TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Proposals From:Mark Dando <danmcc -at- OZEMAIL -dot- COM -dot- AU> Date:Sun, 24 May 1998 17:14:47 +1100
I didn't say or imply that "if 10 companies respond, then you have a 10%
chance", but was talking about average success rates.
A major client of mine operates in the network systems integration market
in Australia. Typically, purchasing in this market by major private and
public sector corporations involves a multi-stage tender process whereby a
shortlist of suppliers are invited to respond to the formal tender.
In identifiable markets segments it is possible (and in fact it is done) to
calculate the average number in a shortlist. If three, for example, the
average strike rate for suppliers would be 33%. Suppliers who significantly
exceed that rate are generally happy with their performance, and suppliers
who don't achieve that rate over a period usually withdraw from the market.
Dando McCredie Pty Ltd
danmcc -at- ozemail -dot- com -dot- au
At 09:29 AM 5/22/98 -0400, you wrote:
>That's such an extreme simplification as to make it almost
>incorrect...infact, sometimes the reverse is true.
>If two or three companies submit a response, then "maybe" this has some
>semblance to reality. However, by extension to your logic, if 10
>companies respond, then you have a 10% chance. In reality, when a
>company get's that many responses, or any number that may be bigger than
>they are comfortable analyzing, they will only give a passing glance at
>the no-name submissions, get it to a manageable number (3-4), then
>perform the same depth of analysis as if they only received those three
>in the first place.
>In addition, there are too many other factors that contribute to make
>your percentage statistically inappropriate.