Drew,

We have a simple RFP policy: Unless we know the business issuing the RFP and have at least a minimal relationship with them, we ignore the RFP.

Lewis,

What brought you to that decision? Does the dollar amount matter?

And if you have a relationship with them...would they typically issue an RFP?

We're really wrestling with this one, so I value your thoughts.

Drew

My experience is very well covered by your description. I usually call the person responsible and try to find out if there really is any interest in us submitting the proposal. If the RFP is not coming from a prospective client but from an agency/system integrator/whatever middleman, I completely ignore it. If I find hints that our technology might not match the client's one (and I get no good reason from them why they would even consider to switch) I ignore it. If I don't know that the RFP has been written because the issues wants me and nobody else and just has to issue an RFP, I usually ignore it ;-)

I have never ever won a single client through an RFP. If I the same time I spend on RFPs on marketing or sales, I know I will win new clients.

These days, I don't do RFP's anymore, thats it. I might forward them to someone who has more resources, experience, connections are whatever it might take, but I like to spend my time in the most efficient manner possible.

And the sum involved does not really matter either. For what we do, there is a window of project size that fits our expertise, experience and man power. I am not interested in things that are smaller or much bigger than that window, because it won't work anyways. We are busy doing things that work. I prefer it that way.

Drew,

In the corporate world we often are required to issue RFPs and get a minimum of three bids. I issued RFPs when I was a book editor and then again as a magazine executive editor. I also did so when I was with GTE and Starbucks. I've noticed that it also is a policy carried over by some in small to mid-sized businesses.

If I know the business and have some relationship with them, I trust they would not send me an RFP, if they weren't open to my services. I don't put my firm on RFP lists on RFP search engines, as we only want to bid on projects where we have some knowledge of the business. We are too small to waste time on RFPs where there is no hope. Some of these RFPs can take days, even weeks, to respond to, and we cannot afford that. Since my ideal client is a business with revenues between $1 million and $20 million, I ignore most RFPs that slip into the transom from most businesses without fear of losing business with a client I want to do business with and can serve well.

Make sense? There is lots that go into my decision and rationale that has been filtering into my criteria over the past two decades. A comment seems inadequate to fully explain my thoughts.

I find RFPs that appear to have been written by a brainstorming committee to be annoying: they ask every question possible, many of which seem marginally relevant or redundant.

Most of the time, if you are not involved in helping to craft the questions of an RFP then you will have little chance to win it. In my experience, responding to RFPs can help raise your profile within a client organisation -- but you are unlikely to win the first. It just might be the door opener for the second (as long as you don't burn your entire marketing budget in responding to the first).

In choosing whether to respond, it is important to qualify the opportunity as much as possible. Ask yourself whether you have:
* Experience with that sort of client or industry
* Frameworks or enablers that have corresponding proof points that match the clients stated pains
Capacity to scale to service the client
* Compelling rewards vs risk profile in taking on the new client

A RFP process can often be a bitter process, but it doesn't need to be. While running the RFP Database http://www.rfpdb.com I've read, reviewed, and bid on a ton of projects and over time I've learned a lot about how to handle RFPs. The following are my suggestions.

1) be selective. Don't waste time on a project you have an ok chance of winning, spend time writing incredible proposals for the ones you feel you have a GREAT chance of winning.
2) if the RFP is overly long, complex, and legal, walk away
3) focus on RFPs within driving distance; while they might not state that there is a local preference, there often is
4) work within the guidelines but differentiate yourself as best you can without breaking the rules. it's a fine balancing act, but it often pays dividends.

But like I said, be selective. Use the RFP Database to turn those bad RFPs into good RFPs and only spend your time responding to the ones you can knock out of the park.

Boris,

Your response seems to be the one that consultants and agencies want to adopt, but some feel as though they can't.

It reminds me that we are not always that good at taking our own advice. We tell them to know their "right" client and not to chase bad business. Perhaps some of us should repeat those words while gazing into a mirror!

Drew

Lewis,

As someone who had to write or at least issue RFP's talk to us about the process from that side of the table.

Did you have any say about the content of the RFP? Did you think it was a good way to choose a vendor? What advice would you have for someone who is bound to use one?

Drew

Neil,

I often assume they don't really know what to ask, so they just ask questions for the sake of asking.

Have you ever seen/responded to a good RFP or is that an oxymoron?

Drew

Gavin,

I hadn't thought about the RFP process as an introduction, but you are probably right.

My question would be...is it worth the pain? And that probably should be decided on a case by case basis.

Drew

David,

Thanks for your great advice. You clearly have seen this issue from some added perspectives.

You gave great advice for the respondent. What would you suggest for the companies/gov't agencies that are required to use RFPs?

Drew

Drew,

It's interesting you ask that since my company is currently writing a whitepaper (to be available free on the RFP Database) illustrating how companies/organizations/agencies can and should run a RFP process. While it's hard to boil down a long whitepaper into a few key points for a blog comment, I'll list my favorites:

1) do you own legwork, both internally and externally, to define the project as best you can for the RFP
2) try to cut down on the bloated legal mumbo-jumbo or at least separate it from the main RFP document
3) define how you want the proposal structured, page lengths, etc. so you can get an apples-to-apples comparison
4) limit discussion to an open place, either through receiving questions and emailing the answers to all potential bidders, or through a moderated blog/wiki
5) be upfront about how you are going to be rating the proposals you've received and any biases/preferences you might have.

The process doesn't have to be sour at all and people on both sides will appreciate openness and specificity, which will in turn lead to more bids and better bids.

If you're in this boat, my company [Confluent Forms LLC: http://www.confluentforms.com ] can assist you in the process of requirements gathering and conducting a RFP process, while getting lots of competitive bids for you from the RFP Database http://www.rfpdb.com

Best,

-David

David,

I'm right with you until #4.

From an agency's perspective, if we come up with some brilliant insight or knowledge but need to ask a question -- I don't really want to tip my hand to the competition, nor do I want them to know the same things we know.

I'm not sure sharing every one's questions and answers is any sort of deterrent to get someone to stop from sharing insider information with a preferred vendor.

Is there a way to keep each agency's questions private but still create a sense of fairness?

Drew

Drew:

You are dead on! The RFP (really foolish proposals) is the least effective process to determine client/vendor partnerships.

My goal within the next year is to develop a standard format for video proposals.

I've seen the most ridiculous formats RFP formats for video requests. Like: budgeting production gear under scripting and creative development. Huh? How's that work?

Creating a single standard is at least a step in the right direction; at least in the corporate video world.

Drew:

I think many of us have felt the pain in this subject at one time or another. Our company recently spent a couple weeks' time and about 14 pints of blood preparing an RFP response, and even the format for the pricing was insanely illogical. The criteria and outline of deliverables are often also overly vague, making true "apples-to-apples" comparisons among several respondents seemingly difficult.

In what could be seen as a defensive move, many clients who issue such RFPs also put up self-imposed dialog barriers preventing any of us from even offering pre-bid advice. What is their fear? If you lose, you often never learn exactly why. And if you win, you wonder how much easier the whole response process could have been in the first place.

Tom,

Hmm, that's an interesting idea -- a standard that was created by the professionals who would have to respond to it.

At least then it would be built in the logic of the industry.

If you do indeed create a standard for video RFPs, how do you intend to introduce it to the industry and potential customers?

How will you get them to use it?

Drew

Steve,

I'm right there with you. You sort of feel "damned if you do and damned if you don't."

Win or lose, as you suggest -- you don't really know why. Or how to duplicate the success if you had some.

I just can't believe there isn't a better way. Ideas?

Drew

RFPs are an opportunity for me to build my contact list, or proof that I did a crappy job at managing relationships within my prospect pool.

If I didn't help write the RFP, I typically won't respond to it. Though I have been known to use it as an opportunity to raise questions and offer alternative approaches not addressed in the RFP with the hope that the RFP will be pulled and I will get a call to discuss my suggestions...it's worked once, failed three times.

Pat,

How do you put yourself in a position to be asked to help write the RFP?

Drew

I'll stick my neck out and put in a good word for RFPs - at least, for well-designed RFPs.

I've seen (and had to respond) to the horrible ones, and I've seen (and created) what I hope are helpful ones.

Bad RFPs are either so full of ridiculous detail that they are a barrier to doing business, or are so simplistic that they give no guidance as to what the client actually wants.

Recent example: for one of my consulting clients, a RFP was about to be issued that was one page long and so vague that it would have driven any vendor crazy to try to figure out how to respond. The responses would have been so divergent as to make comparison and evaluation impossible.

What was critical here was helping the client actually define, in far more detail, what they truly wanted, then crafting the language of the RFP so that agencies could intelligently bid, while still showing some creativity.

We got solid, detailed responses that could be compared apples-for-apples, but still allowed for company individuality and personality.

Like anything else, the process can be done poorly or done well. Done well, the RFP can be a great tool.

I have to agree with David Kutcher's comment. Throughout my corporate career, I was involved in writing many RFPs primarily for ad agencies, research companies and print vendors, but I was also peripherally involved in the RFP process with customer service, IT, credit services and fulfillment services vendors.

Long story short, RFPs are important to truly compare what potential vendors will provide you as the client. They can provide a great apples-to-apples comparison if they're well-written. A tip off to the agency or RFP recipient to how serious the client is in terms of acquiring a new vendor is how specific the RFP is and if they've contacted you to discuss the project prior to sending the RFP.

Questions have to be answered by everyone in order to maintain the legal requirements surrounding the RFP process from the Corporate legal and purchasing teams' perspectives.

Generally, I only had to send RFPs for projects over $50,000, but I would send them for smaller projects if I was considering taking on a new vendor and wanted to see if their pricing and services were competitive with my current vendors.

I should also mention that RFPs that are too specific could be written to fulfill the "required 3 bids" rule, but they're written in such a way to basically make it impossible for anyone but the vendor the RFP author wants to win. It's kind of like when a corporation is required to post a job publicly but they already have an internal candidate identified. To give the internal candidate an edge, the job description might include knowledge of a proprietary software or some similar requirement.

I do a lot of RFP work because about half my practice is in the public sector, where you simply are not going to win any worthwhile contracts without going through a formal (and often nonsensical) bid process.

I tell clients (yeah, I've been asked to write their RFPs and then bid on 'em) that these are the top three things they should look for, as well as the top four things they should be ready to discuss with a potential agency, during a search:

WHAT TO LOOK FOR

* Relevant horizontal- and vertical-market expertise. You don't just want a firm with great media relations or direct-mail or whatever expertise (a horizontal-market skill); nor do you merely want a shop with experience in the vertical(s) of your industry... you want both.

* A defensible explanation of how they'll deliver ROI. The problem with PR people and to a lesser degree marketing folks (and I say this as one of their ilk) is that we love to talk communications and, too seldom, talk in the language of metrics, business outcomes and ROI. In fact, as an industry we often exhibit what I call "the baker's dilemma" -- a client will come along saying "I want some cake!" and our tendency is to start talking about our excellent eggs, how our flour is stone-ground by monks in Greece or some such thing. What you want is a cake - not a self-important list of ingredients. Seeing how well your potential PR partner can talk in *your* language (the language of results and ROI) is a good test of whether they can really work strategically on your behalf.

* An approach (not detailed - you can't expect them to give away the farm while trying to woo your company) that's solid enough to establish objectives tailored to your business goals. (See second bullet, next section.)

WHAT TO OFFER PROSPECTIVE AGENCIES

A really good PR RFP should do a few things:

* It should create a level playing field for you to make apples-to-apples comparisons of key factors. Your job is hard enough without having to compare Agency A's 40-page proposal to Agency B's 5-page document.

* It should give respondents the basics they need to determine whether the project is a good potential fit or not. Not all shops do all things well; your RFP should screen for that. This can be a function of budget, of anticipated tasks and hours, etc. There are may ways to lay this out, but one way to find out how respondents think is to list "two legs of the stool" and let respondents offer counsel on the third leg. Examples include:

-- List one-year goals and anticipated budget, asking respondents to outline objectives and strategies they might undertake with that direction.

-- List goals and objectives, requesting a strategy outline and budget.

-- List strategic business needs that the effort should address, and ask the respondents to develop goals and a rough budget. (This is the highest-level approach and isn't appropriate under some circumstances.)

* It should filter for horizontal- and vertical-market experience, as mentioned in my first bullet.

* Finally, it should respect the confidentiality and work product of the respondents. There are a lot of strong opinions in the PR world about how much (or how little) original strategy you should put into a proposal. In order to foster good, relevant strategy in the proposals you get, you need to respect confidentiality by allowing respondents to mark some or all of their proposals as confidential and not subject to wide review. (That's a thornier issue in the public sector.)