Gaming the system

Customer requirements are often ambiguous and sometimes contradictory. Navigating these conditions can be like finding your way through a complex maze and it can result in some real confusion about how to deal with these in a proposal response. 

Some companies are very good at what I call "malicious compliance."  That is, they take advantage of ambiguous and contradictory requirements to propose a lesser solution, and presumably a lower price, than it will take to actually accomplish the "real work."  Responding is such a way is "gaming the system" and borders being disingenuous, or genius (you decide).

When your capture and/or proposal team spots ambiguous or contradictory requirements, you have some decision to make.  Do you ask formal questions and point out the issues to the prospect (and in doing so alert your competition)?  Do avoid asking questions to keep from tipping off the competition?  It depends on the opportunity, your corporate culture, and how well positioned you might be.

Are you the incumbent and the ambiguity serves you well?  Do you know what really needs to be done, despite the ambiguous requirements?  By allowing the ambiguity to live (not ask questions), are you making it easier for a competitor to bid something that meets the stated requirements (despite it not meeting what you believe to be the real needs)?  See what kind of "games" can be played here?

Regardless of whether you ask questions or not, your Price-to-Win analysis should include an assessment of how competitors will "game the system."