: 3)
โ˜ Unacceptable terms (Score: 0)

Score: ___/10

Design completeness:
โ˜ Complete, high quality (Score: 10)
โ˜ Substantially complete (Score: 7)
โ˜ Incomplete, issues expected (Score: 4)
โ˜ Poor quality (Score: 1)

Score: ___/10

Client payment history:
โ˜ Excellent (Score: 10)
โ˜ Good (Score: 7)
โ˜ Some issues (Score: 4)
โ˜ Poor/unknown (Score: 2)

Score: ___/10

TOTAL RISK SCORE: ___/40 = ___%
(Higher = Lower Risk)

================================================================

Part 4: Resource Assessmentโ€‹

================================================================
RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
================================================================

CAPACITY CHECK:

Estimating capacity:
โ˜ Available (Score: 10)
โ˜ Requires prioritization (Score: 5)
โ˜ Strained (Score: 2)

Score: ___/10

Project management:
โ˜ PM available (Score: 10)
โ˜ PM can be assigned (Score: 6)
โ˜ Would need to hire (Score: 2)

Score: ___/10

Field supervision:
โ˜ Available (Score: 10)
โ˜ Can be assigned (Score: 6)
โ˜ Would need to hire (Score: 2)

Score: ___/10

Bonding capacity:
โ˜ Within single/aggregate (Score: 10)
โ˜ Requires increase (Score: 5)
โ˜ Exceeds capacity (Score: 0)

Score: ___/10

TOTAL RESOURCE SCORE: ___/40 = ___%

================================================================

Part 5: Financial Assessmentโ€‹

================================================================
FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT
================================================================

Estimated margin: ___%
Target margin for this type: ___%

โ˜ At or above target (Score: 10)
โ˜ Slightly below target (Score: 6)
โ˜ Below target but strategic (Score: 3)
โ˜ Unacceptable margin (Score: 0)

Score: ___/10

Revenue value to backlog:
โ˜ Meaningful addition (Score: 10)
โ˜ Moderate value (Score: 6)
โ˜ Small value (Score: 3)

Score: ___/10

TOTAL FINANCIAL SCORE: ___/20 = ___%

================================================================

Scoring Summaryโ€‹

================================================================
GO/NO-GO SCORING SUMMARY
================================================================

Project: ___________________________________________________

================================================================

| Category | Weight | Score | Weighted |
|----------|--------|-------|----------|
| Strategic Fit | 25% | ___% | ___% |
| Competitive Position | 20% | ___% | ___% |
| Risk (inverse) | 25% | ___% | ___% |
| Resources | 15% | ___% | ___% |
| Financial | 15% | ___% | ___% |
|----------|--------|-------|----------|
| **TOTAL** | 100% | | **___%** |

================================================================

DECISION THRESHOLDS:
over 75%: Strong Go
60-75%: Go with conditions
50-60%: Marginal, discuss
under 50%: No-Go

================================================================

RECOMMENDATION: โ˜ Go โ˜ No-Go โ˜ Discuss

CONDITIONS (if any):
___________________________________________________________

================================================================

Decision Made By: _____________________ Date: _______________

Decision: โ˜ Pursue โ˜ Decline

Rationale:
___________________________________________________________

================================================================

Go/No-Go Meetingโ€‹

When to Hold:โ€‹

  • Major opportunities
  • Borderline scores
  • Resource conflicts
  • Strategic implications

Attendees:โ€‹

  • Executive sponsor
  • Estimating lead
  • Operations (PM/Super)
  • Business development

Discussion Points:โ€‹

  1. Score review
  2. Win probability
  3. Resource impact
  4. Strategic value
  5. Risk concerns
  6. Final decision

Declining Professionallyโ€‹

When Declining:โ€‹

Do:

  • Respond promptly
  • Thank for opportunity
  • Keep door open
  • Be honest (diplomatically)

Sample Response:

Thank you for the opportunity to bid [Project Name]. 
After careful review, we have decided not to submit
a proposal at this time due to [timing constraints /
current workload / other commitments].

We appreciate being considered and hope to have the
opportunity to work together on future projects.

Tracking and Analysisโ€‹

Track Every Opportunity:โ€‹

MetricTrack
Opportunities receivedCount
Go decisionsCount and %
No-Go decisionsCount and %
Wins (of Go)Count and %
Win rate by scoreAnalysis

Quarterly Review:โ€‹

  • Are we too selective? Too aggressive?
  • What's our win rate by score level?
  • Are we missing opportunities?
  • Are we wasting resources?

  • Bid Pursuit Process
  • Estimating Standards
  • Win Rate Analytics
  • Proposal Management

Template provided by support.construction. Discipline in pursuit selection drives profitability.

Was this page helpful?