Popular Tags
The Acronym blog recently posted the article “Are RFPs Still Worthwhile?” by Scott Oser. While the comments may be full of split reactions, Scott addresses a number of reasons that he believes RFPs may be outdated. In this article I am going to address each of Scott’s points from our perspective, and also explain why design/marketing services should not be purchased in this manner.
RFPs are normally very vague.
The vagueness of RFPs is a major problem when determining how a project should be approached. Because of the closed communication between client and vendor normally found in the RFP process, proper questioning is not present leaving the vendor making a number of assumptions. These assumptions are bad for the client, because any incorrect assumptions will most likely result in additional costs down the road.
RFPs usually lack a budget range.
Without an accurate price range, the vendor is not able to decide which approaches are appropriate for the project. This coupled with the knowledge of competition leaves the vendor “erring on the safe side” which means proposing a lower quality final product to reach a more competitive price point.
Some providers choose not to respond.
The providers who value creating successful partnerships with their clients will not respond. RFPs force vendors to compete on price, not value or effectiveness. Unfortunately not all design and marketing service providers are created equal; and competing on price is something that experienced firms will avoid.
Additional reasons we avoid RFPs
Frequently RFPs ask for ineffective deliverables.
For example, consider a situation where the RFP is asking for a large website, to showcase change within the organization. It is highly possible that in this situation a rebranding project would be more successful in signaling change and possibly less expensive as well.
We pride ourselves on being different.
I personally have never seen a RFP that asked the vendor whether they had any unique skills that may bring added benefits to the project. When comparing marketing and design services it is never an Apples to Apples comparison, something the RFP does not take into account.
We value partnerships and creativity.
RFPs are not written for people, they are a way for an organization to distill a project down to the cheapest offering. They separate relationships from business, which we believe are what lead to the most effective solutions. Ultimately it is partnership that will allow a firm to gain an understanding of your organization, and effectively communicate your needs.
RFPs may work in more product related industries where the end result is the same across the board. However this is not the case with creative services. This is why we choose not to participate in RFPs. If you are an organization that has been using RFPs in the past, I would challenge you to seek out an alternate method. Scott suggests seeking out 2 to 3 vendors that may meet your needs and engaging in discussions with them. I guarantee the work done upfront to find these firms is at least less work than the process involved in reviewing proposals, and definitely more effective.