The personnel CVs and company experience claims included in a tender proposal are evidence-based scoring components — they earn marks to the extent that they directly address the evaluation criteria for personnel qualifications, experience, and track record. Understanding what evaluators are scoring and formatting your CVs and project references to deliver exactly that evidence is the path to maximum marks in these sub-criteria.
The evaluation criteria for personnel typically specify: the required academic qualification (minimum NQF level or specific degree), the required professional registration (professional body and category), the minimum years of relevant experience (defined by field or sector), and in some cases the number of similar projects managed. Each of these requirements must be explicitly addressed in the CV. The academic qualification should be stated by full qualification name, institution, year of completion, and NQF level. The professional registration should state the registration body, the registration number, the category of registration, and the expiry date. Years of experience should be quantified by field: 'twelve years of experience in civil engineering, of which eight years have been in road infrastructure in rural settings'.
Project references within CVs must be specific and verifiable. For each listed project, include: project name and description (what it was and what the person's role was), client name and department, contract value (ZAR), contract duration (start and end dates), and the individual's specific contribution and key responsibilities. Client contact details — name, telephone, and email of the project manager or contract manager — must be included so that evaluators can verify the reference if required. Projects listed without client contact details are typically scored lower than those with verifiable references, because they cannot be independently confirmed.
Company experience and track record claims require similar specificity. A project reference sheet for the company should describe each relevant prior project with: project name, client name, contract value, duration, scope summary (what was delivered, not just what sector it was in), your role (prime contractor, sub-consultant, joint venture lead), key deliverables completed, and the client's contact person. A portfolio of five to ten highly relevant reference projects — presented as a table with brief descriptions — is more effective than twenty loosely relevant projects described in a paragraph. Evaluators who are working through many bids under time pressure will credit clear, structured reference tables more reliably than narrative descriptions.
Proof of experience must accompany claims where the bid specification requires it. Acceptable proof formats include: completion certificates issued by the client, performance certificates, contract award letters, letters of reference on official client letterhead, and signed project reference forms provided as part of the bid specification. Photographs of completed work, project performance reports, and similar supporting documents are useful supplements but rarely substitute for official client-issued certificates. Some bid specifications explicitly state the required form of proof — ensure you have the right document type, not just supporting evidence.
Formatting CVs for maximum evaluation efficiency is a discipline that distinguishes professional bid writers. The ideal tender CV format begins with a summary of qualifications and registrations (immediately addressing the eligibility criteria), followed by a skills and expertise summary (relevant to this contract), followed by project experience listed in reverse chronological order with the reference details. Each CV should be no longer than four pages — longer CVs dilute the relevant information and make evaluators work harder to find scoring evidence. Use a consistent template across all CVs in the bid so that evaluators can navigate the team CVs efficiently. Include a CV cover sheet that maps each person's qualifications and experience to the evaluation sub-criteria they are intended to address.