When to walk away from an ‘opportunity’: tender red flags to watch for

Is this tender, bid, or proposal worth your time?

When I’m first engaged to support a bid, at the kick-off or even earlier, I’ll usually ask the team,

‘Who’s it written for?’

Often, the honest answer is ‘not us’.

That’s the moment to pause and think. Because while some tenders, bids, or proposals represent genuine opportunities, others are little more than procedural exercises designed to satisfy procurement rules, test the market, or make it look like there’s a contest.

In the 2023/24 financial year, the Australian Government reported 87,960 contract notices worth $99.4 billion (Department of Finance, AusTender). Amid that vast activity, plenty of potential opportunities are vying for firms’ attention, but not all of them are worth the time, effort, or cost of competing.

Have you been ‘invited’ to make up the numbers?

From time to time, clients struggle to attract enough bidders for tricky or unattractive projects. To satisfy their obligations, they may reach out to your firm, encouraging you to submit a bid.

While these invitations are often genuine and even flattering, in some cases your participation may only serve to make up the numbers. The process appears competitive, and your client contact stresses they ‘want a change’ but the outcome might already be decided.

In other cases, the tender is used to test the market to collect intelligence on pricing, methodologies, or innovations, only for the client to reappoint the incumbent, cancel the process, or take the work in-house. A classic fishing expedition.

Red flags to help you decide whether to walk away

Before committing to a major bid, watch for these warning signs that an opportunity may not be worth your time and resources.

Unrealistic timeframes

Rushed deadlines that leave little room to craft a strong, compelling submission.

No opportunity for bidder engagement

No briefing sessions, site visits, or meaningful Q&A periods offered.

Disorganised or unclear RFP/T documents

Vague scope, contradictory instructions, or excessive jargon.

Lack of prior relationship with the client

Especially in urgent or high-risk situations, this could indicate you’re being invited solely to round out the numbers.

Signs of insider influence

A competitor has recently collaborated with the client or appears embedded in their operations.

Unclear or unrealistic contract value

Before bidding, make sure you understand the size of the prize. I recently assessed a local government ‘opportunity’ where, after digging through annual reports and meeting minutes, it turned out the total external spend was around $125,000 per year. With five to eight providers on the panel, and assuming work was shared evenly (which it rarely is), each would be looking at just $15 - 20k a year, hardly worth the effort.

Excessive information requests

Including requests for detailed methodologies or responses to ‘hypothetical’ scenarios designed to extract your insights.

Suspiciously specific requirements

Proprietary software names or terms suggesting the RFP/T was tailored for another firm.

Overly broad or vague scope

Making it difficult to address the requirements meaningfully.

Significant demonstrated past experience required

Disadvantaging non-incumbents by demanding extensive client-specific history.

Odd new requirements for incumbents

Sudden introduction of new credentials, technology, or processes not previously mandated.

Limited clarification period

Very short timelines for submitting questions, often paired with vague or unanswered responses.

Frequent or late-stage addenda

Scope changes or clarifications that create confusion or extra work.

Rapid results or limited feedback

Decisions announced unusually quickly or vague debriefs that don’t explain the rationale for the outcome.

Requirement to register with & pay third-party vendor systems

Some tenders require pre-registration on platforms such as Ariba or VendorPanel before you can submit a bid. While designed to streamline procurement, these can create unnecessary barriers, sometimes even with a fee attached to just download the RFT documents.

Pay to play models are increasing in some sectors with third party vendor managers charging annual fees along with ongoing ‘management fees’ - often a percentage of revenue referred to you via the panel. If you are confident of a flow of instructions or projects - go for it, but factor it in to your fees. Alternatively, if you’re a smaller business it may be a cost burden too far if the amount of work on offer is uncertain.

Unusual procurement processes

Deviations from standard practices, such as skipping shortlisting or bypassing normal evaluation protocols; and refusing to debrief post-outcome.

Focus on cost over value

Evaluation criteria heavily favouring price at the expense of quality, innovation, or expertise.

Poor tendering organisation track record

A history of cancelled tenders, unclear communication, or disputes with previous bidders or huge delays and requests for your to keep your offer open for another 180 days.

Confidentiality concerns

Requests for sensitive information without clear guarantees around data security or confidentiality.

What to do if you spot red flags

Encountering one or more red flags doesn’t automatically mean you should walk away. Sometimes, they reflect inexperience or disorganisation rather than deliberate bias. But they’re still warning lights.

Always weigh the likely cost of bidding against your realistic chance of success. If you proceed, do it with caution, clear eyes, and measured expectations.

To make more confident decisions about which opportunities to pursue, download Bidtique’s Bid or No Bid resource. It offers practical guidance for objectively assessing tenders and can you decide when to walk away.

Happy decisioning!