Construction Bid Go/No-Go Decision Framework [2025 Guide]

Introduction

The go/no-go decision is one of the most important in construction business development. Pursuing every opportunity wastes resources on low-probability bids, while being too selective leaves work on the table. A structured decision process focuses effort on winnable, profitable work.

This guide presents a framework for making better bid/no-bid decisions, including evaluation criteria, scoring approaches, and process best practices.

Benefits of Structured Go/No-Go

Higher Win Rate: Focus on better-fit opportunities
Resource Efficiency: Estimating time on right projects
Better Bids: More time on each pursued opportunity
Risk Reduction: Avoid problematic projects
Strategic Alignment: Pursue work matching goals

Why Go/No-Go Matters

Without a disciplined approach, bid pursuit becomes reactive and inefficient:

Cost of Poor Decisions

Estimating cost per bid: $5,000-$50,000+ depending on size
Time diverted from better opportunities
Team burnout from excessive workload
Lower quality bids due to time pressure
Winning wrong work at wrong margins

Industry Benchmarks

Typical win rates: 15-30% in competitive bidding
Average bid cost: 0.5-2% of project value
Goal: Improve win rate through better selection
Target: Win rate improvement of 25-50% possible

Evaluation Criteria

Effective go/no-go evaluation considers multiple criteria categories:

Project Fit

Does project match our core capabilities?
Do we have experience with this project type?
Is the project size appropriate for our company?
Is the location within our operating area?
Does timeline work with our current commitments?

Competitive Position

Who are likely competitors?
Do we have relationship advantages?
What is our past performance with this owner?
Do we have unique qualifications or approaches?
What is the likely competition level?

Profitability Potential

What margin can we reasonably achieve?
Are payment terms acceptable?
Is the owner financially solid?
Are there cost concerns in the specifications?
Is the budget realistic for the scope?

Risk Assessment

What are the major project risks?
How problematic are contract terms?
Are there schedule or liquidated damages concerns?
What are site conditions and access issues?
Is scope well-defined or ambiguous?

Strategic Value

Does project open new markets or clients?
Will it showcase capabilities?
Is there repeat work potential?
Does it align with strategic direction?
Is there training or development value?

Decision Framework

Structure your go/no-go decisions with a consistent framework:

Three-Level Screening

Initial Screen: Quick pass/fail on basic fit (5 minutes)
Detailed Review: Score against criteria (30-60 minutes)
Final Decision: Leadership approval for pursuit

Initial Screen Questions

Is the project within our geographic area?
Do we perform this type of work?
Is the project size appropriate for us?
Can we meet bonding requirements?
Is the timeline achievable?

If any answer is "no", project may be immediately declined.

Decision Categories

Go: Pursue with full effort
Go with Conditions: Pursue if specific concerns addressed
Hold: Monitor but don't commit resources yet
No-Go: Do not pursue

Scoring Approach

Quantitative scoring helps compare opportunities objectively:

Sample Scoring Matrix

Criteria	Weight	Score (1-5)
Project Fit	25%	Experience, type, size match
Win Probability	25%	Competition, relationships
Profitability	20%	Margin potential, payment
Risk Level	20%	Contract, schedule, scope
Strategic Value	10%	New markets, relationships

Score Interpretation

4.0-5.0: Strong Go - pursue aggressively
3.0-3.9: Go - pursue with normal effort
2.5-2.9: Marginal - pursue only if capacity allows
Below 2.5: No-Go - don't pursue

Common Decision Factors

These factors frequently drive go/no-go decisions:

Strong Go Indicators

Repeat client with good history
Strong relationship with design team
Limited competition expected
Project matches core strength
Good contract terms
Strategic importance

Strong No-Go Indicators

Outside geographic or specialty area
Inadequate time to prepare bid
Onerous contract terms
Client payment or relationship problems
Unrealistic budget or schedule
High competition with no advantage

Factors Requiring Careful Analysis

New client or project type
Larger than typical project
New geographic area
Complex schedule requirements
Unusual contract provisions

Decision Process

Implement a consistent process for go/no-go decisions:

Who Should Be Involved

Business Development: Opportunity identification
Estimating: Scope and pricing assessment
Operations: Schedule and resource feasibility
Executive: Final approval for significant pursuits

Timing

Initial screen: Within 1-2 days of opportunity identification
Detailed review: 2 weeks before bid deadline minimum
Final decision: Before committing significant estimating resources
Re-evaluation: If significant new information emerges

Documentation

Record decision rationale for all opportunities
Track decisions against actual outcomes
Review patterns to improve criteria
Maintain database for analysis

Common Mistakes

Avoid these go/no-go decision errors:

Process Mistakes

No formal decision process
Deciding too late (after starting estimate)
Not documenting decisions
Skipping review for "obvious" opportunities
Not involving key stakeholders

Judgment Mistakes

Chasing every opportunity when slow
Over-optimism about win probability
Ignoring red flags
Emotional attachment to projects
Not learning from past decisions

Strategic Mistakes

Criteria not aligned with strategy
Too much or too little selectivity
Not adjusting for market conditions
Ignoring resource constraints
Not balancing portfolio

Frequently Asked Questions

How selective should we be?

Depends on your capacity and market. Generally, be selective enough to give quality effort on each pursued bid but active enough to maintain pipeline. If win rate is very high, you may be too selective. If very low, be more selective.

Should we ever bid projects we score low?

Rarely. If you need work urgently or see strategic value not captured in scoring, consider it. But habitually pursuing low-scored projects wastes resources. Better to improve your pipeline of quality opportunities.

How do we handle pressure to bid everything?

Document the cost of bidding (estimating time, opportunity cost) and track win rates. Show how selectivity improves results. Establish clear criteria so decisions aren't arbitrary. Get leadership buy-in for the process.

When should we change a go/no-go decision?

When significant new information emerges: competition changes, scope clarified, timeline adjusted, or client situation changes. Don't flip decisions based on emotion or pressure. Document reason for change.

Conclusion

A structured go/no-go decision process is essential for efficient business development. By consistently evaluating opportunities against clear criteria, you focus resources on winnable, profitable work and improve overall results.

Key takeaways:

Implement a consistent decision framework
Evaluate against multiple criteria categories
Score objectively and document decisions
Involve appropriate stakeholders
Track results and continuously improve

Find Better Bid Opportunities

Better opportunities make better decisions easier. ConstructionBids.ai aggregates public and private construction bids with AI-powered matching. Get daily digests of relevant opportunities delivered to your inbox.

Start Finding Bids →