Capability template for marketing and content
Project experience sheet
For one finished project and one proposal, turn the firm's approved project records into a one-page experience sheet: the firm's role, the scope it performed, partners' work kept apart, and the record behind each line. Names, images and permissions still to confirm are listed for sign-off.
Listed under
Add it to a workflow in the Fully Powered Planner, beside the teams and roles that will run it. Book a fit call
The outcome
A proposal asks for a relevant example of your work, and you have the project: finished, filed, and remembered differently by each person who worked on it. You get a project sheet that says only what your records support. It states the firm's role as the agreement gave it, lists the scope your firm performed, and shows in a separate place the work that partners performed. Beside each line sits the record it comes from.
The sheet makes no claim about how the finished design performs and adds no result nobody can show. It contains no engineering judgment. Where a name, an image or a client's permission is still open, the sheet uses a plain description, and a list says what is left to confirm and who confirms it.
The project principal checks that every line is the firm's own contribution. Marketing approves each name, image and claim. Nothing goes into a proposal before both have done so.
Who starts the work, and when
The proposal lead or a business development coordinator starts it when a request for qualifications or a proposal asks for a relevant project, and runs it once for each project the team wants to show. The project principal verifies the firm's contribution. A marketing lead approves names, images and wording.
The capability prepares. It contacts no client and no partner, sends nothing, and changes no record.
What they supply
- The request: what the proposal asks the example to show, and the length the sheet may run.
- The statement register: one row for each fact you may want on the sheet, with its category, its source record, its date, who performed the work and whether it may be used. Default headers are in the template.
- The permissions register: for the client's name, the project's name and location, each image and each partner's name, whether permission is granted, pending, refused or not yet asked.
- Your settings: the firm's name for the sheet, the people who verify and approve, and the length limit.
What comes out
One document with these parts:
- The sheet: the firm's role, the project at a glance, the scope the firm performed, the work performed by others, the supporting records and any image, each line tagged to the register row behind it.
- Fit to this request: each requirement the proposal states, the rows that match it, or "No matching record".
- A list for the project principal: every line to confirm as the firm's contribution, change or remove.
- A list for marketing: every name, image and permission, and the lines that read as claims.
- Not used, with the reason for each row, and decisions for people.
Good looks like this: a reader can point at any line of the sheet and find the record it rests on, and nothing on the page is the firm taking credit for a partner's work.
An invented example
Illustrative example with invented data. Firm E, the parks authority, City M, Firm Q, Firm G, Contractor C, the project and every record named below are invented. Firm E is an invented 40-person civil and structural engineering firm. Its proposal lead is answering a request for qualifications from City M and wants to show one finished footbridge project.
The inputs come first, in full, so the template can be run on them. The output follows.
The inputs
The request and the settings
Proposal: Response to City M's request for qualifications, rehabilitation
of the Riverside Path Bridge.
Requirements to show with an example project:
R1. A pedestrian bridge replacement or rehabilitation project.
R2. Completed within the last seven years.
R3. The consultant's role and the scope it performed.
R4. Experience with a historic or heritage-designated structure.
Firm name on the sheet: Firm E.
Project principal role: Principal-in-charge. Marketing role: Marketing lead.
Length limit: default. Requester: proposal lead. Today's date: 10 November 2026.
The statement register
ID | Statement | Category | Source document | Source date | Performed by | May use
P1 | Firm E was appointed by a regional parks authority as lead consultant for the replacement of a pedestrian footbridge, under a services agreement dated 14 March 2021. | role | Services agreement, clause 2 | 14 Mar 2021 | firm | yes
P2 | The replacement footbridge is approximately 42 metres in length. | size | Services agreement, Schedule A | 14 Mar 2021 | project | yes
P3 | Structural design of the new deck and abutments. | scope | Services agreement, Schedule A | 14 Mar 2021 | firm | yes
P4 | Construction drawings and specifications for the structure. | scope | Services agreement, Schedule A | 14 Mar 2021 | firm | yes
P5 | Review of the contractor's shop drawings for the structure. | scope | Services agreement, Schedule A | 14 Mar 2021 | firm | yes
P6 | Site visits during construction, as listed in Schedule A. | scope | Services agreement, Schedule A | 14 Mar 2021 | firm | yes
P7 | Landscape and lighting design. | scope | Subconsultant agreement with Firm Q | 20 Mar 2021 | partner | yes
P8 | Geotechnical investigation. | scope | Subconsultant agreement with Firm G | 22 Mar 2021 | partner | yes
P9 | A certificate of substantial completion was issued on 22 June 2022. | completion | Certificate of substantial completion | 22 Jun 2022 | project | yes
P10 | The new bridge halves crossing times for pedestrians. | performance | Parks authority newsletter | 8 Sep 2022 | unclear | yes
P11 | The structure is designed for a 75-year life. | performance | Design basis memo | 2 Apr 2021 | firm | yes
P12 | The project won a regional engineering award in 2023. | recognition | Photograph of award certificate | 15 May 2023 | project | ask
P13 | Inspection of the existing bridge before demolition. | scope | Email from the project manager | 9 Apr 2021 | unclear | yes
P14 | Construction cost was $3.1 million. | size | Contractor's final account | 30 Sep 2022 | project | no
The permissions register
ID | What is wanted | Status | Granted by | Date | Conditions
K1 | Name of the parks authority | pending | | | The authority's communications office is reviewing
K2 | Name and location of the project | not asked | | |
K3 | Photograph IMG_0412, the completed bridge | granted | Authority project manager | 3 Mar 2023 | Credit line "Photo: Firm E"; for use in submissions only
K4 | Names of Firm Q and Firm G | not asked | | |
K5 | Photograph IMG_0388, the bridge under construction | refused | Contractor C | 6 Mar 2023 | Shows the contractor's crew
The output
PROJECT EXPERIENCE SHEET: DRAFT FOR VERIFICATION
Project described: a pedestrian footbridge replacement for a regional parks authority
Prepared for: Proposal lead Date: 10 November 2026
For: Response to City M's request for qualifications, rehabilitation of the
Riverside Path Bridge
Status: Draft. Not verified by the Principal-in-charge. Not approved by
Marketing lead. Not to be put in a proposal or shared outside the firm
until both have signed off.
Built from: statement register (14 rows, 12 marked yes); permissions
register (5 rows). Nothing else.
THE SHEET (about 160 words; limit 250, the default)
Footbridge replacement for a regional parks authority [P1]
Role: Firm E was appointed by a regional parks authority as lead consultant
for the replacement of a pedestrian footbridge, under a services agreement
dated 14 March 2021. [P1]
Project: The replacement footbridge is approximately 42 metres in length.
[P2] A certificate of substantial completion was issued on 22 June 2022. [P9]
Scope performed by Firm E:
- Structural design of the new deck and abutments. [P3]
- Construction drawings and specifications for the structure. [P4]
- Review of the contractor's shop drawings for the structure. [P5]
- Site visits during construction, as listed in Schedule A. [P6]
Performed by others on the project:
- Landscape and lighting design, by a partner firm (not named). [P7]
- Geotechnical investigation, by a partner firm (not named). [P8]
Supporting records: services agreement and Schedule A (14 March 2021);
subconsultant agreements (20 and 22 March 2021); certificate of substantial
completion (22 June 2022).
Image: IMG_0412, the completed bridge. Conditions as written: credit line
"Photo: Firm E"; for use in submissions only. [K3]
FIT TO THIS REQUEST
R1 A pedestrian bridge replacement or rehabilitation project: P1, P2.
R2 Completed within the last seven years: P9.
R3 The consultant's role and the scope it performed: P1, P3, P4, P5, P6.
R4 Experience with a historic or heritage-designated structure: No matching
record.
The Principal-in-charge and the proposal lead decide whether a matching row
meets the requirement.
FOR THE PROJECT PRINCIPAL: VERIFY THE FIRM'S CONTRIBUTION
P1 Firm E was appointed by a regional parks authority as lead consultant for
the replacement of a pedestrian footbridge, under a services agreement
dated 14 March 2021. Source: services agreement, clause 2, 14 Mar 2021.
Firm.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P2 The replacement footbridge is approximately 42 metres in length. Source:
services agreement, Schedule A, 14 Mar 2021. Project fact.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P3 Structural design of the new deck and abutments. Source: services
agreement, Schedule A, 14 Mar 2021. Firm.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P4 Construction drawings and specifications for the structure. Source:
services agreement, Schedule A, 14 Mar 2021. Firm.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P5 Review of the contractor's shop drawings for the structure. Source:
services agreement, Schedule A, 14 Mar 2021. Firm.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P6 Site visits during construction, as listed in Schedule A. Source:
services agreement, Schedule A, 14 Mar 2021. Firm.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P7 Landscape and lighting design, by a partner firm (not named). Source:
subconsultant agreement, 20 Mar 2021. Partner.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P8 Geotechnical investigation, by a partner firm (not named). Source:
subconsultant agreement, 22 Mar 2021. Partner.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P9 A certificate of substantial completion was issued on 22 June 2022.
Source: certificate of substantial completion, 22 Jun 2022. Project fact.
Confirmed / Changed to: ____ / Remove
FOR MARKETING: NAMES, IMAGES AND CLAIMS
Permissions
K1 Name of the parks authority: pending. The sheet uses a plain description
("a regional parks authority"). Conditions: the authority's
communications office is reviewing.
Approved / Changed to: ____ / Remove
K2 Name and location of the project: not asked. The sheet uses a plain
description and gives no location. Conditions: none.
Approved / Changed to: ____ / Remove
K3 Photograph IMG_0412, the completed bridge: granted by the authority
project manager, 3 Mar 2023. The sheet uses it. Conditions: credit line
"Photo: Firm E"; for use in submissions only.
Approved / Changed to: ____ / Remove
K4 Names of Firm Q and Firm G: not asked. The sheet describes them as
"a partner firm (not named)". Conditions: none.
Approved / Changed to: ____ / Remove
K5 Photograph IMG_0388, the bridge under construction: refused by
Contractor C, 6 Mar 2023. The sheet uses nothing. Conditions: shows the
contractor's crew.
Approved / Changed to: ____ / Remove
Claim lines
P2 size: The replacement footbridge is approximately 42 metres in length.
Approved / Changed to: ____ / Remove
P9 completion: A certificate of substantial completion was issued on 22 June
2022.
Approved / Changed to: ____ / Remove
NOT USED
- P10 (performance): a result about the finished bridge; performance
statements are never used, and its source is a newsletter and nobody is
recorded as performing the work.
- P11 (performance): a statement of what the design is designed for;
design performance is never stated.
- P12 (recognition): marked ask. If approved it would add a recognition
line, which marketing would also approve.
- P13 (scope): nobody is recorded as having performed it.
- P14 (size): marked no.
- K5 (image): permission refused; no image used.
FOR PEOPLE TO DECIDE
- Who performed the inspection of the existing bridge before demolition
(P13), and whether it belongs on the sheet. Principal-in-charge.
- Whether to ask the authority's communications office again about naming
the authority (K1), and whether to ask about the project's name and
location (K2) and the partner firms' names (K4). Marketing lead.
- Whether P12 may be used and who approves it. Marketing lead.
- Whether this project is the one to show for this request. Proposal lead.
- P11 is marked yes in the register but is not used because it states a
design performance; the register's marking may need correcting.
Principal-in-charge.
The sheet is built from registers the firm supplied and states nothing that is not in them. It contacts no client, names no partner and sends nothing.
Where it fits
- Marketing and content: the sheet is a reusable piece of proof that proposals draw on.
- Sales: proposal teams need an example that matches the request, fast and without an argument over who did what.
- Engineering firms: the project principal's verification is built in, and the sheet makes no statement about engineering.
- Professional services: firms whose product is expertise show past work, and need the line between their own scope and others'.
- Construction: design-build and construction-support teams describe work done beside contractors and partners.
- Established businesses: a firm with a long project history can keep each project's record in the same shape.
- Growth & scaling: a growing pursuit calendar needs sheets prepared by more people without drifting in what they claim.
What has to change for your company
- Who verifies and who approves. Name the principal for each project and the marketing role that approves names, images and claims.
- Your register. Keep the default headers or change them, and decide which project records may be cited.
- Your length. The default is 250 words; set the limit your proposals use.
- Your categories. The default categories are role, scope, size, dates, completion, recognition, performance and other. Rename or extend them to fit your records.
- Your credit lines and image rules, if clients or photographers attach conditions.
- Your platform. It runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini, from records you supply. Decide which records the assistant may read and where drafts are kept.
What has been checked
Fully Powered AI wrote this capability template. It was editorially reviewed on 10 November 2026. It was tried once on its invented example in Claude on 10 November 2026; the record is published with it and lists the small edits made afterward that have not been run again. It has not been tested in a client environment or as a packaged version in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini.
Testing in your environment means running it on a finished project the principal knows well, plus cases written in advance with the expected result: a row about a partner's work marked as the firm's, a result quoted from a newsletter, a header that has been renamed, an image whose permission is still pending, a request to make the firm's role sound larger. The principal checks every line against the records before anyone relies on the sheet. Customer case study is the capability for telling a project in the client's own words, and Bid or no-bid and RFP response plan is the one for deciding whether to respond at all.
The full capability template
Everything above is the outline. The complete capability template is the working version: the roles, the inputs, the procedure, the exceptions and stop conditions, the output format, the reviewer checklist, the acceptance tests, the instructions for an AI assistant and what to customize for your company. It comes with a download and the link to its folder in Fully Powered’s public repository.
Free with an account. Sign in by email: no password and no card.
Next step
Put this capability to work for your team: on your plan, or built with you in a sprint.
Build this in a sprint
In a sprint, Fully Powered adapts this capability template to your rules, proves it on your own work and puts it in the hands of the roles that own it.
Two ways to begin: