STRATUM AND GENERAL AI
Compare the proposal workflow, not just the writing.
Compare how the same material is handled: can you inspect the source behind a claim, see missing information, examine a scope change and understand which version was reviewed?
The same five questions, answered.
| Question | General AI chat | Stratum |
|---|---|---|
| Source behind each claim | General AI chat: Can quote a passage if you ask; you check it | Stratum: Every finding cites the requirement and proposal page |
| Fact vs. assumption vs. missing | General AI chat: Separated only if you ask | Stratum: Labeled separately; missing inputs stay open |
| Impact of a change | General AI chat: You re-prompt and compare | Stratum: Pursuit Workspace (coming soon): affected deliverables flagged for review |
| Which revision was reviewed | General AI chat: Whatever file you attached; you track versions | Stratum: Recorded in the Evidence Ledger |
| Decision record | General AI chat: Kept in the chat history | Stratum: Accept, Edit, Decline, or Leave open, per finding |
STRATUM AND PROPOSAL SOFTWARE
Proposal software writes it. Stratum checks it.
| Question | Proposal software | Stratum Proposal Review |
|---|---|---|
| Built to | Proposal software: Write and assemble responses from your content | Stratum Proposal Review: Review the finished proposal against the RFP, your documents and your call notes |
| When you use it | Proposal software: While writing | Stratum Proposal Review: Before the proposal is approved for submission |
| What you get | Proposal software: A response document | Stratum Proposal Review: Findings where the proposal misses a requirement, or contradicts itself or the buyer's documents. Each one cites the requirement and the proposal page, says why it matters to the evaluator, and suggests the fix, with fact, assumption and missing information labeled. Findings are ranked by what matters most to this buyer, with a summary of the pattern behind them. |
| Who decides | Proposal software: Your team | Stratum Proposal Review: Your team: Accept, Edit, Decline or Leave open, per finding |
Use both. Proposal Review doesn't replace your proposal tool.
What Proposal Review catches
- Required sections that are missing or still placeholders, the kind that get a bid screened out before anyone reads it.
- Contradictions inside the proposal, or with the buyer's own answers.
- Wrong figures, unsupported numbers and totals that don't add up.
- Promises with no term, price or owner.
- Claims stronger than your evidence, including promises a competitor could quote back to the buyer.
- Safety and governance red flags a technical evaluator will challenge, such as a system that acts on its own in one section while another promises a person approves every change.
- Commercial terms and named third parties to confirm before you submit.
- Leftover internal material: comments, notes and file names.
Start with the work you need to do.
Bring the same brief, requirements, source documents and review criteria to the comparison. Consider your current tools and the process your team uses around them. A useful comparison examines the findings and deliverables as well as the steps needed to review them.
What Stratum organizes.
Stratum supports four connected jobs: develop a pursuit strategy, review an existing proposal, prepare connected proposal materials and continue the work as pursuits change. The selected offer determines the analysis, outputs and scope.
You supply the context and evidence. The software produces the analysis and outputs. Your team examines the result, resolves missing information and decides what to approve and share.
Compare the same work.
- Can you inspect the source behind a requirement or number?
- Can you distinguish a source fact from an interpretation or missing input?
- Can you identify the decisions and deliverables a proposed change affects?
- Can you see which revision was reviewed and what remains unresolved?
- Can the next reviewer understand the decision record?
Use the same sources, changes and review criteria to assess the result. A linked source is a starting point for review; it does not by itself establish that a claim is supported.
Choose the workflow that gives your team useful, reviewable work for the decision in front of it.