Case study 04 / Tendering decision support

Tendering

Competitive enough to win, while still protecting profitability and delivery feasibility.

The tensionA credible proposal needs more than a price. It needs evidence that cost and schedule assumptions can hold.
Organization
TechnipFMC
Users
Tendering & Category Management
Contribution
Sole designer, discovery through implementation

01 / The business problem

One proposal carried several competing risks.

Tendering worked with sales and Category Management to prepare bids for major projects. Teams needed credible component and bill-of-materials costs, supplier agreements, last price paid, manufacturing lead time, logistics time, and other predictive estimates.

Bid too low

Win the project while damaging margin or making the work unprofitable.

Bid too high

Lose potentially profitable work to a competitor.

Promise too soon

Win based on a schedule the supply chain cannot support.

This made Tendering a decision-support problem, not merely a quoting interface.

02 / Sources of truth

Different evidence carried different confidence.

An outline agreement with a supplier provided relatively strong evidence for expected terms. Recent purchasing history offered another useful signal. Where stronger evidence was unavailable, predictive approaches could help estimate likely cost or timing.

The interface needed to present those signals together without pretending they were equally certain—or that one analytical estimate was a guaranteed answer.

Evidence placeholderCost, timing, and evidence confidenceApproved product media needed
01BOM / component-cost analysis02Outline agreement03Last price paid04Lead and transit time05Source-confidence comparison

03 / My role

Sole design ownership across a shared business problem.

I led discovery interviews, synthesis, user stories and journeys, information and workflow modeling, wireframes, stakeholder validation, high-fidelity design, and iteration. I also contributed to the React UI and maintained design ownership as the product moved toward implementation.

I worked closely with product management, engineering, Tendering, and Category Management. Based on recollection, the project moved from discovery toward implementation in roughly six months; that timing is not presented as an exact project metric.

04 / Shared decision environment

Commercial knowledge and proposal needs had to meet in one place.

Tendering needed reliable inputs for competitive proposals. Category Management held supplier and commercial knowledge that could validate those assumptions. The product brought the two perspectives together around component cost, source confidence, and timing.

Cost evidenceLead-time evidenceCommercial contextInformed proposal decision

05 / Strategic framing

The interface wasn’t trying to produce one magical number.

It was helping people understand the evidence behind a decision. A useful tender depends on judgment: which inputs are strong, which are uncertain, and what risk the proposal is asking the business to accept.

Evidence still needed

TODO: Add approved product media and verified qualitative outcomes. No revenue, margin, win-rate, or time-saving claims are made without evidence.