Government contractors always face a tricky issue of whether to exceed technical, professional, and other requirements included in a government solicitation or whether to just provide solutions that are closer to what the customers says they actually want.  While the more robust proposal provides better security and a higher level of services, it also usually costs more.  Customers looking for a value-based approach may not want to pay the additional amount, even though the solution will work better for them over time.  This issue came up recently in a Bloomberg Government article where the author, a federal cyber adviser, advocated for enhanced cybersecurity offerings.  His argument was that companies that can offer higher levels of security and performance may have an edge.  The author may be right from the end user’s perspective, but that’s not always the same as the contracting officers.  Companies must take each position into account when bidding on a project.  Often, guidance on how to bid will be in the solicitation document.  A procurement where a contract award will be based on low-price will clearly state that term.  It’s not always that easy, though, which is one of many reasons contractors like to have discussions with perspective buyers before an RFP or RFQ is issued.  Similarly, the ability to offer improved technology at a lower price would appear to be a clear advantage over competitors, but experienced contractors know that government agencies sometimes want the peanut butter sandwich they ordered, regardless of whether the steak is the better deal.  Understanding what the customer wants, or at least what’s on their mind, can help companies craft better responses with the right mix of technical superiority and pricing.  Having superior cybersecurity is definitely a potential benefit, but knowing when and how to offer it is important to company success.