I have talked about this issue in previous articles and it continues to be problematic for contractors.
One of the problems that I frequently encounter is the over-reliance on the use of boilerplate RFPs, the type of one-size-fits-all documents that can be completed simply by filling in the blanks.
While the use of precedents is natural, all RFP documents need to be tailored to the specific requirements of the competition to which they relate.
Where conformity to the precedent is exaggerated, there is a risk that the documents will not be properly integrated with the specific needs of the project.
I have always said when drawing up specifications, particularly for an RFP, it is best to focus on problems to be solved rather than on trying to prescribe a method of solving the municipality’s problems.
The very decision to use an RFP should be dictated by the fact there are different types of products or services in the market that can be used to solve the problem.
Instead of following this approach, very often RFPs are written with rigid specifications that undermine the entire purpose of the RFP approach.
Generally, flexible specifications are the preferable route. Such an approach increases the number of contractors who can potentially bid for the work. It also allows the municipality to consider options for dealing with its problem that may not have come to the minds of the staff members who prepared the RFP documentation.
From a municipality’s perspective, the practical benefit of allowing flexibility in relation to the solutions solicited in an RFP is brought home by the following comment taken from a blog site devoted to webpage design:
“RFPs aren’t inherently bad things. In purchasing hard goods like fleet vehicles, fixtures or bridges with detailed specifications, they make a great deal of sense. The challenge with creative work, however, is that the solution is often informed by the process, and as such is difficult to postulate prior to beginning. Consider a client who requests a website, but in fact would be better served by a low-cost brochure. Boilerplate RFPs don’t generally allow flexibility for such opportunities.”
Given the breadth and complexity of construction RFPs, great care must be taken in preparing both the RFP documentation and in the planning for the eventual evaluation of any bids received, to make sure the evaluation team is not simply overwhelmed with what they receive. The information sought must address the specific needs of the municipality.
If care is not taken, the municipality may well find itself presented with mountains of paper to review, setting out overly lengthy and detailed responses that cannot properly be compared or evaluated.
A purchasing department conducting an RFP is not the equivalent of a PhD student writing a doctoral thesis. The goal is not to become an expert in telephony systems. It is to be put into a position where one can make an informed choice between competing systems.
The information that is necessary for this purpose must allow comparability.
Proprietary or otherwise unique features of the system offered by each contractor do not lend themselves to comparison. Little point is gained in asking for information that cannot be verified.
Where possible, the proponents should be directed to provide information in numerical form. Hard numbers, as opposed to picture-like descriptions such as charts and graphs, allow data to be fed into a computer spreadsheet. Once entered, it is possible to manipulate the evaluation process so as to get a proper understanding of the comparative merit of the goods or services offered by each proponent.
To avoid any appearance of cheating, the critical methods for comparing and summarizing the data should be settled by the municipal staff before the RFP documents are distributed to contractors.
Stephen Bauld is a government procurement expert and can be reached at swbauld@purchasingci.com.
Some of his columns may contain excerpts from The Municipal Procurement Handbook published by Butterworths.
Recent Comments
comments for this post are closed