Most RFPs and RFQs that are not written by professional system designers have deficiencies.
At best that delays the project only. At worst, it sabotages the results and brings significant cost and schedule overruns—and sometimes requires a lawsuit for resolution.
Often Request for Proporal (or Request for Quotation) material is copied from other documents, such as boiler-plate material or templates, or previous documents that have been issued for similar systems.
Where previous material has been used or assembled for a new RFP, a technical review is almost always required to obtain a technically correct and coherent scope of work.
The more important the project is, the more important it is to verify that the scope of work and requirements information is:
- consistent
- complete
- appropriate
- unambiguous
Many project problems can be traced back to a failure of an RFP item to meet one or more of these four attributes.
Whenever possible, base the selection of starting material not on similarity of systems, but on similarity of functional requirements.
A common RFP error is to specify the details of how something should be implemented rather than specifying what functionality or capability is needed. Where a specific implementation is specified, be sure to include the reason why. Failure to do so could mean that better or more cost-effective technology is bypassed in order to “meeting the spec.”
Key Questions
- Is each RFP requirement testable?
- Will it be possible for independent testing to determine whether or not each requirement has been satisfied?
- If every documented requirement is met, will that guarantee desired system performance?
Safeguard your procurement process and your project by calling
949-831-6788 to have RBCS review your RFP or RFQ documents.