Winning in construction starts before a single shovel hits the ground. Audie Tarpley , who leads Indianapolis-based Dillon Construction Group (DCG), built the company’s reputation on one often-overlooked foundation: a structured, disciplined bid-management process. The goal? Qualified subcontractors compete on an even playing field, hidden costs get stripped out early, and scope-of-work details are transparent from day one.
Here’s the thing — most people outside the industry don’t realize how cutthroat the bidding process actually is.
At its core, construction bidding means submitting a detailed proposal to a project owner. You’re spelling out exactly how the job gets done, by when, and for how much. General contractors chase large projects this way; subcontractors run a parallel process, competing for individual pieces of the larger job. It’s competitive all the way down the chain.
Even the best firms lose more bids than they win. That’s not failure — that’s the business. The bid-hit ratio measures exactly this: how many proposals submitted versus how many land. Private projects? A 4:1 ratio (four bids for every win) sits in acceptable territory. Public projects are tougher — 10:1 is considered normal. That’s a lot of work for one contract.
Worth separating out here: estimating and bidding aren’t the same thing. Estimating is about forecasting costs — what does it actually take to put up a structure? Bidding is assembling that forecast into a formal, acceptable proposal. Two distinct deliverables, both carrying real risk if done sloppily.
The process itself starts with contractors dissecting the project — understanding every element, gauging supplier and subcontractor input, then building cost models that hold up under scrutiny. Preconstruction errors are brutal. They bleed into expense overruns, missed deadlines, or specs that never quite get met.
Most serious contractors run dedicated software alongside hard-won field knowledge to keep estimates sharp against specific RFPs (requests for proposal) and ITBs (invitations to bid). Getting subcontractor quotes accurately compared is where a lot of proposals quietly fall apart — or quietly win.
The catch? Not all bids are created equal. There are four main types:
Open tendering throws the door wide. Anyone can bid. It’s transparent, publicly advertised, and frequently used on large government projects where fairness is non-negotiable. The downside — managers often sift through piles of low-quality proposals, which drags out the decision timeline considerably.
Negotiated tendering flips that entirely. The owner picks a contractor directly and hammers out terms one-on-one. Fast? Yes. Competitive? Not really. Best suited for urgent projects or situations demanding specialized expertise that only one firm can reliably deliver.
Selective tendering splits the difference — a small group of pre-qualified contractors get invited to bid. It keeps competition alive while cutting down the noise of an open process. Faster evaluations, fewer headaches.
Serial tendering covers multiple similar projects over a defined period. Lock in costs once, skip the repetitive bidding overhead, enjoy the predictability. The trade-off is that future uncertainty can push contractors to pad estimates — just in case.
For Audie Tarpley and DCG, understanding these distinctions isn’t academic. It shapes how they pursue work, structure proposals, and ultimately deliver the combination of quality and value the company has built its name on. Bid smart or bid often — the best firms do both.