EP127: MISTAKES WE SEE VENDORS MAKE WHEN RESPONDING TO RFPS—WITH CHERI FISHER & KEVIN CLEARY
Here at the RFP Success Company, we not only help our clients design, develop and write a top-notch RFP for submission, but they also look to us for guidance on proposal best practices.
And over the years, we’ve noticed some common mistakes our vendors make when it comes to RFP processes.
On this episode of the podcast, guest host Ted Koval, Senior Proposal Manager at the RFP Success Company, sits down with team members Cheri Fisher, Director of Operations and Client Services, and Kevin Cleary, Proposal Manager and Writer, to discuss the top eight mistakes we see our vendors make and how to fix them!
Cheri explores how waiting until the last minute to respond to an RFP impacts your proposal, and Kevin explains why it’s crucial to involve your HR and legal departments early in the process.
Listen in for insight on making time for a series of reviews of the draft response and learn how to create a winning culture where everyone at your company understands the value of responding to RFPs.
Key Takeaways
The 8 most common mistakes we see our vendors make in responding to RFPs
How waiting until the last minute to respond to an RFP impacts the proposal process
How to create a culture where SMEs understand the value of responding to RFPs
The impact of not having a formal go/no-go decision-making process in place
Why it’s crucial to involve your HR and legal departments early in the RFP process
How not making time for us to meet with SMEs leads to boilerplate responses
Why we suggest making time in the calendar for 3 reviews of the draft RFP response
The consequences of submitting a proposal without differentiators or win themes
What you can learn from an internal and external RFP debrief (win or lose)
RFP Success Show EP127 Transcription
(0:00):
You are listening to the RFP Success Show with eight-time author, speaker, and CEO of the RFP Success Company, Lisa Rehurek. Tune in to each episode to learn what today's capture and RFP teams are doing to increase their win percentages by up to 20, 30 and even 50% and meet the industry trailblazers that are getting it right. Let's get started.
Ted Koval (0:24):
Hi, and welcome to the RFP Success Show Podcast. I'm your host, Ted Koval, Senior Proposal Manager with the RFP Success Company. I'm sitting in today for our usual host, Lisa Rehurek, Founder and CEO of the RFP Success Company. I'd like to introduce you to our guests for today's episode, Mistakes We've Seen Our Vendors Make When Responding to RFPs. Our guests are two of RFP Success's stars. Cheri Fisher, who wears many hats but is mostly known for her work as director of operations and client services. Kevin Cleary is a proposal manager and writer here at RFP Success as well. Welcome, Kevin and Cheri.
At RFP Success we manage the entire proposal process. We've had great interactions and significant wins with our clients. While our clients look to us to help them design, develop and write a top-notch RFP for submission, they also look to us for guidance on proposal best practices. Cheri and Kevin and I have learned a thing or two about this over the many years in the proposal biz, and the observations we're going to discuss today are based on the work we have done in the RFP space, including strategic reviews of RFP processes and systems or lack thereof, previous RFPs we've seen, or RFPs that we've helped clients develop. And our observations encompass all of these scenarios.
So Cheri and Kevin, we have a list of situations where you've seen vendors make mistakes. Let's walk them through and discuss your experience with these as well as the impact they have on the proposal process. I think our audience would love to hear your recommendations on how to fix them. So we'll start our discussion with mistakes we've seen our vendors make when responding to RFPs with Cheri. Cheri, one of the most often seen mistakes we see in the proposal process is when a vendor waits until the last minute to engage us and their team in responding to an RFP, especially if the proposal has been out for a while. What impact does that scenario have on the proposal process and the team assigned to respond to the RFP?
Cheri Fisher (2:29):
Well, yes, Ted, we do see this quite often. We see clients that think the RFP, it's not a big deal. They can just hurry up and do it and then they decide to open it up a couple of weeks later and realize it's a bigger lift than they thought. So I think what we see just at that point, it's just all-hands-on-deck and no one person really is just jumping in and coordinating it all. So they're just piecemealing it together. They're probably doing a lot of copying and pasting, which means old content could get in there. It's not customized to that specific client. I would think that's probably a big impact that we see.
Ted Koval (3:08):
Yeah, absolutely. And that really does have an impact on the whole process. Kevin, how about you? What are some of the mistakes that you've seen in this scenario?
Kevin Cleary (3:18):
Yeah, and just to reiterate Cheri's point, I like to look at these opportunities like a job interview and placing your best foot forward. And I think when we wait till the last minute what we find from our clients is a scramble drill or fire drill. It's like walking into an interview unprepared, and the evaluator or the person conducting the interview is going to read right through that and they're going to see that you rushed to finalize the product or the proposal. They're going to find errors, missing requirements, a failure to identify differentiators and win themes. And you also run the risk of meeting the deadlines. So it's a very negative impact if you don't engage immediately.
Ted Koval (4:11):
Yeah, I love that example that you gave about an interview because really, that's what it is, isn't it, when you're submitting a proposal. Lisa always talks about that there's a human on the other side of the RFP that you're reading and they're reading your interview, your story. So, Kevin, what's the fix for something like this?
Kevin Cleary (4:28):
I think the fix, you have to have a process in place. It has to be identifiable and it has to be structured. And the first step when that RFP is received is to decide on your go/no go. It has to be thoroughly shredded. The RFP has to be thoroughly shredded with all the key decision-makers to make that informed and educated decision as to whether you're going to move forward with the process.
Ted Koval (4:53):
That makes a lot of sense. Cheri, how about you? What do you see as the fix for this kind of a scenario?
Cheri Fisher (4:58):
Yeah, I would think with Kevin talking about the go/no go, and you've got that set criteria and you decide to go, I would say my next fix is then just don't wait on it. Again, when I mentioned on the impact, we see that a lot that it's just assumed you can just hurry up and do it until you open it up and it's not an easy one or it's not a quick one and there's a lot of questions to answer. So it's not just assuming and really opening it up and looking at it and just starting right away. If you finish early, great. But most likely you're going to need all the time you can get.
Ted Koval (5:35):
Absolutely. Absolutely, yeah. You never take for granted that you got all the time in the world. I love that. All right, moving on to our next scenario. We've worked with a lot of good companies that have a great working environment, what you'd call a great culture. Yet some of these we have seen haven't taken the time to create what we call an RFP culture, where their SMEs understand the importance of responding to RFPs as the lifeblood of a company. This can include mistakes by leadership, by not ensuring that the SMEs have the time or really the expectation to participate in the RFP process. So, Kevin, what kind of impact do you see that having on a proposal process?
Kevin Cleary (6:17):
All stakeholders have to feel valued. They all have to want to be heard. They all want to, or they should, feel that their voice is heard, and they need to be part of the team. There is no "I" in team. It needs to be defined for them. This is the role, this is why you're valued, this is why your expertise in this particular subject is valued and the importance of what you bring to our response. So setting that culture, setting the table of all key players, what the role is, and it's identifiable.
Ted Koval (6:52):
That makes a lot of sense. Cheri, we understand that the SMEs that we're working with, well, they've got a day job and sometimes the RFP work isn't a priority.
Cheri Fisher (7:03):
Yeah, and I think with identifying everybody who needs to be involved, what can we do with those SMEs? Because, yeah, they do have real jobs. They have real tasks that they have to get done and that competes with their time available. So making it a culture thing too that we know what can be put aside, what other resources can we give that SME to be able to get their other work done so they can participate in this RFP and not just expect them to be able to do it all and get it all done within the day. So just really looking at ways that we can help the SMEs be able to take that time to participate.
Ted Koval (7:41):
Excellent, excellent. And changing the culture is a difficult thing regardless of what industry you're working in. So Cheri, what do you think the fix is for vendors who want to create a culture of RFPs?
Cheri Fisher (7:54):
Yeah, I think first is, again, Kevin mentioned this a little bit, but really just contributing what they do to the overall company goals, their specific goals. So, how does what they're doing with this RFP response, how does it contribute to all that, to the success of the company, to the success of them, and really give them that connection piece of the bigger picture. And then again, providing the resources in order to get their work done, their competing priorities, so they can feel like they can fully participate.
Ted Koval (8:31):
Yeah, absolutely.
Kevin Cleary (8:33):
I think providing a seat at the table early on. Engage them in the kickoff calls, in each and every step of the process. And we had a meeting with a client several weeks ago and they freely admitted that they have a loser's mentality. They continuously will bid on opportunities or solicit... Or not solicit proposals, but submit proposals, but they frequently lose and people are just tired. But engaging the proper personnel and identifying the roles that they understand, eventually you'll start winning. And winning breeds success.
Ted Koval (9:13):
Yeah, wow. I heard that loser's mentality. Wow, that's got to be a tough way to go about going after RFPs. That definitely makes it difficult to get up every day and work on one of those, but I hear what you're saying. All right, so one of the most common phrases in the proposal business is the go/no go decision. Yet we often find vendors that don't have a process in place to determine which RFPs are the right fit and often without a process to fully review the RFP and the requirements before they decide to respond. So, Kevin, what's the impact of not having a formal RFP go/no go decision process in place?
Kevin Cleary (9:53):
First and foremost, it leads to poor organization, no direction, which then results in poor use of allocated resources, negative cost factors. It's labor dollars. People are working, they're working, and as you mentioned previously, people have day jobs, but a company spends so many labor dollars responding with content and trying to put a proposal together. But if they don't have the guidance and the proper decision-making, it just leads to the negative allocation of resources. And then also it can lead to disqualification of a proposal because of the errors and the risk we mentioned previously.
Cheri Fisher (10:38):
Yeah, and I would add, too, with Kevin mentioning the losing culture there, when that happens, when the team is like, "Eh, we're going to lose this one anyways." One, they're not invested in it, they're just, "Let's churn it and burn it. Let's just slap it together and get it out the door so I can move on." That can cause team morale to go down. They're just not interested in it. They'll probably burn out if they're doing a lot of these, too, because there's no specific strategy on, let's bid on stuff that's really in our wheelhouse, instead of bidding on everything and making the team push these out so often, so frequently.
Ted Koval (11:16):
Yeah, and it's just kind of counterintuitive, isn't it? You think if you respond to everything, you're going to win something. But really what we see is in this space is, when you respond to those RFPs that are more in your niche, in your wheelhouse, then the chances and the opportunity for you to win actually increases.
Cheri Fisher (11:36):
Quality over quantity.
Ted Koval (11:37):
Yeah. Well said. Well said. All right. So what's the fix for helping vendors choose the right opportunities to respond to?
Cheri Fisher (11:45):
I think Kevin mentioned this earlier is that having that go/no go criteria, sitting down and, what's the list of our deal-breakers where we're not going to bid on something? And then, where's the rest of our criteria lie and importance, and where does that RFP fall within that? And use it every time. If you're just starting to do it, put it together, go through some RFPs with it, the ones that you decide to bid on, keep track. Did you win? Did you lose? Do you need to go back and adjust any of that criteria? But really sitting down and starting with that is a good starting point.
Ted Koval (12:22):
Yeah. Kevin, what's your thoughts around that? Around choosing the right opportunities to respond to?
Kevin Cleary (12:29):
Yeah, absolutely. I can just repeat what Cheri said. You really have to shred the RFP. Know what your strengths are and know the market and do what you want to go after.
Ted Koval (12:43):
Yeah, absolutely. Cheri, I like particularly what you said is that you don't have to be stuck with that go/no go criteria. Try a few RFPs out, find out what works, go back and look, "What do we do that we want? What do we do that we lost?" And document it and move on with that. So it's kind of a living, breathing document of those kinds of decisions.
Cheri Fisher (13:07):
We recently worked with a company that we were helping them through their past content and processes to help them improve, and they were responding to hundreds of RFPs with a very small response team. So to say they were burnt out was an understatement, and they weren't engaged. They were just like, "We're just trying to survive and get them out the door." So when we saw their content, too, seeing a lot of generic responses and they weren't positioned to win, so lots of improvements that can be made by just following a process.
Ted Koval (13:47):
Yeah, their content reflected the burnout.
Cheri Fisher (13:50):
Yes.
Ted Koval (13:51):
You're saying. Yeah, absolutely. All right. So, proposal teams get very busy. There's a lot of back and forth, and generally a lot of people involved, especially in the complex RFPs that we work on here at RFP Success Company. Sometimes some of the key players that we need information from are... Well, they're not considered by the proposal team as subject matter experts or SMEs that we need to get content for in the response. And legal and HR are the two that I think of immediately in this scenario. So, Cheri, what's the impact of proposal teams not sharing the RFP and its requirements with departments like HR and legal early on in the process?
Cheri Fisher (14:31):
I think for focusing on the HR side, what I've seen is, when there are those requirements, what are your hiring procedures? How do you recruit? What's your background check process? All of those things and nobody has time. They don't want to spend the time engaging the HR department, so they just assume or guess or answer at a very high level instead of getting those people involved and getting the good detailed processes and policies into their response.
Ted Koval (15:02):
Kevin?
Kevin Cleary (15:03):
Yeah, I think it's so critical to share the RFP with legal and HR. Not doing so can just lead to catastrophic consequences. They have to be engaged very early in the process and they have to be held accountable to meeting deadlines to get their feedback. There's so much that can go wrong if T&Cs, terms and conditions, are not reviewed by the legal experts. A client may get stuck or a company may get stuck with a contract that just leads them to, again, catastrophic consequences, your performance bonds, failure to provide the standards of service, liquidated damages, bid bonds. If those things are not reviewed and agreed to, or take an exception to, it can just be a very disastrous result.
Ted Koval (15:57):
Yeah, absolutely. And the most terrible thing with that certainly is talking to the client about reviewing the Ts & Cs and it just doesn't happen, it doesn't happen. And then we're working through the RFP and at some point they actually do run it by either themselves or legal or HR, and they realize that there is something in there that they can't meet and they actually can't go forward with the proposal, and a lot of time's been wasted. So what's the fix for that?
Cheri Fisher (16:28):
Don't wing it.
Ted Koval (16:30):
Don't wing it. I like that.
Cheri Fisher (16:31):
Don't wing it. Don't guess. We did have a client once and he was not involved in, for me, kind of sticking to the HR theme. He just wasn't involved in that, and he's like, "Well, I think this is what we do. Just put this down." I'm like, "You can't just put down. Let's find out. Who can I talk to in your HR department, so we make sure that we're inputting accurate information, and then that also answers the questions."
Ted Koval (16:56):
Right. Right.
Kevin Cleary (16:57):
And with companies that have their own legal department and HR, they become part of that RFP culture and they need to understand that and be part of the team and be part of the kickoff call and as well as the go/no go decision-making. Engage them from the top.
Ted Koval. (17:15):
Yep, get them involved early. Love that. A recurrent theme is, don't wait. I like that. So we know that vendors don't sit around thinking and dreaming of RFPs all day like we do, and that's okay. That's our job here at the RFP Success Company. And we get that they have day jobs as we talked about, but when a vendor decides to respond to an RFP, sometimes we see them not making the time for us to meet with their SMEs and other key proposal stakeholders. So we do need time with them, and especially we need their technical knowledge. Cheri, what kind of impact does it have when a vendor doesn't make the time for us to work with their SMEs?
Cheri Fisher (17:52):
Yeah. Again, you just can't get that detailed information to make sure that you're fully addressing everything in the question or requirement that's being asked and providing high-level responses that aren't going to provide the client much detail or confidence in your ability to do the work, maybe, also, when you're so vague and not having that technical information.
Kevin Cleary (18:17):
And to Cheri's point, it leads to boilerplate responses because you don't have the technical content. Your response or proposal does not appear to address the actual technical components of the RFP, therefore you don't look like you have the technical capabilities to perform the services.
Ted Koval (18:37):
Yeah, absolutely. And the evaluators see right through that, don't they? They can tell the difference between boilerplate content and content the vendor has taken time to thoughtfully answer. So, what's the fix for getting vendors to have us have the opportunity to sit down with their SMEs and get that knowledge out of their head?
Cheri Fisher (18:57):
I think like we mentioned before, respecting their time, but also letting them know that we need them in the process and the importance of their contribution in the process and whatever we can do, maybe, to give them a heads-up, schedule into their week, weeks, give them a heads-up also on the content we need so they can start thinking about it. Gathering content so when you meet with them, they've already gathered some of that content. So I think, too, just knowing they're pulled in different directions and they've got their real jobs, how can we also make it easier on them so we can get the information?
Ted Koval (19:37):
Absolutely. All right. Very good.
Kevin Cleary (19:38):
Sitting them down, having them included in the meetings and make them feel part of the team so that when it comes time to schedule those interviews with them, they are prepared and they feel valued.
Ted Koval (19:49):
Well said. Yeah. So it's not new to them. Love that. All right. Well, we're going to take a quick commercial break and be right back with the podcast.
Speaker 1 :19:56):
The opportunity to dramatically increase revenue through RFP Use has never been better. If you're ready to respond to more RFPs tap into our team's 60 plus years of combined experience. Our fractional RFP response team becomes your RFP Response Team seamlessly. For more details email us at We can help at RFP success.com
Ted Koval (20:22):
Welcome back to the RFP Success Show podcast. Today we're talking with RFP Success's director of operations and client services, Cheri Fisher, and Kevin Cleary, a proposal manager and writer here at RFP Success. Our topic today is mistakes we've seen vendors make when responding to RFPs, and we've had some interesting discussions around what we've seen in the industry in our years of helping clients respond to RFPs. So, welcome back, Kevin and Cheri.
Our next observation is one where we see vendors not recognizing the benefits of a series of reviews of the draft RFP response and not scheduling time to do those reviews. So, Kevin, it has a huge impact on the RFP response when editorial reviews, strategic reviews, final reviews, compliance reviews are not part of the RFP response process.
Kevin Cleary (21:10):
Yeah. I go back to what we discussed in the first half of the show, job interviews. Think about what the evaluator is seeing from your proposal if you do not go through the appropriate levels of review. You run the risk of submitting a proposal filled with grammatical errors, not meeting RFP compliance requirements, missed opportunities for proper storytelling, differentiators, win themes, and those items can all be captured during different levels of reviews, and it's critical in order to properly tell your story.
Cheri Fisher (21:47:
With what Kevin's saying, too, when you're not telling your story, what are you doing? You're most likely maybe submitting some cookie-cutter response that's not customized to that specific situation. And for me, also, think of the story Kevin's going with, too, applying for a job. If I get a resume that's full of errors, is that what their work is going to be like, too? So the same thing. If we're not doing those reviews to make sure we catch grammatical errors or spelling errors, is that going to have the client thinking, "Hm, I wonder if this is what their work is like also, full of errors and mistakes?"
Ted Koval (22:25):
Absolutely, they're already showing us what their quality of work is going to be like including grammars and errors. Yeah, good point. So, Kevin, what's the fix to encourage vendors to include a series of reviews of the draft RFP?
Kevin Cleary (22:40):
The support of the process should include a high-level calendar, or it's recommended to have a high-level calendar, visible to all stakeholders involved. And on that calendar, identify and schedule at least three levels of review. When scheduling work backwards from the submission due date back to the date that the RFP was received to ensure appropriate time, sufficient time is allowed for those three levels of review. And then holding those who are performing the reviews accountable to the deadlines, the timeline.
Cheri Fisher (23:17):
And with that, and scheduling, it is discussing the importance. I feel like that's missed a lot, too, is, the team, the people that are contributing maybe different pieces and parts of it and maybe not into the whole process, don't necessarily understand the reason for those reviews and what we're really looking for in those reviews. Talking about like we did, we just talked about the impacts that when we don't have those reviews and bringing that up at the beginning as we go over the calendar and when these are scheduled, but let's also talk about why they're being scheduled and the importance of sticking to those calendars so we have time for them.
Ted Koval (23:53):
Yeah, absolutely. It's often one of the first things that we see that vendors will say, "Well, we've got some time here at the end for reviews. Let's use that for the writing component because we're a little bit behind." But vendors need to understand that the time for reviews is not cushion or contingency time. It's there for a purpose to make sure everything we're working on is top notch. Absolutely.
Cheri Fisher (24:16):
Yeah. And Ted, I think you might remember a client we recently worked with where after the review, the client went in and made some changes and copied and pasted, and it ended up copying over a whole question and requirement. And luckily another review period had showed that, "Wait a minute, there's a section missing here."
Ted Koval (24:37):
That's right.
Cheri Fisher (24:38):
So without that review, that RFP proposal could have been submitted without a whole question being addressed.
Ted Koval (24:44):
And what happens then? It gets rejected.
Cheri Fisher (24:46):
Exactly.
Ted Koval (24:47):
Yep.
Cheri Fisher (24:48):
Bye-bye.
Ted Koval (24:49):
Yeah, bye-bye. Right. All right. We're always coaching our clients to find ways to set themselves apart from their competitors. One way we do this is, is in helping them identify differentiators, win themes, and an RFP response strategy. Kevin, when vendors leave out these identifying, these specific differentiators and win themes and such from the RFP response process, what's the impact?
Kevin Cleary (25:13):
Well, I like to use the analogy... I like analogies, but billboards are a great way to advertise, and I think of it as driving down a road to a tourist attraction. And along the side of the road are a bunch of billboards. Everybody can see them. But at nighttime, if they're not lit up, you can't read them. So how are you setting yourself apart from the competition? And keep in mind that rarely are you the only one submitting a proposal.
So what can you do to personalize and speak directly to the pain points and the heartburn that the buyer is experiencing? Explain why your solution is the best choice, why your company is the partner of choice. But oftentimes we see a lack of one-voice approach. You can see that there are multiple variations or iterations involved in the response, and it appears that more than one person has written the RFP. It leads to confusion, lack of consistency.
Cheri Fisher (26:22):
And with setting it apart, I think when we review content, kind of the first thing I usually say is, "There's no doubt you can technically do this. You are technically answering all the questions. You can do steps one, two, three, whatever they need to do. But so can a competitor. So when you match technically and maybe even price, what's really going to set you apart from that?"
Ted Koval (26:46):
Exactly. Yeah. Differentiators. Right. So Kevin, as you know, one of the things we coach our clients on, win or lose, the RFP is, don't miss out on requesting a debrief from the agency and make sure you do an internal RFP response debrief as well. So without that, vendors are not in the best position to continue developing and documenting lessons learned that they can apply to the next RFP response. So what else is the impact of not having an internal and external debrief after the RFP, win or lose?
Kevin Cleary (27:17):
First and foremost, failure to have those meetings does not allow you to understand what you did well in your response and what you didn't do well. So it's a learning exercise and it's an opportunity to learn. It also is an opportunity for you to learn what your competition does well and what they don't do well. So it's a scouting report, not just on yourself, but also against those who you're competing against. Critical, very critical, when you are not the incumbent. So, not only can you do a debrief at the end, but it will help you for the next opportunity.
Cheri Fisher (27:53):
Yeah, and I think back, just as a story pops into my head, I remember Lisa talking about a client she had a while back, but they had won and they thought, "Wow, we have a great proposal." So they just kept using that proposal only to find out later they won because they were the best of the worst. So never going back and really looking at what you did, and again, just evolving it and improving the content or the processes, you could just get stuck in just using something that might not have been a strong response content.
Ted Koval (28:32):
Absolutely. And what surprises I think the most is how few vendors actually take that time to get that kind of feedback.
Cheri Fisher (28:39):
Absolutely.
Ted Koval (28:40):
It's right there for you. So, well, that's it for this episode of the RFP Success Podcast. I'd like to thank our guest, Cheri Fisher and Kevin Cleary of the RFP Success Company for joining us on the show and sharing their invaluable insights. If you like what you heard today, please take a moment and share our podcast with others who would benefit from hearing about the show. And make sure you subscribe to our podcast so you don't miss an episode. On behalf of my guests and myself and our founder and CEO, Lisa Rehurek, I want to thank you for listening to the RFP Success Show.
Outro (29:10):
This has been another episode of the RFP Success Show with Lisa Rehurek, eight-time author, speaker and CEO of the RFP Success Company. Thank you for joining us. If you have feedback on today's episode, email us at podcast@rfpsuccess.com. No matter your business size or industry, if you have an in-house RFP team or need outside support, the RFP Success Company helps increase RFP win ratios by 10, 20 and even 50%. Learn more at therfpsuccesscompany.com.