The Plateform is built specifically for high-volume RFP and InfoSec questionnaire work, not a generalist AI tool stretched into the use case.

Drfats come back with real structure and inline citations, which cuts revbe time a lot. The SharePoint integration is the unlock for us once we had the right tenant ID setup, our content just flowed in.

As an SE getting pulled into more federal-flavored RFPs, having one place that handles both the proposal and the questionnaire piece matters a lot. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Frankly, Setup had a couple of bumps: the SharePoint connection took a minute to get right and there was a tenant ID. I would also like more in the way of dashboards for tracking response performance over time. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

AI / Intelligence: The responses aren't generic AI filler, Inventive.AI pulls it from our actual knowledge sources and gives every answer inline citations, so I can verify where a claim came from before it goes out. The conflict manager is a very powerful feature it catches contradictions across old RFPs and docs, which used to be a manual QA headache. We also use it for DDQs, Due Diligence Questionnaires it is generates the first draft answer with about 90% accuracy.

Performance: Inventive.ai cut our RFP turnaround from 14 days to 4 hours and answers actually hold up on nuanced, unusual questions instead of reading as boilerplate. We've also seen higher win rate since switching.

Integrations: Connecting to SharePoint / Google Drive / Notion / Confluence and Salesforce meant we didn't have to migrate content into a separate silo. It pulls live from where our team already works, so the knowledge base stays current without anyone babysitting it.

UI / UX: The interface is intuitive enough that SMEs picked it up with minimal training. In-line edits let me tweak a specific sentence rather than rewriting a whole answer, which saves real review time.

ROI: We saw ROI within 3 months, the time saved per RFP adds up fast once volume scales.

Support / Onboarding: Implementation was faster than expected, largely because Inventive's support team stayed hands-on through setup rather than handing us a manual. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Reporting & Analytics, The analytics view is solid for the basics, but I'd love to see it go a bit deeper things like how often AI answers get edited, which question types take longest to review, or win-rate trends over time. It's a bit of a lighter touch right now for teams who want to use that data to fine-tune both content and workflow, not just move faster. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I really appreciate Inventive.AI's AI-first approach, rather than a library-first one. For an overly busy team without time to manually maintain a library of RFP responses, this is a huge advantage.

It's also very intuitive to create and manage projects, assign questions to colleagues, and leave comments, which makes collaboration on RFPs much smoother.

What really stands out is the accuracy of the AI. It only pulls from the sources you specify, and when it can't find an answer to a question, it flags that clearly instead of guessing. Those gaps are then easy to fill by adding the missing info to the knowledge base, so the system keeps getting smarter over time.

Lastly, our team has started using the AI Agents within Inventive even outside the context of RFPs. Our team trusts the accuracy of the responses, and it saves time when answering client questions. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

In certain cases the file import has not been as intuitive as expected, but their team is very responsive to any issues or product feedback.

Our team was also really missing document templates (they didn't exist), but this was recently added to the platform. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

We only do around 20 RFPs a year, but each one

used to be 80-85% rework of past answers and 10% actual new thinking. Inventive flipped that

ratio. Drafts now come back grounded in our existing content with citations, so my team is

editing for win themes instead of rewriting boilerplate. Sales finally owns the RFP cycle instead

of dragging in our SMEs for every paragraph. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The AI sometimes over-cites and stuffs three source

links into an answer where one would do Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The thing that made me such a believer in Inventive.AI is that it did not just make proposal writing faster — it made our entire proposal process smarter. It changed proposal development from a back-end cleanup effort into a front-loaded strategic process. For our team, that has been the biggest shift and the clearest value.

Before using Inventive.AI, our process worked, but it followed a pretty common proposal pattern: draft the response, gather input from contributors, and then use the final stretch before submission to tighten the voice, sharpen the strategy, integrate examples, add case studies, and make everything feel cohesive. The problem was that some of the most important work — strategy, positioning, proof points, and storytelling — was happening too late, when everyone was already deep in deadline mode.

Now, we are able to start with the strategy. We define the themes, compile the examples and case studies we want used, identify the differentiators that matter, and give Inventive.AI the direction and source material up front. From there, it helps build responses that already reflect our brand voice, messaging strategy, client-specific positioning, and supporting proof points from the beginning.

That has completely changed the quality of our first drafts. Instead of starting with a rough collection of answers that need to be heavily rewritten later, we begin with content that is already more cohesive, more intentional, and more aligned to the story we want the proposal to tell. It still needs human review, judgment, and refinement — and it should — but the work starts from a much stronger place.

The unexpected benefit has been how much it improved the final stage of the proposal process. The last hours before submission used to involve a lot of rearranging, rewriting, integrating examples, and trying to make the document feel like one unified response. Now, those final hours are much more focused on quality control, compliance, polish, and making sure the final product is buttoned up. It gives us more room for the white-glove review that proposals really need.

The AI itself is strong, but the real value is how it supports the full proposal workflow. It helps us use our existing knowledge more effectively, maintain consistency in our brand voice, and ensure the strategy we define at the start actually carries through the response. For a proposal team, that is a major operational improvement — not just a writing shortcut.

Overall, Inventive.AI has helped us work earlier, smarter, and more strategically. It saves time, but more importantly, it helps us produce stronger, more cohesive proposals with less last-minute chaos. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

It is honestly hard to name a true dislike because we have been so happy with Inventive.AI. The only challenge has been the normal adjustment that comes with moving away from a legacy proposal platform. Our previous system had certain features and workflows we had gotten used to, especially for managing a complex content library across many lines of business.

We knew before signing that there would be a few legacy features we might miss, and we were very upfront with the Inventive.AI team about that. Once we started implementation and began using the platform in live proposal work, we also identified a few areas where additional flexibility or refinement would make the experience even stronger for a company with our level of complexity.

That said, this has been one of the most positive parts of the experience. The Inventive.AI team has been incredibly receptive to feedback. They listen, take our requests seriously, talk through the use case, and have already implemented some of the improvements we asked for. That level of partnership makes a huge difference.

So my feedback is really more of a wish list than a dislike. I would love to see the platform continue to expand around content organization, workflow flexibility, and tools for more complex enterprise environments. But overall, I am genuinely very happy with the product and even happier with how responsive and collaborative their team has been. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I'll lead with the numbers because I track them. I run a spreadsheet on every RFP we respond to kickoff date, submission date, hours logged, win/loss outcome. Before Inventive, our average RFP took us about 6 working days from kickoff to submission. Six months in, that average is down to roughly 1.5 days. Roughly 75% faster, give or take depending on how complex the RFP is.

Win rate moved too. Rolling 6-month win rate before Inventive was around 22%. Last 6 months it's been around 36%. I'm being careful about how much of that to attribute to the platform vs. our team just getting better probably 60% of the lift is the tool (more thorough responses, fewer compliance misses, less rushing), the other 40% is general practice maturity. Either way it's not a small move.

On the experience side: the UI is the cleanest in this category by a long way. I logged in on day one and was running drafts within 20 minutes. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Analytics in the platform itself are thin which is ironic given how much data I track on the side. I'd love to pull win rate by RFP type, time-to-respond trends, and edit volume per section out of Inventive directly instead of maintaining my own spreadsheet. Told the team; on the roadmap.

Occasional complex Word export formatting drift on heavily templated docs. Adds a 10-minute clean-up pass before sending. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The first time we ran a real RFP through Inventive, it left a question blank with a tag that said "Information Unavailable" meaning the AI couldn't find a supported answer in our knowledge hub and refused to guess. Every other AI tool we'd tested would have invented something plausible. The actual experience of using it: import the RFP, the AI parses it in a few minutes, drafts come back grounded in our content with inline citations on every answer. A 100-question questionnaire goes from import to first draft in under 5 minutes. Most of the answers were accurate & most of them did not need any edit. The UI is clean assignments, status tracking, and reviewer comments all live in one place instead of scattered across email and a side document. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Reporting feels surface-level. I want to see win rate by RFP type, edit volume per section, time-to-respond trends. The data is presumably there surface it. Told the team about it; they said it's on the roadmap. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

context: we're 50 people. no proposals team, no SE org, no marketing person. when an enterprise prospect sends us a 150-question security questionnaire i'm the one filling it out because there's nobody else. i was losing entire weekends to this stuff before we tried inventive.

the UI is the part that surprised me. i was expecting one of those bloated enterprise tools where you need a 30-min training video to find the export button. it's actually clean. i logged in, imported an rfp, and was generating drafts within like 15 minutes. the assignment + status tracking is genuinely good even though we only have a few people — i route the technical sections to my cofounder, the commercial stuff i handle.

drafts come back grounded in our content with citations on every answer. for a 100-question questionnaire it spits out a v1 draft in under 5 minutes. that's the part that bought me my weekends back.

oh and the "information unavailable" tag — the AI flags questions where it doesn't have an answer instead of making something up. for a small company this matters more, because if we send a wrong answer to a $200k prospect we don't get a second chance Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

honestly priced for bigger companies. we negotiated down from their default and they were flexible, but the sticker price at first was a lot for a startup at our stage. would love a smaller starter tier.

setup had a sharepoint tenant id thing that took an afternoon to figure out. their slack support helped same day. not a huge deal but worth flagging.

some of the deeper analytics aren't there yet (win rate by rfp type, time-to-respond trends). would be useful when i'm trying to justify the spend to my board. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I'm an AE, not a proposal person. We don't have a proposals team so RFPs land on whoever owns the deal which is usually me. Before this I'd lose 2-3 days every time a 100+ question RFP came in and I'd be behind on my pipeline for the rest of the week.

inventive does most of the actual writing for me. I import the RFP, give it some context about the deal, and it drafts answers from our content. I go through, fix the ones that need work, and we're done in like a few hours instead of 3 days. That's the whole pitch from my seat.

the citations help me verify something technical. and the AI knowing when to say "i don't know" is good because i don't have time to fact-check 200 made-up answers. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Honestly, the platform has a bunch of features I don't use. go/no-go analysis, conflict detection, all that. probably useful for someone but i just need drafts. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

We're an engineering and construction firm. RFPs in our world aren't 20 questions about a SaaS subscription; they're 150-200 page documents with site plans, scope-of-work specs, embedded drawings, and pricing schedules. We see about 100 RFPs a year and we can only realistically bid on 50-60 of them. The biggest cost in our process isn't writing the bids, it's writing bids we shouldn't have written in the first place.

The Bid/No-Bid analysis is what sold us. We feed Inventive the RFP and it tells us where we're capable, where we're stretching, and where we have no business bidding. That single feature has saved us probably 300+ hours of estimator and engineer time this year on bids we now know to walk away from. The platform paid for itself before the first response was generated.

On the actual response side it ingests a 160-page RFP in about 4 minutes and drafts answers grounded in our knowledge base (past proposals, project case studies, capability statements). The drafts come back at the accuracy level they promised (>80% on day one) and get better as our team edits, thanks to the learning layer. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

There's no public API yet for connecting to our project management system. That'd be useful for us. We'd love to pull project metadata directly into RFP responses (past project specs, completion dates, change order history). Told it's something they're working on.

Image-based content (site plans, terrain images) ingests but the AI's interpretation of those is hit or miss not really their fault, it's a hard problem, but worth flagging for anyone in our industry. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.