STATEMETHOD

Illustrative workflow / one possible configuration

Turn tender requirements into a traceable qualification review.

Structure tender requirements, surface submission risks and prepare a controlled qualification record.

Explore the workflow One example configuration · synthetic data · Interactive reference
Audience
Bid managers · Commercial managers · Preconstruction teams
Workflow owner
Bid Manager
Input
Tender invitation, schedules, specifications and amendments
Final artifact
Approved tender review and qualification register

01 / Tender qualification path

Trace each tender requirement before the bid decision.

The tender set and amendment chain are fixed first. Requirements, deadlines and qualifications remain separate controls until the Bid Manager chooses release, clarification, hold or no-bid.

Select a synthetic scenario

Synthetic case / SM-TND-016/Q-04 / Primary view
NEEDS REVIEW
Tender Review — Needs reviewA controlled exception is waiting for the named owner. No output has been issued. Current reason code: RESPONSIBILITY_CONFLICT. The topology contains 10 icon nodes and 14 directed connections. Current node: Bid Manager gate. Focus a node to inspect its lane and responsibility.baselinebaselinemanifest passmanifest passchain completechain completerequirementsrequirementsfuture deadlinefuture deadlineregister readyregister readyreleasehold / no-biddeadline conflictdeadline conflictnew sourcenew sourceFreeze tender set: Record files, source and hashes01Freeze tender setIntegration / toolManifest control: Check inventory and readability02Manifest controlDeterministic controlAmendment chain: Reconcile numbering and supersession03Amendment chainDeterministic controlBuild obligations: Extract returns and responsibilities04Build obligationsModel-assistedDeadline routing: Check deadline, timezone and buffer05Deadline routingDeterministic controlDraft qualifications: Prepare cited exceptions or NIL06DraftqualificationsModel-assistedBid Manager gate: Approve, query, hold or no-bid07Bid Manager gateHuman approvalClarification queue: Hold missing sources and queries08Clarification queueRecovery routeIssue internal review: Write approved register to workspace09Issue internalreviewControlled outputHold or close: Record hold, no-bid or expiry10Hold or closeControlled output
Human approval / Bid authority / activeBid Manager gate

Approve, query, hold or no-bid

State: NEEDS REVIEWReason: RESPONSIBILITY_CONFLICTA controlled exception is waiting for the named owner. No output has been issued.
  • completed
  • active
  • blocked
  • pending

Primary route first · expand controls only when needed

02 / Value hypothesis

Less handling. More deciding.

This planning model separates machine preparation from remaining human review. It is not a measured result.

Before / manual handling

8h
  1. 01Search packageRead requirements across several tender documents.
  2. 02Track amendmentsReconcile updates in spreadsheets.
  3. 03Draft reviewPrepare risks and qualifications manually.

After / controlled preparation

AI-assisted preparation
24m
Remaining human review
1h 35m
Potential time returned / case
6h 1m
  1. Index sources. The workflow maps bounded tender requirements.
  2. Review risks. The Bid Manager checks evidence and consequence.
  3. Approve register. The final qualification record stays human-owned.

Your volume / adjustable

Illustrative estimate
Calculated monthly time returned78h

6h 1m × 3 cases × 4.33 weeks, rounded to the nearest hour.

03 / Live tender-review run

Tender obligations stay visible at the bid gate.

Run a synthetic tender requirement through amendment, responsibility and deadline controls to generate an obligation register row for the bid gate.

SYNTHETIC CASE / SM-TND-016/Q-04 / NEEDS REVIEW
READY TO RUN
01 / Input data

Tender volume, clauses and amendment chain

Employer Requirements / Volume 2 / Technical
ER 4.2.1

Temporary works design responsibility

1The Contractor shall coordinate and provide temporary works design required for the Works.

2The specialist contractor shall retain design responsibility for proprietary systems.

3Design information shall be submitted not later than fourteen days after the relevant notice.

Synthetic preliminaries and scope schedule

02 / Controls

Executed checks

  1. Amendment chainWaiting to run
  2. ResponsibilityWaiting to run
  3. DeadlineWaiting to run
03 / Generated result

Obligation and qualification register

No run yet

The result will be generated from the visible synthetic rows.

All rows, checks and outputs in this run are synthetic. They demonstrate executable workflow behavior and authority boundaries, not analysis of client documents or measured production performance.

04 / Explicit authority

The system prepares. The named owner decides.

Permission matrix for Tender Review
AuthorityPermissionOperating scopeStatus
ModelExtract obligations and draft candidate qualificationsPrepare a bounded proposal and cite available evidence.✓ May
SoftwareCheck deadlines, amendment sequence and source linksEnforce deterministic rules, state transitions and action limits.✓ May
ModelResolve conflicting source evidenceConflicts must stop or route to the named human owner.× May not
HumanApprove bid qualifications and release the reviewOnly an authorized Bid Manager can approve the final artifact.✓ May

Deterministic checks

  • Submission deadline is explicit
  • Required return schedules are present
  • Amendments are sequenced
  • Every qualification cites a tender source

Model-assisted actions

  • Index tender obligations
  • Summarize submission requirements
  • Draft candidate risks and qualifications
  • Cross-reference amendments

Human approval gate

The Bid Manager owns the bid decision and approves every commercial or contractual qualification.

Failure and recovery

Missing amendments or conflicting submission instructions block release and route the tender for clarification.

05 / Decision ledger

Reconstruct the displayed decision.

This synthetic ledger changes with the scenario. Its final decision event records the same state and reason shown in the workflow canvas.

Displayed state
NEEDS REVIEW
Reason code
RESPONSIBILITY_CONFLICT
Approval owner
Bid Manager
Synthetic event log for the Needs review scenario
EventActorResultEvidenceTime
case.receivedIntake serviceInput hash recordedSM-TND-016/Q-04
validation.completedRules engineRequired fields checkedSM-TND-016/Q-04
exception.detectedRules engineRESPONSIBILITY_CONFLICTSM-TND-016/Q-04
review.requestedWorkflow serviceBid Manager assigned—
case.review_requiredState reducerRESPONSIBILITY_CONFLICT—

06 / Related workflows

01 / Preconstruction

Estimating Assistance

Prepare traceable quantity and scope candidates while reserving rates, adjustments and estimate approval for the Lead Estimator.

Bounded drawing set, schedules and approved rate library → Reviewed estimate workbook with assumptions and exclusions

02 / Design coordination

Specification Compliance Review

Compare bounded requirements with submitted evidence and route every mismatch to a Technical Manager.

Approved specification sections and product evidence → Approved compliance matrix with exceptions

03 / Design coordination

Construction Document & Drawing Review

Check drawing packages, surface revision conflicts and issue only a human-approved review record.

Drawing package, schedules and revision register → Approved, evidence-linked review record

Browse all workflow examples

Example set / not a fixed catalogue

Your workflow can start somewhere else.

The eight detailed examples demonstrate reusable patterns, not the limits of the service. State Method maps the real process around your documents, recurring decisions, system touchpoints and named approval boundaries.

01 / Other processes we can map

Project and design

  • Meeting minutes and action tracking
  • Design comment coordination
  • Change control and instruction review
  • Document distribution and approvals

02 / Other processes we can map

Commercial and procurement

  • Supplier and quotation comparison
  • Payment application review
  • Variation evidence preparation
  • Procurement package coordination

03 / Other processes we can map

Site, quality and compliance

  • Inspection and test records
  • Defect and NCR management
  • Safety observation reporting
  • Environmental evidence reporting
Discuss another workflow

Start with a repetitive process, its evidence and the person who must retain authority. It does not need to match one of these examples.

Assessment / human-reviewed intake

Assess one tender-review boundary.

Bring the package structure, qualification owner, deadlines and current review effort—not confidential bid material through the public form.

Assess one workflowReview the diagnostic

Share business context only. Do not submit documents, credentials, confidential architecture, sensitive personal data or client information.