RFT evaluation criteria are the roadmap to winning. They tell you what the client values, how the client will make its decision, and what you need to do to win. But RFT evaluation criteria are rarely transparent. They're often vague. They're sometimes contradictory.
Most RFTs include evaluation criteria with percentage weightings. This is the surface level — it's useful, but it's not the full picture. The percentages tell you the relative weighting, but they don't tell you how the client actually evaluates each criterion. A criterion weighted at 30% for "demonstrated experience" could mean anything. The weighting tells you it matters. It doesn't tell you what actually matters within it.
To decode the evaluation criteria, you need to read the entire RFT carefully. Look for clues in the background section, in the scope of work, in the selection process, and in the client's history with similar projects. The relational overlay also matters. Evaluation criteria are not purely objective. They're filtered through relationships, politics, and organisational dynamics. Understanding what the evaluation panel actually cares about often requires intelligence beyond the document itself.
Once you've decoded the evaluation criteria, you can assess your probability of winning. Do we have the technical capability? Can we price competitively? Do we have relevant experience? Do we have a relationship advantage? BIDCODE™ is designed to help you answer these questions systematically, before committing serious bid resource. The goal is to arrive at a genuine, evidence-based assessment of whether this pursuit is worth your team's time.
BIDCODE™ is structured intelligence that decodes RFTs and EOIs before commitment — delivering a disciplined go / no-go recommendation calibrated to the specific opportunity.
Explore BIDCODE™Subscribe for insights on pursuit discipline and pre-construction decision-making.
More Insights
View all articles →