we help not-for-profit organizations use technology to build their capacity and increase their effectiveness
Freeform Solutions is proudly supported by a grant from the Ontario Trillium Foundation, which builds healthy and vibrant communities in this great province. The Ontario Trillium Foundation is an agency of the Government of Ontario.
what RFPs are for
It's important to understand RFPs from both the perspective of the issuer as well as the respondent. Your comments Julian are well taken, but they do not take the bias and the motivation of the issuer into account.
Issuers of RFPs are basically trying to be as accountable as possible most likely to a higher power -- be it citizens for government, a grantor for not profits that have received a grant, or shareholders if it's a private organization. That accountability does not understand an open ended proposition of any kind.
The main motivation is to ensure that the RFP survives any scrutnity should the project go off the rails for any reason. It's true that the contract should really take care of this but the RFP is just as important as the contract, since most contracts are boiler plate, in fact. They're after thoughts done by legal departments.
RFPs on the other hand are done by procurement groups and legal groups and have stringent criteria usually depending on the size of the RFP. They are evaluated line by line, step by step and have multiple processes involved to select a "winner" or potentially no winner at all. When done properly they lead to the best proponent.
Sometimes price is an evaluation figure, sometimes it is not. It's also the case that different levels of projects require different amount of sign off so there are tiers of pricing always in mind when RFPs go out whether the actual budget is written or not. All groups have budgets they manage too so there is usually upper limits of some sort. If there are no limits that is a red flag. The project most likely is just fishing for proponents to inform the RFP requestor -- that should be done as an RFI rather than RFP.
The notion of RFQs exist too -- request for quotes are specifically a way to get price points and are probably the real bane of any consultants existence.
I think an RFP is a decent vehicle for the purpose of deliberation. But I think if one was to move price negotiation to a separate stage, AFTER selection of a vendor, then the process would be more transparent. Not sure if that will ever happen, but that's how I'd like to see the RFP process improved. Remove cost until the project selection committee has selected a vendor and then work through the pricing and timing based on negotiation before contractual obligations are set.
Thoughts?