RFP (Request For Proposal) are frequently used to select an off the shelf IT package to be the right solution for the business. They focus on the key points to making the investment decision but how much emphasis should we place on the intangible cultural matching of a client to supplier? Should a supplier lead the client or be lead by the client in best practice and feature enhancements?
The RFP I’ve been involved with have always focused on the important tangible criteria. Does the product meet the requirements, is the company financially sound, will the product fit within the IT standards of the organisation, does it fit comfortably within the target enterprise architecture and will the supplier be able to provide a support model which will fit with the internal support teams. All of these criteria can be factually scored and weighted leading to a clear recommendation.
Two suppliers with very different cultural behaviours can have very similar scores. I’ve seen examples where the most successful partnership is between a small supplier , who is lead by the visionary direction of its clients. The client having direct input into the product roadmap and virtually mandating the content of future version. The counter case is where a supplier influences the client to upgrade and expand the product base by providing insight on best practice business processes and benefit case for change.
There is no doubt that both of these models work but only where the parties drop into these roles. A classic failing is where both the client and supplier take the passive role and the product and business area stagnate. Market pressure should normal resolve this through competition but in vertical sectors that competition does not always work. So how do tangible measure this in the RFP to guarantee a good partnership?
