Method Statement for a Tender: How to Write One That Wins

A method statement for a tender is the section where contracts are most directly won or lost on writing quality alone. The buyer already knows what you have delivered in the past — your case studies and experience answers cover that. The method statement answers the question that matters most to the evaluator right now: how, specifically, will you deliver this contract? A vague, generic or descriptive method statement signals delivery risk. A specific, credible and evidence-anchored one signals the operational confidence that earns the highest marks. This guide shows you exactly how to write a method statement for a tender that does the latter — in any sector, for any contract type.

For the complete craft framework that surrounds your method statement, visit our pillar guide How to Write a Bid.

What Is a Method Statement in a Tender?

A method statement for a tender is a structured, scored response that explains precisely how you will deliver a specific element of the contract. It describes your delivery processes, the people responsible for them, the timescales they operate within, the risks they manage and the quality mechanisms that ensure performance is maintained throughout the contract term. Buyers use method statements to assess not just whether you can deliver the contract — your experience answers address that — but whether your delivery model is credible, specific and low-risk enough to award the contract to with confidence.

Method statements appear across virtually every sector and contract type. In facilities management, they explain how cleaning, maintenance and helpdesk services will be coordinated across a multi-site estate. For construction, they describe the sequence of works, safety methodology and programme management. In professional services, they outline project management approach, team deployment and quality assurance. In health and social care, they cover person-centred delivery, safeguarding protocols and outcome measurement. The question type changes with the sector. The principles of a high-scoring answer do not. Understanding how bids are scored gives you the evaluator’s perspective that makes every method statement decision strategic rather than instinctive.

Why Method Statements Are the Most Scored Section of Most Tenders

Method statements typically carry the highest individual mark weightings in any quality evaluation. A single method statement question may account for twenty to thirty per cent of the total quality score — more than experience questions, more than social value, more than management approach. This weighting reflects what buyers most need to know: not just that you have delivered comparable work before, but that you have a specific, credible plan for delivering this contract in particular.

Consequently, the return on investment from writing method statements well is higher than almost any other bid writing activity. A supplier who writes adequate method statements and excellent experience answers will consistently score below a supplier who writes excellent method statements — because the method statement carries the marks. Invest in this section proportionally to the marks it carries. Our guide to quality tender responses shows you how to allocate effort across a submission in proportion to mark weight, ensuring your highest-impact writing goes where it earns the most.

The Fundamental Difference Between Describing and Delivering

The single most consistent failure in method statements is the choice to describe rather than deliver. A descriptive method statement tells the evaluator what your organisation is like. A delivery-focused method statement tells the evaluator what your organisation will do. Evaluators score the latter — because they are awarding a contract for future delivery, not a retrospective account of organisational values.

The distinction is clearest in comparison. A descriptive opening reads: “We are an experienced and dedicated provider committed to delivering high-quality facilities management services. Our team brings extensive expertise to every contract we deliver, and we pride ourselves on a client-focused approach that has earned us an outstanding reputation across the sector.” Not a single sentence in that paragraph describes delivery. Every sentence describes the organisation. An evaluator reading this has learned nothing about how the contract will be managed, staffed, monitored or risk-controlled. The marks reflect that absence.

A delivery-focused opening reads: “We will deliver this contract through a dedicated site management structure, with a named contract manager on-site for a minimum of four days per week, supported by a central operations team that monitors KPI performance in real time and activates our escalation protocol within two hours of any threshold breach.” Every sentence in this version describes a specific delivery mechanism. The evaluator immediately knows who manages the contract, how much time they spend on-site, how performance is monitored and what happens when it deviates from target. That specificity earns marks from the first sentence. Apply this standard to every paragraph of every method statement you write.

How to Structure a Method Statement for a Tender

A well-structured method statement for a tender gives the evaluator a logical, progressive picture of delivery — from the moment the contract begins to the moment it concludes, with the performance management and risk control mechanisms that sustain quality throughout. The following six-section structure works across most contract types and can be adapted to any specific question requirement.

Section 1: Delivery Overview

Open the method statement with a direct, confident overview of your delivery approach — stated in two to three sentences that answer the question immediately and set the structure of everything that follows. Name the core delivery model. Identify the key operational phases. Reference the performance framework that governs them. The evaluator should finish the opening section knowing the headline answer to the question before reading any of the supporting detail. This is the thesis statement of your method statement — the argument that the rest of the section evidences and elaborates.

Section 2: Mobilisation and Transition

For most contracts, the transition from the current provider to your organisation is the highest-risk phase of the entire delivery period. A strong method statement addresses this risk directly and specifically. Describe your mobilisation programme in phases, with named activities, named responsibilities and specific timeframes attached to each. Reference your parallel operations model — or equivalent transition risk management approach — and evidence it with the outcome from a comparable mobilisation you have managed.

Buyers evaluate mobilisation sections with particular care because poor mobilisation is the most common cause of early contract failure. A supplier who describes mobilisation in general terms — “we will work closely with the incumbent to ensure a smooth transition” — provides no evidence of a specific plan. A supplier who describes a twelve-week phased transition programme with named roles, defined activities and a referenced track record of zero-disruption mobilisations provides the specific confidence that earns full marks.

Section 3: Operational Delivery Processes

The operational delivery section is the core of the method statement. It describes the day-to-day processes through which the contract requirement will be met — the specific activities, the named team members responsible for them, the systems and tools that support them and the standards they are measured against. This section must be specific to this contract and this buyer — not a generic description of how your organisation typically delivers this type of service.

Name the specific processes. Describe how they connect to each other. Explain how they align with the specification requirements the buyer has published. Reference the technology platforms, management systems or accredited frameworks — ISO 9001, ISO 14001, sector-specific standards — that govern their operation. The evaluator reading this section should finish it with a clear, confident mental picture of your organisation in delivery. That clarity earns the marks that vague methodology descriptions leave on the table.

Section 4: Roles, Responsibilities and Team Structure

Buyers award contracts to people as much as to organisations. The team section of your method statement gives the evaluator confidence that the right people will be delivering the contract — with the right experience, the right authority and the right organisational support to maintain performance throughout the contract term. Name your contract manager. Describe their relevant experience in specific terms. Explain their reporting line, their authority level and their deputy arrangements. Present the wider team structure and the specific responsibilities of each role.

Resist the temptation to use generic job titles and generic descriptions of responsibilities. “Our contract manager will oversee all operational activities” tells the evaluator nothing they could not have assumed. “Our contract manager — [Name], who managed a comparable 62-site facilities management contract for a North West local authority from 2021 to 2024, achieving 98.4 per cent KPI compliance — will be on-site for a minimum of four days per week and has full authority to deploy additional resource against any emerging performance risk” tells the evaluator exactly what they need to know. Specificity at this level earns full marks. Generality does not.

Section 5: Risk Management

Every contract carries delivery risks. A method statement that does not address them signals either naivety about the complexity of the contract or a lack of genuine planning. A method statement that identifies the specific risks, names the specific mitigations and evidences their effectiveness from comparable delivery signals exactly the operational maturity that high marks reward.

Identify the three to five most significant risks for this specific contract. Name each risk precisely — not “operational risk” but “the risk of service disruption during the transition from the incumbent supplier.” Describe the specific mitigation — not “we will implement robust contingency planning” but “we will run parallel operations during weeks seven to ten of the transition, with dual sign-off on all client-facing decisions.” Evidence the mitigation with a specific outcome from a comparable contract where this approach worked. This three-part risk structure — named risk, specific mitigation, evidenced outcome — is what earns maximum marks in every risk section of every method statement in every sector.

Section 6: Performance Management and Continuous Improvement

Close the method statement with a clear description of how you will monitor performance, report it to the buyer and improve it continuously throughout the contract term. Name the KPI framework you will operate. Describe the review cycle — weekly, monthly, quarterly — and what each review covers. Explain your escalation protocol — what triggers it, who activates it, how quickly corrective action is implemented and how it is independently verified. Describe your continuous improvement methodology and evidence it with a specific improvement you delivered on a comparable contract.

This section reassures the buyer that your commitment to performance does not end at mobilisation. It demonstrates that your delivery model includes the governance mechanisms that protect performance when challenges arise — because challenges always arise. Evaluators score this section highly when it is specific, credible and evidenced. They score it poorly when it describes quality management in general terms without the specific mechanisms that make quality assurance verifiable.

Evidence in Method Statements: What Works and What Does Not

Evidence in a method statement for a tender works differently from evidence in an experience question. In an experience question, evidence is the primary content — you are demonstrating past delivery capability. In a method statement, evidence is the proof that validates your forward-looking delivery claims. It shows the evaluator that the processes you describe have worked in practice — reducing the perceived risk of awarding the contract to your organisation.

The strongest method statement evidence names a specific contract, describes how the same process or approach was applied and quantifies the outcome it delivered. Embed this evidence at the point of the claim it supports — immediately after describing a specific process, before moving to the next one. An evaluator who reads “our escalation protocol activates within two hours of any KPI threshold breach — on our comparable contract with X council this protocol prevented two potential KPI failures from becoming formal contract breaches in the final year” has both the claim and the proof in the same reading flow. That immediacy of evidence is more persuasive than evidence clustered at the end of the section.

Choose evidence that mirrors the contract as closely as possible — same sector, same contract type, same scale, same buyer type. A facilities management case study is far more persuasive in a facilities management method statement than a construction case study of equal quality. Our guide to writing case studies for tenders shows you how to select and frame evidence for maximum relevance and scoring impact.

Tailoring Your Method Statement to the Specific Contract

A tailored method statement demonstrates genuine understanding of this buyer’s specific requirement. An untailored one demonstrates only that your organisation delivers this category of service in general. Evaluators identify the difference immediately — and score accordingly.

Tailoring begins with a thorough read of the specification before writing begins. Identify the buyer’s specific service environment — the estate, the service users, the performance standards, the reporting requirements, the strategic priorities. Reference these specifics throughout your method statement. If the specification names a particular system, reference your experience with it. For a specific performance metric, explain how your delivery model achieves it. If it identifies a specific community or service user group, describe how your approach addresses their needs.

Use the buyer’s language throughout. Where the specification uses specific terminology — “responsive repairs,” “planned preventative maintenance,” “void turnaround” — use the same terms in your method statement rather than your organisation’s internal equivalents. This alignment of language signals that you have engaged genuinely with the buyer’s world rather than describing your standard service offer with the buyer’s name attached. Our guide to answering tender questions gives you the complete tailoring discipline that applies as powerfully to method statements as to any other quality answer.

Common Method Statement Mistakes That Cost Maximum Marks

Several consistent failures appear across poorly scoring method statements. Recognising them makes eliminating them from your submissions straightforward.

Describing rather than delivering is the most damaging. Every paragraph that describes your organisation’s values, culture or general approach is a paragraph that does not describe your delivery plan. Replace every descriptive sentence with a delivery sentence — one that names a specific process, a specific person or a specific outcome rather than a general organisational characteristic.

Generic content that ignores the specification produces a method statement that could apply to any contract — and consequently earns the marks appropriate to a generic response, which are consistently lower than those earned by a tailored one. Read the specification. Reference it throughout. Use the buyer’s language. Show the evaluator that your method statement was written specifically for this contract.

Omitting risk management leaves a significant gap in the evaluator’s assessment of your delivery plan. Every contract has risks. Buyers know this. A method statement that does not acknowledge and address the primary delivery risks signals either poor planning or a lack of engagement with the realities of delivering this contract. Include risk management as a named section — not a single sentence appended to the end of the delivery plan.

Unsupported claims without evidence reduce the credibility of every delivery assertion the method statement makes. Name the contract. Quantify the outcome. Evidence every claim that the evaluator cannot verify from your organisation’s general reputation alone. For the complete breakdown of everything that costs marks across competitive submissions, read our guide to common bid writing mistakes.

Frequently Asked Questions About Method Statements for Tenders

What is a method statement in a tender?

A method statement for a tender is a structured, scored response that explains precisely how you will deliver a specific element of the contract. It covers your delivery processes, the people responsible for them, the timescales they operate within, the risks they manage and the quality mechanisms that sustain performance throughout the contract term. It is typically one of the highest-weighted sections in any quality evaluation.

How long should a method statement be?

Exactly as long as the buyer specifies. Comply with every word count or page limit precisely. Within that limit, allocate word count proportionally across the six sections — mobilisation, operational delivery, roles and responsibilities, risk management and performance management — in proportion to the scoring weight each carries in the evaluation criteria. Our guide to concise bid writing gives you the editing techniques to achieve maximum scoring impact within any length constraint.

What makes a method statement score highly?

Specificity, delivery focus, evidence and tailoring. A maximum-scoring method statement names specific processes, named individuals and specific timeframes. It describes what will be done rather than what your organisation is like, supports every delivery claim with evidence from a comparable contract, uses the buyer’s language and references the buyer’s specific service environment throughout. Every sentence earns marks. None introduces content that does not advance the delivery argument.

Should a method statement include risk management?

Always. Risk management is a standard component of every high-scoring method statement and frequently appears as an explicit scored element in evaluation criteria. Identify the three to five most significant delivery risks. Name each one specifically. Describe the specific mitigation. Evidence it with a comparable outcome. Omitting risk management leaves marks on the table that a properly structured response would have earned.

How do I tailor a method statement to a specific contract?

Read the specification forensically before writing begins. Identify the buyer’s specific service environment, their stated performance priorities, their specific service user groups and their terminology. Reference all of these specifically in your method statement. Use the buyer’s language. Describe processes in the context of this contract’s specific requirements — not as a general description of how your organisation typically delivers this type of service.

Can I reuse method statements from previous bids?

Use previous method statements as a structural starting point — never as finished content. The delivery processes, named personnel, risk assessment and performance management framework all require substantive adaptation to the specific contract, buyer and service environment. A method statement that reads as adapted from a previous bid earns the marks appropriate to a generic response — which are significantly lower than those earned by a genuinely tailored one.

Written by Joshua Smith, a seasoned bid-writing expert with experience across the UK, Middle East and US, helping organisations secure the contracts they deserve through high-quality, competitive tender responses.

Write the Method Statement That Wins the Contract

The method statement is where the contract is won or lost on writing quality. Together: The Hudson Collective writes method statements that are specific, credible and evidenced — delivering the operational confidence that evaluators reward with their highest scores.

For over a decade we have written method statements across every sector and contract type, for businesses across the UK, Middle East and US. We bring the delivery focus, the buyer intelligence and the writing craft that turn method statements from adequate to outstanding.

Explore our tender writing services and write the method statement your next contract deserves.