Overview of the Go/No-Go Meeting Process
December 30, 2016
Published originally on peakproposals.com
A go/no-go meeting should be conducted for each funding opportunity of potential interest. The meeting, if done correctly, will answer three key questions: 1) Is this opportunity strategic for us; 2) Do we have what it takes to respond to the opportunity; and 3) Given what we know about the funder and the potential competition, will we be competitive?
How Go/No-Go Meetings Should Work
Ideally, the meeting should include all key stakeholders who potentially could be impacted by a decision to move forward with the application process.
During the meeting, attendees will evaluate whether adequate resources (human, time, and money) exist to respond to the opportunity and, second, whether the infrastructure exists to implement the work should the organization receive an award. Without a structured review that considers everything from potential competitors to staffing issues, it is hard to determine whether an opportunity is worth pursuing or aligns strategically with the organization's direction.
Where Go/No-Go Meetings Often Fail
In practice, the go/no-go decision process can be cursory. Decisions to pursue an opportunity can be made quickly, often by a few senior staff with limited representation from the wider stakeholder group, such as the staff members who will implement the proposed project.
A few common reasons why the go/no-go process breaks down include:
Time: The stakeholders who should weigh in may not have time to attend a go/no-go meeting or respond to requests for feedback.
Responsibility: In an attempt to be inclusive, too many people are invited to the go/no-go meeting. A large attendee list can lead many stakeholders to choose not to attend. Individuals may think their opinion isn't needed, won't matter, or will be "covered by" someone else who they assume will attend.
Consequences: If a go/no-go decision process is part of the organization’s standard operating procedures, but the procedures aren't followed (e.g., decisions are routinely made to go for an opportunity regardless of whether key staff has a chance to weigh in), staff may start to feel like the outcome of every review is predetermined, and it doesn't matter whether they participate in the process.
Money: When an organization feels pressure to bring in new funds, the go/no-go process can break down because there is an overwhelming drive to pursue any and all opportunities, regardless of fit or strategic alignment with the organization's direction. It is hard to say no to a potential opportunity when you are short of funds. Especially for multi-million-dollar opportunities, the go/no-go process—that is, methodically evaluating each opportunity based on fit, resources, and strategic value—can be skipped in favor of focusing on the potential award size.
Tips for Creating an Effective Go/No-Go Process
Changing the organizational culture so that go/no go meetings are worthwhile can be difficult. However, there are a few things that can make the process more effective:
Identify the essential opinions: If go/no go meetings are poorly attended or inconsistent, one option is to forego group meetings and instead create a list of 4–5 people whose opinions must be sought before a decision to pursue an opportunity is made. People in this core group might be the head of development (so you can learn if anyone has the time to work on the proposal), the head of the technical/programmatic team that will do the work if the grant application is successful (you can uncover staffing issues and issues with “fit”), the head of the finance department (to help put numbers behind the opportunity cost), and one or two senior leaders of the organization (to make sure the opportunity fits the strategic direction of the organization).
Make the Go/No-Go Decision Group a Manageable Size: The stakeholder group should be inclusive and adequately represent the departments most likely to be impacted by the decision. However, it should also be small enough so that each invited member believes his/her participation matters.
Protect the Process: The go/no-go process is meant to identify potential pitfalls before moving forward with an opportunity. An organization's most senior leaders may not know all of the potential downsides of a particular opportunity if they make the go/no-go decision in isolation. To make the go/no-go decision process work, ideally, there should be a consequence for not following it. For example, deciding that any opportunity that has not gone through a full review or review by key stakeholders will not be pursued.
Make the Decision Matter: Related to protecting the process, for the go/no-go process to be meaningful, the meeting outcome has to be accepted. There may be times when senior leadership decides to pursue an opportunity despite a “no” decision from the "no-go" meeting, but this should be an unusual event. Staff need to feel that the process and their participation in it matters.
To see an example of a go/no-go worksheet, click the link below.
Most grant writers have been asked at some point to “massage” unfavorable facts into preferred ones, or have seen their fact-based prose reworked by others into something that has the essence of truth but is not strictly true, or is at least less transparent. To some, this may sound like business as usual and what you need to do to win a grant. However, these little acts of truth-stretching, which can take the form of exaggerations, omissions, and misrepresentations, can exact a cost.