It is a bit of a dance, securing government contracts–oftentimes more art than science. Your company’s success hinges not just on a persuasive pitch, but on seamless execution. It's a delicate balance that requires constant communication and accountability between the sales and execution teams throughout the entire business development and sales cycle.
From the initial qualification of an opportunity to the final handshake, every step is crucial, and both the sales and execution team should use questions to assess progress. Can we do it? Can we price it? Can we deliver it? These are the fundamental questions that must be addressed collaboratively and not just by your sales team. Sales cannot operate in isolation from execution, nor can execution proceed without the guidance and insights gleaned from the sales team during their capture process.
For companies in the dual-use tech arena, where development and innovation serve both commercial and Government purposes, this collaboration takes on added significance. It's not just about winning a contract; it's about ensuring that the government gets tangible, quantifiable value from the product or service you’re selling. Too often in Government, we see contracts devolve into mere studies, lacking real-world impact or results that can be articulated and measured. This is especially prevalent in burgeoning sectors like AI, where many companies are in the stage where the value is in the process of studying the data itself. But for most Government offices, the act of studying data does not improve their mission enough to warrant deals past early SBIRs.
Sales and execution must hold each other accountable in scoping deals for new government customers. The goal is clear: deliver measurable results, not just promises. Engineers may brainstorm ideas, but it's the sales team's responsibility to gauge the market's willingness to invest. In other words, there is a huge difference between, “Will you use this free thing if made available to you?” and “Do you care enough about this tool to spend your own money on it and endure the pain of the procurement process in addition to performing your main job duties?” This is where programs like SBIR/STTR can provide a stepping stone, but the ultimate aim for most companies is (or should be) to graduate to the big leagues.
To avoid this issue, implement a structured communication plan that includes execution early on in the sales process. This can be achieved simply by establishing specific checkpoints or requirements for your teams:
-CRM Checkpoints: Integrate checkpoints related to execution into your CRM system. At key deal stages, require the sales team to document their discussions with the execution team. This could include questions like "Have execution team members been consulted on feasibility?" or "Has the execution team provided input on the delivery schedule?" or could be as simple as a checkbox.
-RACI Matrix: Utilize a Responsibility Assignment Matrix to clearly define roles and responsibilities for each stage of the sales cycle. Include execution team members in relevant sections of the matrix (such as Consulted or Informed), and at the right stage (Opportunity Qualification or Pre-Negotiation) to ensure they are involved early.
-Regular Meetings: Incorporate communication with the execution team at existing company meetings. This can be an agenda item or a targeted invite to ensure efficiency, but needs to occur early enough to ensure usefulness.
In this symbiotic relationship, both sides play critical roles. Sales must champion the value proposition, while execution bears the responsibility of ensuring that promises translate into reality. It's a journey from pitch to delivery, where each step reinforces the other. After all, in the world of government contracts, sales and execution are indeed two sides of the same coin.