December 6, 2014: This week, Kevin Lee writes about RFPs (Requests for Proposal) — which prospects often demand agencies fill out before they’re allowed to enter the formal consideration set. As Kevin Lee observes, RFPs are not universally beloved. In fact, plenty of people seem to downright detest RFPs (if you search Google using the keywords “RFP” and “evil” you’ll get more than 175,000 results). He writes:
Requests for proposal (RFPs) continue to be a factor in agency life, despite the fact that no one – either on the writing or receiving end – seems to be happy with them. On the agency side, RFPs are unpopular because they’re tremendous time sinks. A 50- or 100-page RFP (yes, they often run that long) can take more than a week to complete, soaking up staff time.
Furthermore, RFP close rates are typically very low, and agencies rightly suspect that RFPs are often rigged (or “wired”) in a process that’s nothing more than an expensive charade (because an insider has already gotten the business but the prospect — for reasons unknown — must still “go through the motions” of selecting a vendor using neutral criteria).
Worse prospects have been known to abuse the RFP process in order to solicit creative ideas “on spec.” Once these ideas have been captured, only the vendor whose price is determined to be lowest is given the job of implementing and executing them. This practice might not be illegal, but it’s an offensive and deeply unethical theft of intellectual property. Yes, agencies sometimes try to protect themselves against this practice by putting terms into place when responding to RFPs, but because most prospects tend to refuse to sign agreements that bind them legally for theft of IP, the issue remains forever unaddressed.
Finally, even completely executed, laboriously filled out RFP responses are often not even read by the prospect, a fact demonstrated back in 2009 when Zappos.com (now owned by Amazon) put out an RFP that 104 agencies responded to. One agency had the foresight to put its completed RFP on the Web, where its actual usage could be monitored via analytics software. Apparently, Zappos personnel only read five pages out of the 25-page RFP, spending less than 14 seconds on each page!.
Things are little better on the prospect side. “Cattle call”-style RFPs result in wasted time evaluating multiple proposals. In effect, RFPs, which typically focus narrowly on price, are inherently biased toward the cheapest vendors, not necessarily the best. The result is unhappy relationships and high churn rates.
Still, traditions die hard, so RFPs won’t be going away tomorrow. Here’s what I think you should do if you get one:
- Make sure it’s not “wired” (rigged) or “a fishing expedition.” Is the RFP well-written or look like something an intern dashed off in a hurry? Are the questions irrelevant or even absurd given the overall context of the document? Are there errors or other signs that it was quickly generated? Are critical details (e.g. budget) missing? If the RFP doesn’t pass this simple smell test, discard it immediately.
- Refuse to do “the document dance.” When you receive an RFP, get on the phone with the prospect. Use this opportunity to attempt to move the discussion from the bureaucratic to the human level and try to negotiate a more advantageous deal (“I’ll do this RFP but only after a meeting with a higher-up”). If the prospect says “no,” that’s fine: you’ve just saved your team a week or more of fruitless work.
- Never provide spec creative. Too many agencies are willing to give away their intellectual property in the mistaken belief that it will somehow result in “landing a whale.” Don’t ever make this mistake.
I know I sound harsh and perhaps hard-bitten. But RFPs are such one-sided documents, and are so easily abused by those who send them, that the only way to win is “not to play the game.”
A fair portion of this fault belongs to in-house people who keep sending RFPs out. To these people, I would offer the following advice:
- Use RFIs (Requests for Information) instead of RFPs. Do you really want to spend hours combing through dozens of 50- to 100-page documents? (I didn’t think so.) If you use RFIs instead of RFPs, you’ll be able to reduce your consideration set from an unmanageable 100 to a manageable handful, saving yourself and your respondents lots of pain. (You can use some of this saved time to actually meet with qualified vendors and have conversations with them.)
- Include details. Exactly what kind of marketing problem are you trying to solve? What’s your budget (either an absolute number or range)? What are your goals? Please don’t expect anyone to hit your targets if you don’t include them!
- Remember: you get the agency you deserve. If you’re sending out cookie-cutter RFPs, expect to get cookie-cutter responses in return. Sure, you’ll get samples, and maybe even some free work out of the exercise. But that’s no way to choose a long-term strategic partner.
Agencies: what’s your stance on filling out RFPs? I’d love to know. Clients: do you feel you actually get the best agencies via an RFP process? Publishers: RFPs abound in the paid media side of the business. Are RFPs working there?