Quick Tip: A technical proposal on GeM is scored against the criteria the tender document specifies. On QCBS tenders, the technical bid carries 60 to 80 percent of the final weight and is typically scored on four sub-criteria: past performance on similar contracts, methodology, team qualifications and project understanding. Each sub-criterion carries its own weight. Reading these weights before drafting is what separates a proposal that scores well from one that treats the technical bid as a single document.
Every seller learning “how to write a technical proposal for a tender” on GeM has the same goal, which is a proposal that clears the qualifying score and reaches the financial stage. The tender document itself defines how the technical proposal is scored and drafting to those specific criteria is what earns marks. This article will walk you through the scoring structure, how to read the criteria before drafting, how to run a mock score before submission and where ClearBid Tender Proposal builds the technical bid against each criterion for you.
How the Technical Proposal Fits Into GeM Bid Evaluation
The technical proposal is one of two documents submitted with a GeM bid, alongside the financial proposal. Both go into the bid life cycle from draft to award, where the technical bid is opened and scored first. Only bids that clear the pre-qualification and technical scoring stage move to the financial opening.
The buyer specifies the evaluation model in the tender document. On Least Cost Selection tenders, the technical bid only needs to clear the qualifying score, after which the lowest financial quote wins. On QCBS tenders, the technical score is combined with the financial score to produce a composite that decides the award. Which model the tender uses shapes how much preparation effort the technical bid deserves.
The GeM technical bid format is defined inside each tender document. It sets the sections the seller must respond to. A sample technical proposal for tender from a previous bid is a useful structural reference but not a copy source, since every tender document defines its own criteria and its own evidence requirements. The wider how to participate in GeM bids walkthrough places the technical proposal inside the two-phase decision most first-time bidders miss: qualification first, preparation second.
The Four QCBS Technical Sub-Criteria That Decide the Score
On QCBS tenders, the technical proposal is scored against criteria defined in the tender document, typically covering four sub-criteria that each carry their own weight. The weights sum to the technical total, which is then combined with the financial score using the tender's stated ratio.
- Past performance on similar contracts: Documented evidence of comparable work delivered, usually with client names, contract values and completion certificates
- Methodology proposed for execution: How the seller intends to deliver the scope, including the approach, resources and timeline
- Qualifications of the team assigned: CVs of key personnel with qualifications and experience mapped to the tender's requirements
- Understanding of the project: The seller's grasp of the buyer's needs and how the proposal addresses them
A bidder ignoring the criterion weights treats the technical proposal as one document when the buyer is scoring it as four. This is the single most common misread of QCBS scoring and the most fixable. Sellers who understand how GeM bid evaluation moves from technical scoring to L1 recognise where this misread costs marks.
How to Read the Technical Scoring Criteria Before Drafting
The technical scoring criteria sit in the tender document, usually in a section titled Technical Evaluation Criteria or Evaluation Methodology. See the structured read of a GeM tender document for the specific pages where these criteria sit.
The reading sequence that works is to identify each criterion, note the scoring and weight against each, then mark which criteria the company already scores high on and which require fresh evidence. A bidder who is strong on past performance but weak on methodology should allocate preparation hours accordingly rather than equally. The tender's stated weight ratio is the single most important number to find before pricing the bid or drafting the response.
The standard QCBS weight in Indian government procurement is 70:30 (technical to financial), with some tenders running 80:20 for consultancy work or 60:40 for goods-heavy procurement. The exact ratio is specified in every tender document.
Bidders should also confirm where the pre-qualification floor sits, since a bidder who does not meet the minimum PQ thresholds cannot be considered regardless of the technical score. The tender's evaluation section sets this floor alongside the sub-criteria weights. Both need to be read together before drafting begins.
How the Financial Score Normalises Against the Technical Score
The financial quote is not scored directly. It is normalised against the lowest valid quote using a specific formula. The lowest bidder receives the maximum financial score. Every higher bidder gets a proportionally reduced score using the formula: (lowest quote divided by submitted quote) multiplied by hundred.
The composite score combines the two using the tender's weight ratio. For instance, on a 70:30 QCBS with a technical score of 85 and a financial score of 90, the composite is (85 multiplied by 0.7) plus (90 multiplied by 0.3), which equals 86.5. The contract goes to the highest composite score, not the lowest price. Working out the composite during bid preparation tells the bidder exactly how much technical lead is needed to absorb a higher price.
Key point: On QCBS, a bid scoring 95 on technical can finish second to a bid scoring 60 if the second bidder priced ten times lower. The composite gap often lands at hairline margins. Reading the weight ratio and running the math before pricing is what closes this gap.
How to Run a Mock Scoring Self-Evaluation Before Submission
The most useful exercise before submitting a technical proposal is a mock scoring run, also known as a self evaluation. The bidder scores the company's own technical response against the tender's sub-criteria before submission. A bid scoring itself at 60 honestly tells the bidder the composite they will get. That read decides whether the price needs an aggressive cut to compensate.
Where the mock score lands at 50 or below, the conclusion is usually that the bid is not worth chasing on QCBS terms. The bidder is better served by skipping the opportunity and reallocating the preparation hours to a tender where the technical fit is naturally stronger. Sellers who understand pre-qualification and technical scoring on GeM recognise this triage as the same discipline that separates competitive bids from wasted effort.
Common Mistakes That Cost Marks on Technical Proposals
Three patterns waste effort across MSME bidders on QCBS tenders. Each is a misread of how the evaluation works rather than a weakness in the company's capability. Working the technical proposal against the actual scoring criteria fixes each pattern, as does a careful pre-bid checklist run before drafting.
- Treating the technical bid as one document: The tender scores it as several separate criteria. A single narrative document does not map cleanly onto the criterion list so points get lost to unclear allocation
- Weak team qualifications presentation: Team qualifications are scored against a checklist the buyer publishes. Listing CVs without mapping each team member to a specific criterion the tender weights costs points the bidder could have earned by reshaping the same CVs
- Submitting mismatched documents: The buyer asks for a Consignment and Receipt Acceptance Certificate (CRAC) and the bidder submits a Completion Certificate (CC). The document types serve different purposes and the substitution disqualifies the bid at technical evaluation
- Missing named certificates: The tender lists specific certifications, including OEM authorisation on certain product categories. A missing certificate flags the bid non-responsive at technical opening
- Skipping the ATC review: Additional Terms and Conditions vary by buyer and often carry clauses that decide compliance. Not reading the ATC line by line is a common source of avoidable rejections
Each of these is fixable with a technical scoring plan rather than a post-bid post-mortem. Reading the technical scoring criteria first, allocating preparation effort against the sub-criteria weights and writing the technical response as four documents instead of one changes the outcome across most tenders.
How ClearBid Tender Proposal Builds a Scoring Technical Bid For You
Doing the mock scoring exercise manually takes time the bidder rarely has on a busy week. It also requires the technical sub-criteria to be extracted from a fifty-page tender document before scoring can even begin. ClearBid Tender Proposal pairs the seller with a Tender Expert who reads the tender, extracts the criteria and the weight ratio and builds the technical response against each criterion.
The scope covers the full preparation cycle, from criteria extraction through response drafting to a compliance check against the buyer's format. On a first-attempt bid, the manual preparation cycle typically takes seven to ten days. With expert support, the cycle compresses because the criteria are pre-extracted, the response is drafted against known scoring weights and the compliance sheet is checked line by line before submission.
ClearBid Tender Proposal sits alongside ClearBid Tender Intelligence so the seller can identify the right tenders and then build a scoring proposal for the ones that fit. Sellers who use both services together take fewer bids to a higher win rate rather than spreading drafting effort across bids with weak technical fit.
Key point: The seller stays in control of the final proposal. The Tender Expert drafts, the seller reviews and approves. The submission goes through the seller's own GeM account and there is no login handover at any point during the engagement.
Register on ClearBid today and get a technical proposal built by a Tender Expert against the specific scoring criteria the tender uses.
Frequently Asked Questions About Writing a Technical Proposal
Q1. How to write a technical proposal for a tender on GeM that scores well?
The way to write a technical proposal for a tender that scores well is to read the evaluation criteria section of the tender document first, note the weight against each sub-criterion, then draft the response as separate sections that map to each criterion. On QCBS tenders, running a mock scoring self-evaluation before submission tells the bidder whether the technical score is strong enough to carry the composite.
Q2. What are the QCBS technical sub-criteria a tender typically scores on?
The technical bid of a QCBS tender is typically scored against four sub-criteria: past performance on similar contracts, proposed methodology, team qualifications and project understanding. Each carries its own weight that sums to the technical total. Buyers vary the weights between tenders so the bidder reads the specific tender for the actual split.
Q3. How is the QCBS composite score calculated?
The QCBS composite score is calculated by multiplying the technical score by the technical weight, the financial score by the financial weight and adding the two. Standard QCBS in Indian government procurement uses a 70:30 ratio (technical to financial), with consultancy tenders often at 80:20 and goods-heavy tenders at 60:40. The financial score is normalised against the lowest valid quote using (lowest quote divided by submitted quote) multiplied by hundred.
Q4. Where do most technical proposals lose marks on GeM tenders?
Most technical proposals lose marks by treating the technical bid as one narrative document when the buyer scores it as four separate criteria, by presenting team CVs without mapping each member to a criterion the tender weights, by submitting a Completion Certificate where the tender asks for a CRAC, by missing OEM authorisation or other named certificates and by skipping the ATC review. Each of these is fixable with a technical scoring plan.
Q5. Does ClearBid Tender Proposal draft the technical proposal end to end?
Yes. ClearBid’s Tender Proposal service pairs the seller with a Tender Expert who reads the tender, extracts the criteria and weight ratio, drafts the technical response against each sub-criterion and runs a compliance check before submission. The seller reviews and approves each stage and the final submission goes through the seller's own GeM account.
Q6. How does ClearBid Tender Proposal work alongside ClearBid Tender Intelligence?
ClearBid Tender Intelligence surfaces relevant tenders for the seller and runs an eligibility check against the saved company profile. ClearBid’s Tender Proposal then builds a scoring technical and financial proposal for the tenders that fit. Sellers use both together to take fewer bids to a higher win rate rather than spreading drafting effort across bids with weak technical fit.
