AI shapes RFP proposal teams as revenue pressure grows

New research from QorusDocs finds that formal proposals and requests for proposal account for a large share of revenue at many business-to-business services firms, even as teams struggle with capacity and uneven automation.

The survey suggests proposal teams are handling higher volumes and sharper workload swings, with some organisations leaving a material number of RFPs unfinished. It also points to growing boardroom attention on proposal operations as clients adopt more structured buying processes and place greater emphasis on quantified value.

In the QorusDocs study, 68% of respondents reported year-on-year increases in proposals and 63% said they responded to more RFPs. Many growing firms added between six and 10 new proposals or RFPs per month. The average response still took between six and 10 days.

Workload pressures appeared widespread. Most organisations reported proposal-team spikes of between 25% and 50%. Responses also often involve large internal groups, with 31% saying 21 or more people are regularly involved.

Revenue gateway

The research positions RFP performance as a key gatekeeper for revenue in several services sectors. More than four in five respondents (82%) said they win 25% to 75% of new business through RFPs. A majority also said at least half of both new and existing client sales come from winning RFPs.

That reliance becomes more acute when teams lack the time or resources to respond. Most organisations said they were unable to respond to 10% to 20% of incoming RFPs for those reasons. The report estimates that missing one response per month could expose teams to between USD $1.2 million and USD $60 million in potential annual revenue loss, depending on volume and deal size.

"Time, not intent, has become the primary constraint for modern proposal teams," said Ray Meiring, CEO of QorusDocs.

"Organisations believe in formal pursuits and see clear revenue upside, but many simply can't respond to everything that hits their desk-and that gap now shows up directly in revenue risk exposure," Meiring said.

Proof of value

Buyers also appear to be placing more emphasis on quantified outcomes. Almost 90% of respondents said including return on investment analysis or business cases is important to their proposal process. The finding suggests bid teams are spending more time on financial justification, alongside coordinating subject matter experts and assembling reusable content.

The study also suggests the main bottlenecks lie in execution rather than drafting. The most cited pain point was delays from subject matter experts (48%). Time spent locating and maintaining content followed (46%), while meeting deadlines came next (42%).

Personalisation remained a challenge for many teams (41%). A lack of a centralised content solution followed (40%). More than a quarter of respondents said it was difficult to measure proposal effectiveness, which can limit a firm's ability to refine messaging based on win-loss outcomes.

Automation uneven

QorusDocs found automation is becoming more common, but adoption varies. Nearly three quarters of organisations (73%) said they have automated at least a quarter of their proposal process, and 29% said they have automated at least half. At the same time, 28% reported little automation.

Where organisations are using AI and automation, the reported impact centres on throughput and outcomes. The survey found 60% said AI increased the volume of responses they could handle, while 35% credited it with higher win rates and revenue.

Respondents also set high expectations for software in this area. The survey found 81% expect proposal management software to increase RFP win rates, 73% expect to complete requests faster, and 77% expect lower proposal generation costs.

On process measures, 86% expect AI to reduce the time required to personalise and respond to customer RFPs. Some 82% anticipate better response quality, and 79% expect less time spent managing content.

Microsoft habits

Despite changes in tools and workflows, much proposal work still happens in familiar desktop applications. The research found 53% of organisations rely on Microsoft Word to draft proposals, with PowerPoint at 18% and Excel at 11%.

The pattern underlines how proposal processes often span multiple contributors and established document workflows. It also suggests any shift towards automation and AI will sit alongside common file formats and collaboration practices rather than replace them overnight.

The QorusDocs benchmark is based on a survey of 297 professionals involved in proposal creation, RFP responses and proposal management software decisions. Participants worked at organisations ranging from 100 to more than 5,000 employees. The largest respondent groups came from professional services (26%) and legal services (24%), followed by architecture, engineering and construction (20%) and IT services (19%). Financial services accounted for 4%.

"The next phase of proposal work won't be defined by who uses AI, but by who turns AI into a coordinated system," said Meiring.

"Firms that integrate AI across people, content, and process will be able to scale without scaling risk; those that treat it as a bolt-on feature will hit a ceiling," he said.