For government contractors ยท working session
Practical AI for proposal and capture teams, with the guardrails your environment demands.
A working session built around your actual operating flow: where AI genuinely saves proposal, capture, BA, and PMO time, where it must not be used, and how to govern the usage that is already happening.
$3,500-$6,500 depending on team scope. Credited toward a workshop or retainer starting within 45 days.
Request the buyers' briefWhen this is right
Proposal turnarounds are brutal, your writers are drowning, and everyone suspects AI could help, but nobody wants to be the compliance story.
Your people are already pasting text into free AI tools. Pretending otherwise is exposure, not governance.
Leadership wants AI in the capability narrative and you would like that claim to survive contact with a customer question.
BA and PMO work eats hours that AI demonstrably shortens, and nobody has scoped it properly.
You leave with
A workflow opportunity map for intake, past-performance retrieval, draft support, compliance matrices, and PMO tasks.
The do-not-automate list, so judgment-heavy and sensitive work is not quietly delegated to a model.
Governance guardrails: approved tools posture, classification gates, and review checkpoints your compliance lead can sign.
30/60/90 pilot candidates, each with an owner, a metric, and a kill criterion.
Related resource
Read the memo format first.
The GovCon AI Workflow Memo is a condensed version of the deliverable: where AI helps proposal and capture work now, where it must not be used, and the guardrails that make the difference.
Questions
Can any of this touch sensitive or controlled material?
The briefing itself does not require it. The questionnaire deals in workflow shapes, not contract contents. The memo's central guardrail is exactly that boundary: which classes of material may touch which classes of tools.
Our proposal shop is three people, not thirty. Still worth it?
Small shops often gain the most. Scope and price scale down accordingly.
Do you write proposals?
No. I fix the workflow around the people who do. That separation keeps the advice honest.
What tools do you recommend?
The memo names categories and evaluation criteria, and where relevant, deployment tiers. Named vendors appear only with reasons, never as the point.
Remote or on-site?
Either. On-site works well when the session doubles as alignment between proposal leadership and executives, which is often the real bottleneck.
Closing