Consider an illustrative case: a principal approves a pursuit because they like the client. Weeks later the structural group has no hours, the proposal automation has eaten significant time, and the fee never covered either. A go/no-go decision is the call you make before those hours get spent: pursue this one, or pass.
Among firms that turned down work because of workforce shortages, 83% became more selective about the projects they accept, while median backlog sits at roughly 11 months. Survey data indicates every respondent had a go/no-go process, but only 31% follow it consistently.
Score Every Pursuit on Seven Factors
Monograph's model uses seven factors. Use a 0-to-5 scale, where 0 argues for walking away and 5 supports full commitment.
- Expected margin. Median firm-level operating profit before bonuses and taxes runs 20.5% of net revenue. Compare each project with your project-margin median.
- Capacity fit by discipline. Score the availability of the roles the project needs. A firm can be overloaded in structural and idle in civil.
- Strategic value. Consider target-market fit, referenceable experience, relationship depth, and how you entered the pursuit.
- Client quality. Check reputation, financial stability, project experience, and decision-making authority.
- Payment history. Review how fast the client pays based on your invoices or reference checks.
- Scope certainty. Check whether the RFP defines deliverables, exclusions, and client responsibilities.
- Schedule risk. Decide whether the timeline supports work completed to standard at the proposed fee.
Document each score: margin from the fee estimate, capacity from the staffing plan, and payment history from recent invoices. For a conditional go, the PM owns and closes the open condition before proposal work starts.
Have the people who will staff the work score independently. Material differences expose missing information; resolve them, then rescore.
Weight the Factors and Set the Decline Threshold
A go/no-go decision only holds when weights are fixed before a pursuit lands. Setting them after the RFP arrives invites the team to justify the fee. This is Monograph's recommended starting model, not an industry standard.
Set the Factor Weights
- Expected margin: 20%
- Capacity fit by discipline: 15%
- Strategic value: 15%
- Client quality: 10%
- Payment history: 10%
- Scope certainty: 15%
- Schedule risk: 15%
The weights total 100%. Scope certainty, schedule risk, and capacity fit carry 45%, more than double margin's 20%.
Set the weights before reviewers see the RFP so a desirable fee or familiar client cannot sway the decision.
Choose Decision Bands
One published A&E scoring form treats 22 to 30 points out of 30 as a go, about 73% of its maximum. Monograph's proposed model sets the decline line at 70% and full commitment above 80%:
- Go (above 80%). Full proposal effort and a named pursuit lead.
- Conditional go (70–80%). Name and resolve the condition before proposal work.
- No-go (below 70%). Decline and record what must change.
Record the band and total on the pursuit file.
Define Automatic Deal-Breakers
Some conditions stop a pursuit regardless of its total. Monograph's form flags these deal-breakers:
- Pursuit cost above a proposed 10% of potential revenue when other qualifying answers already fail
- A client history of late or non-payment, a red flag for financial trouble or dissatisfaction
- Uninsurable contract terms; duty-to-defend language has forced firms to walk away from existing clients
Whoever spots one records it, and the pursuit stops there.
A Pursuit Worth the Yes
Consider this illustrative scenario: a municipal stormwater client your firm has served before issues an RFQ for another phase. Client quality and payment history each score 5 because the client pays in about a month. Monograph's 2026 Architecture & Engineering Business Benchmarks Report found average time to payment is 34 days, with top performers collecting in 22 and low performers waiting 42.
Capacity fit scores 4 because the civil group has an illustrative 78% of its available hours assigned, inside the 75–90% sweet spot, while anything above 90% risks burnout. Margin scores 4 against an illustrative 21% projection.
Scope certainty, schedule risk, and strategic value each score 4. Under the recommended model, the pursuit lands at 4.20 out of 5, roughly 84% of the maximum, with no deal-breakers.
The High-Fee Pursuit You Should Decline
In a second illustrative scenario, a private developer offers a much higher fee than usual for a mixed-use tower's structural package. Margin scores 4, but strategic value scores 1 because the field includes the developer's longtime engineer.
Client quality and payment history each score 2. There is no invoice history or progress billing, so months of labor pass before the first invoice clears. The RFP asks for "all structural engineering services," wording professional-liability guidance advises replacing with explicit exclusions. Scope certainty scores 1.
The permit set has a compressed deadline while more than 90% of the structural group's available hours are assigned, so capacity fit and schedule risk each score 2. The weighted score is 2.10 out of 5, roughly 42%. Follow the project decline criteria: decline and explain what must change.
Make the Scores Honest
Capacity fit is the score most likely to be guessed. When staffing by role, project plans, and capacity use sit in separate spreadsheets, the score is only as current as the last manual update. Monograph puts them in one system, so the score can reflect the current staffing plan instead of an outdated spreadsheet.
Workbench uses Monograph to make staffing 8x faster and reduce unbilled fees by 75%.
To calibrate the model, score your recent pursuits retroactively. If the scorecard rejects a project that became a write-off, the weights hold. If it rejects a project you are glad you took, adjust a single weight and run the test again.
Make Every Pursuit Decision with Current Data
The next bad-fit pursuit is already in your pipeline. Principals should fix the weights and thresholds before it arrives.
Monograph connects pipeline, staffing, capacity use, project plans, and financial data in one A&E-specific system, providing current inputs without rebuilding the decision from separate spreadsheets.
Decide before proposal hours disappear. See how Monograph can support your firm's go/no-go workflow and book a demo.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a principal override a no-go score?
Treat an override as a documented exception. Record the reason, name the person who owns the risk, and close every condition before proposal work. A deal-breaker still stops the pursuit.
How do we score a new client with no payment history?
Use reference checks and available information about reputation and financial stability. Keep the score conservative, then require better payment terms or progress billing.
How often should we change the weights?
Keep them fixed long enough to see a pattern. Review them after enough pursuits to identify that pattern, test changes against past results, and adjust weights individually.
What should we do when an RFP deadline leaves no time for a full review?
Check deal-breakers first, then score every factor from the current fee estimate, staffing plan, scope, schedule, and client information. Missing information should lower confidence, not justify skipping the review.
Data was collected as of April 2026.