How to write a method statement
The method statement is where most tender quality marks live — and where most bids quietly lose them. It’s your chance to show how you’ll deliver, not just that you can. This guide explains how to structure, evidence and write a method statement that an evaluator can award top marks to.
What a method statement is
A method statement is a written response explaining how you will carry out a specific aspect of the contract — your approach, process, resources and controls. Buyers use them to test whether you genuinely understand the work and have a credible, deliverable plan, rather than just the capacity to do it. They’re scored against the published criteria like any quality answer, and because they carry significant weight, a strong method statement often separates the winner from the field. The principles apply across every sector, from a construction sequencing plan to a facilities management mobilisation, but the evidence beneath them is sector-specific.
Plan before you write
The single biggest determinant of a method statement’s score is the planning done before a word is written. Break the question into its component requirements — there are usually several hidden in one prompt — and note the marks available and what the criteria say a top answer must contain. Then plan your response: the points to make in order, the evidence attached to each, and the win themes to weave through. A method statement written from a one-page plan reads as a considered argument; one written cold reads as a stream of consciousness, and scores like one. This is the same discipline at the heart of our guide to writing a winning bid.
A structure that scores
Evaluators mark fast and against a rubric, so structure your method statement to make awarding marks easy:
- Open with the direct answer. State your approach up front, then explain it. Never make a marker hunt for the point.
- Mirror the question’s structure. If it has three parts, use three labelled sections — you’re completing their marking sheet for them.
- Sequence logically. Walk through the work in the order it happens: approach, process steps, resources, controls, contingencies.
- Use headings and visuals. Sub-headings, a process diagram or a responsibility table help a tired evaluator follow and score — white space is your friend.
- Close on assurance. How you’ll monitor quality, manage risk and handle what could go wrong.
What lifts a method statement’s score
Factors that move a method statement from a middling to a top-band mark — illustrative weighting from our review work.
Evidence, not assertion
The difference between a 3 and a 5 is almost always evidence. “We follow a rigorous quality process” asserts; “our ITP records show a 99.2% first-time inspection pass rate across three comparable contracts in 2025” evidences — and an evaluator can defend the higher mark to a moderation panel. Audit every claim in your method statement: each statement that you do something well should be followed by a number, a named example, or the mechanism that makes it true. Where you describe a process, show it operating with a real (anonymised) example. Method statements drowning in adjectives and light on specifics sit in the middle of the scale by default.
Common mistakes
Four recurring failures cost method statements their marks. Describing what rather than how — restating the requirement back to the buyer instead of explaining your approach to it. Generic content — a reused statement that mentions the wrong sector or never quite addresses this contract, which evaluators spot instantly. Ignoring the weighting — lavishing words on a low-value sub-question while skimping on a high-value one. And no risk thinking — a plan with no contingency reads as inexperience. All four trace back to the same root cause we cover in why bids fail: skipping the planning that should precede writing.
Turning a weak answer strong
Take a weak opening: “We are committed to delivering a high-quality service and will ensure all work meets the required standards.” It asserts, evidences nothing, and could be any bidder. Now strengthen it: “We will deliver to [specified standard] through a three-stage inspection regime — daily supervisor checks, weekly quality audits scored against [named framework], and monthly client review. On a comparable [sector] contract this regime delivered a 98% audit pass rate and zero formal complaints over twelve months. Our quality manager, [role], owns this process and reports monthly.” Same length, transformed score — because it answers how, names evidence, and gives the evaluator something to reward. Writing every paragraph to that standard is the craft, and it’s exactly what our bid writing service does, or what a bid review will pinpoint in your existing drafts.
Frequently asked questions
How long should a method statement be?
As long as the word or page limit allows and the marks justify — no longer. Word limits are a discipline, not an obstacle: a tight, evidenced answer that fills the limit purposefully beats a padded one. Always check the limit and the weighting before deciding how much to write.
What’s the difference between a method statement and a RAMS?
In construction and similar sectors, RAMS (Risk Assessments and Method Statements) are health-and-safety documents about how work is done safely. A tender method statement is broader — it covers your whole delivery approach for scoring — though it should reflect the same safe systems your RAMS describe.
Can I reuse method statements between bids?
Reuse the evidence and structure, never the answer wholesale. Each method statement must be rebuilt around this buyer’s question, weighting and specification — evaluators spot recycled content immediately. A well-built bid library stores reusable building blocks with tailoring notes, which is the right way to work efficiently without copying.
Can you write our method statements for us?
Yes — method statements are core to our bid writing and tender writing services. We interview your delivery experts, plan each answer against the criteria, and write to score. If you’ve drafted your own, a review will show exactly where the marks are leaking.