A number of times I have been asked to help with an RFP. During the kick-off meeting I ask 'What about the RFI?' The reply is often 'We do not have time for an RFI'. I then end up with a discussion pointing out that preceding an RFP with an RFI saves time and effort.
An RFI is quick to create and issue; it can be done in parallel with the RFP processes. The benefits of doing an RFI process are as follows:
-
It generates a shortlist for the RFP stage which keeps to a sensible numberthe RFP responses to be evaluated.
-
The shortlist members know they are on a shortlist and have a greater incentive to respond to the RFP.
-
The RFI can be sent to a wide and inclusive list of potential vendors.
The last point enables inclusion of organisations such as: favourite vendors of various stakeholders, companies owned by relations of the Board (I am being serious), existing suppliers etc. and therefore no one can raise the issue of being excluded.
The RFI process follows the same principles of the RFP stage. The major headings of an RFI are:
1 Confidentiality Statement (if appropriate)
2 Procurement Introduction
2.1 Background
2.2 Objectives
2.3 IT Service Overview
3 Instructions to Vendors
3.1 Point of Contact
3.2 Submission of Responses
4 Response Format
4.1 Primary contact (1/4) page
4.2 General business background information (1/2 page)
4.3 Description of client base for similar services (1/2 page)
4.4 Experience with the technologies (1 page)
4.5 Experience with the Business Sector (1 page)
4.6 Geographic coverage (1/2 page)
4.7 Client references (1/2 page)
4.8 Potential for Value Added Services (1/2 page)
4.9 Other relevant experience (1/2 page)
4.10 Potential and preferred contract structures (1/2 page)
5. Conclusion
The structure of an RFI document is in two parts. Firstly, a set of paragraphs providing the background information to the vendors. This also explains that material attached by the vendor to their formal response will be ignored. The aim is to force the vendors to think about their reply and not throw the kitchen sink into their responses. The second part defines the response format (and size) required from the vendors.
The best way to avoid the kitchen sink is to set a page size limit for each section. I have suggested some suitable sizes in the above list; these are not to exceed sizes and Section 3.2 explicitly states this point. The aim is to get five to six pages of very well structured response.
The response part has associated with it a client internal document that quantifies the marking schedule for the RFI responses; a marking spreadsheet. The response format material for the RFI and it's associated marking spreadsheet are developed together and jointly agreed by the stakeholders of the client organisation. By having the response format defined and backed by a marking spreadsheet makes evaluating the vendors responses to the RFI very simple.
Ian Richmond
email: 'About' and 'Email Me' link.
Comments