Ryan Perez · Proposal system
A decision document, not a brochure.
The proposal contains only what the buyer needs to understand, trust and approve the recommended engagement. Company history, full capabilities and boilerplate live in supporting documents. Thirteen page layouts rendered below at page proportion.
The personalisation test
If a paragraph could be sent unchanged to any company, personalise it or remove it.
Thirteen page specimens · US Letter proportion
Every proposal page, rendered
A worked example throughout — a qualified-lead funnel engagement. Pages are shown in reading order, and each carries the rule it exists to enforce.
01 · Cover
Name the outcome, not the service. “Qualified-Lead Funnel and Website Proposal” — never “Marketing Services Proposal”.
02 · Decision summary
One page. Condition, outcome, recommendation, investment, duration, decision required. This is Layer 1, and it must stand alone.
03 · Personal letter
What we heard → why it matters → what we recommend → why we fit → what this document contains. It names the difficulty of choosing a partner rather than opening with company history.
04 · Current condition
Client-stated facts and your inferences are visually distinguished. An unlabelled inference presented as fact is how proposals lose credibility in the review meeting.
05 · Desired outcomes
Business, customer, operational and measurement outcomes kept separate — because they have different owners and different evidence.
06 · Strategic recommendation
What to build, why this approach, what was rejected and why, and the assumptions holding it up. Rejected alternatives are what make it a recommendation rather than a preference.
07 · Phase detail
Numbered 1.0 / 1.1 / 1.2 so it can be referenced in negotiation. Priced at the phase, never per sub-activity — itemising invites the buyer to treat an integrated process as a menu.
08 · Measurement
Baseline, target, source, frequency, owner — and the limitation. Stating what the measurement cannot prove is what makes the rest of it credible.
09 · Timeline
Approval gates marked, committed and potential phases visually distinct, and the client-response assumption stated on the page it affects.
10 · Investment
Committed total set apart from optional work. Tax, third-party costs, payment schedule and validity all on one page — nothing about money discovered later.
11 · Responsibilities
Provider, client, shared. The shared column is where most engagements actually fail, so it gets equal weight rather than a footnote.
12 · Evidence
Comparable condition → intervention → verified result → relevance to this proposal. The fourth line is the one most case studies omit and the only one the buyer needs.
13 · Acceptance
Explicit option selection, authorised signer, and what actually happens on signature. If signing does not immediately start work, that condition is stated here.
Three layers
Each layer answers a different reader
The signer reads Layer 1. The person who has to run the engagement reads Layer 2. Procurement and the sceptic read Layer 3. Collapsing them is why proposals get long and still fail to answer anything.{{ l.n }}{{ l.t }}
{{ l.who }}
Fourteen types
Client condition selects the form
{{ p.a }}{{ p.b }}
Selection engine
Eight branches
What to change
Five habits that weaken a proposal
{{ a.t }}
{{ a.why }}
{{ a.fix }}
Structures by decision type
Six running orders
{{ s.t }}
{{ s.when }}
CTA progression
The ask changes with the stage
{{ c.n }}
{{ c.stage }}
{{ c.cta }}
Deliverable descriptions
The same deliverable, twice
Object + purpose + contents + format + quantity + acceptance. The left one is a dispute waiting to happen; the right one can be checked off.
{{ r.a }}
{{ r.b }}
Phase specification
Nine fields, all required
Scope control
Seven branches
Revision system
Define the round, not the number
“Three revisions” is not a term. This is.
{{ r.label }}
{{ i.t }}
Timeline & evidence
Eleven rules
{{ r.a }}
{{ r.b }}
Three presentations
One recommendation, three options, or phased
Recommended engagement
Qualified-lead funnel, three phases
{{ s.t }}
$68,400
+ GST
40% on signature · 30% at Phase II approval · 30% on launch
One recommendation
Use when one solution is clearly appropriate. A committed number, not a range.
{{ o.t }}
Recommended
{{ r.k }}
{{ r.a }}
{{ r.b }}
{{ r.c }}
Three options
Only when the options solve genuinely different levels of need — and never offer a cheapest option that cannot achieve a responsible outcome.
Phased investment
Each phase buys a decision, not just deliverables. You can stop after any one of them.
Phase
Decision unlocked
Fee
{{ p.t }}
{{ p.unlocks }}
{{ p.fee }}
Phased
When later work depends on earlier findings. Naming the decision each phase unlocks is what stops it reading as an instalment plan.
Seven models
When each one applies
{{ m.t }}
{{ m.when }}
Point-based model
Ten things the proposal must define
Purchased points → prioritised work → visible consumption → replenishment. The last item on the list is the one that prevents every dispute.
{{ p.t }}
{{ p.d }}
What points do not guarantee
Points buy prioritised capacity, not a fixed outcome, not a fixed date, and not unlimited revision. Say so in the proposal, not in the first difficult month.
Generation gate
Eight conditions before a final proposal exists
{{ g.t }}
If information is missing
{{ r.a }}
{{ r.b }}
Agent contract
Machine-readable
Ecosystem
Five documents, not one
Everything the proposal does not need lives somewhere it can be reused.
LAKA states
Ten proposal treatments
{{ l.a }}
{{ l.b }}
Page-family rules
{{ r.t }}