Evaluate this opportunity against the firm’s priorities and proof.
Pursuit qualification
Make the go/no-go decision visible before the proposal hours begin.
At a glance
Propagent makes the pursuit decision traceable instead of hiding it behind a single number. It compares each opportunity with strategic fit, requirements, evidence readiness, risk, capacity, and pursuit cost; shows the supporting evidence and gaps; and keeps the final pursue/no-pursue decision with firm leadership.
Show why the opportunity looks strong, weak, or uncertain.
The system frames the decision; people own it.
A pursuit decision in practice
A good fit still needs the right evidence and an available team.
Illustrative pursuit using fictional projects, people, and records; not a live product capture or customer result.
The opportunity
A county is selecting an engineering team for stormwater improvements along existing roads. Its fictional RFQ requires three comparable projects completed within five years, the proposed manager’s responsibilities and availability, and an approach to drainage design around existing utilities and access constraints.
Hold until the evidence and team are confirmed.
Hickory Lane and Westgate are ready to use. Cedar Run looks relevant, but its closeout record has not reached the proposal team. Maya’s role on Hickory Lane and her availability need confirmation. The principal authorizes these checks before committing the full proposal team.
Hold · resolve the evidence and team questions
The technical lead retrieves Cedar Run’s record. The Hickory Lane principal confirms Maya’s responsibilities, and the practice leader checks her capacity. Answers are due at the next morning’s pursuit review.
Go · after the confirmations
Cedar Run qualifies, Maya’s design-lead role is confirmed, and the practice leader verifies her availability. The principal approves the pursuit and proposed team. Final response approval remains a separate step.
No-go · if the requirements cannot be met
If no third qualifying project or suitable available manager can be confirmed before the team’s pursuit cutoff, the principal declines. A strong client relationship does not replace a mandatory requirement.
Read the fictional source records
- R1 · County RFQ · sections 3.2–3.4
- A county is selecting an engineering team for stormwater improvements along existing roads. Its fictional RFQ requires three comparable projects completed within five years, the proposed manager’s responsibilities and availability, and an approach to drainage design around existing utilities and access constraints.
- P1 · Hickory Lane drainage improvements · 2023 project sheet
- Completed drainage design along an existing neighborhood road. The firm designed replacement storm drains and inlets, coordinated utility conflicts, and developed construction phasing to maintain driveway access. Maya Chen is listed on the team, but her responsibilities are not recorded.
- P2 · Westgate culvert replacement · 2024 project sheet
- Completed culvert replacement design beneath an existing county road. The firm coordinated utility crossings, temporary traffic arrangements, and drainage tie-ins. The approved project sheet and client reference are available.
- P3 · Cedar Run drainage retrofit · 2022 closeout record
- Completed drainage retrofit design within an existing road corridor, including utility coordination and property-access constraints. At initial qualification, this record is still with the project lead; the proposal library contains only a short project listing.
- E1 · Hickory Lane project principal · confirmed role
- Maya was drainage design lead. She coordinated the utility-conflict review and developed the access-phasing drawings. The principal retained overall project management. Maya’s pursuit résumé is updated to describe that role accurately.
- C1 · Practice leader · capacity confirmation
- The practice leader confirms Maya’s availability for the anticipated assignment after reviewing her existing commitments. Any change to the assignment schedule requires a fresh capacity check.
- D1 · Pursuit principal · approved direction
- After P3, E1, and C1 are confirmed, approve the pursuit using Hickory Lane, Westgate, and Cedar Run. Lead with existing-road constraints, not contract size. Propose an early review of drainage tie-ins, utility conflicts, and access requirements with the county. The final statement of qualifications still requires review and approval.
Open the blank Go/No-Go worksheet Fill in your browser and print or save as PDF. No signup.
Why go/no-go breaks down
Separate eligibility from the reasons you want to win.
Mandatory submission and qualification requirements set the floor. Strategic fit, client relationships, and growth priorities help leadership decide whether an eligible pursuit deserves the team’s time. Keep those judgments separate so a strong relationship does not hide a missing qualification.
An unknown is a focused check with an owner and a deadline. A confirmed inability to meet a mandatory requirement is a different decision. In the stormwater pursuit, hold means resolve the evidence and capacity questions before committing the full team.
Decision record
Keep the basis of the decision with the decision.
Record the requirement, the evidence you have, the unresolved question, its owner, and the decision deadline. Add the principal’s final call and its conditions. Use the blank worksheet above for your own pursuit; it does not calculate a Propagent score or a win probability.
Win probability
A pursuit decision is not a win prediction.
Approving a pursuit means leadership accepts the case for committing resources. It does not establish the probability of winning. Preserve the original reasoning so the firm can review the decision alongside the eventual outcome.
Further reading
Why construction firms need a stronger RFP approval process.
In Construction Executive, Propagent Co-founder and CEO Daniel Beecham explains how informal pursuit choices consume senior time and why durable decision records make future Go/No-Go decisions stronger.
Where your team stays in control
Firm leadership makes the final pursue/no-pursue decision and can add relationship, capacity, commercial, and strategic context that no document alone contains.
Frequently asked questions
Straight answers for your evaluation.
What is go/no-go scoring for AEC pursuits?
It is a structured way to evaluate whether an opportunity fits the firm, whether the evidence and team are ready, what risks and costs exist, and whether committing proposal resources is warranted.
Does go/no-go scoring predict whether the firm will win?
It organizes evidence and confidence factors, but it is not a guarantee. Propagent keeps the basis, uncertainty, and human decision visible.
Which factors matter in an AEC go/no-go process?
Common factors include strategic and client fit, project relevance, firm proof, team availability, requirements, contract risk, competitive context when verified, response cost, and the quality of the available evidence.
Who makes the final decision?
The designated firm leader or pursuit owner. Propagent frames and records the decision without removing executive judgment.
See it on real work
See it in a demo Put a real opportunity through the decision
Bring an RFP and see how requirements, evidence, risk, readiness, and judgment come together.