Responding to RFPs – Joint Blogpost with Babette Ten Haken

[This jointly-written blogpost appears also on Babette Ten Haken’s blog, Sales Aerobics for Engineers]

Many Requests for Proposal (RFPs) are well written, and play an important role in the intelligent procurement processes of well-run companies. We both know that to be true, yet sometimes we have to wonder: Why is it that we see so many of the other kind? Is it lack of knowledge on the part of the RFP writer? An inability to alter processes that might have worked in the past?

You know the kind we’re talking about: RFP’s that are written to avoid talking to salespeople, that assume the only relevant variable is price, that are motivated by a fear that salespeople will gang up and collude against the buyer if it becomes known there’s a purchase afoot.  These types of RFPs are written from a defensive position, rather than as a confident and aggressive approach to creating mutually beneficial business relationships and outcomes.

We’ve both written about RFPs before (Charlie in Open Letter to Clients: Why You Should Drop RFPs; Babette in Do You Mean Business?  In this post we want to address how to respond to such RFPs.

Remember: There are good reasons for creating as well as responding to RFPs. Any hurt feelings you might have are irrelevant to your proper reaction. Strive for an objective, reasonable tone, devoid of blaming. That will help the central point you want to make.

A Sample Response

You might consider something like this as a starting draft:

Dear ___ :

I hope this finds you well, etc.

I wasn’t sure how to respond to your RFP regarding objectives, agenda and costs. Here’s why:

• In our initial call, I shared with you a list of objectives that past clients achieved through us.  I was trying to help you defineyour own objectives, rather than presume to tell you what your objective should be.

• We also discussed several alternative program designs, to help you craft your own agenda, rather than us simply proposing one for you.

Basically, I was trying to collaborate on a customized design rather than to sell a standardized product.

What I read into your RFP is that you’d prefer not to engage in a design discussion, but rather go straight to bid.  There is of course nothing wrong with that, and it’s completely your decision.  At the same time, I find that usually means one of two things:

1.     The customer really isn’t interested in customizing, preferring a standardized product; or

2.     The vendor decision has been pretty much made (and we’re not it).

Again, there’s nothing wrong with either one of those. But in either case, it’s hard on our end to justify investing the extra time. We have a mild preference for customized products; more importantly, we fear misunderstandings from purchases based on incomplete understandings.

Please don’t hear anything critical or complaining about this; nobody’s wrong, no feelings are hurt.  I just want to be clear and not leave conversations uncomfortable or unfinished.  I hope I’m not offending by being very candid and direct in this email; my intent is to make it OK for us to be truthful with each other.

Best wishes….

That was a real-life letter, by the way.

If you’re thinking, “that sounds way too direct,” ask yourself how many sales hours you spend requesting people to allow you to respond to one of these cattle-call documents, vs. the time you spend with prospective customers? Because that’s the price you’re paying for an inability to directly confront the issue.

Your goal is to reduce your responses to RFPs whose sole goal is price. That means you need to rethink your customer acquisition strategy too.

Understand whether your relationship with your customer merits strong consideration, or whether you feel you’ve already been placed in the “also-ran” category. If you believe your thought leadership and industry, product or platform expertise is genuinely of value to them, then this is why you give yourself permission to reply directly. Respond from a position of  confidence and knowledge.

What if It Doesn’t Work?

If you are right, they will see it your way and ask you to talk further. If they don’t ask you to talk further, it is because:

a.     It was price-driven anyway, in which case you just saved a lot of time, or

b.     You were wrong, and they actually don’t care about your expertise, in which case you saved a lot of time (and got something to think about), or

c.     You offended them.

If you’re concerned about the last possibility, then we urge you to write a better letter, because you’re still preparing to waste a lot of time.

Meantime, you might want to know the actual response to the real letter above:

LOL! The next steps are in our court.  We need to really look at the links you sent us and come up with a draft of what we would like to see and then get back to you.  I will certainly email/call you if we have any questions along the way. You are still very much in the running.

Was that a worthwhile letter? When was the last time you could have written such a letter? What will you do when the opportunity next presents itself?


6 replies
  1. Bob Whipple
    Bob Whipple says:

    Hi Babette and Charlie. This was a good posting. I have had a journey to understanding the RFP process myself over the years. I find that a pretty high percentage (especially in government work) are just a sham, where they already know the winner before the race is begun. I did a test a few years ago to prove it to myself.
    I had lost a bit for some training work. Two years later, they went out for another bid for the coming 2 years. I knew the price points from the last round because I had taken the time to go in and review the various submissions.
    I decided to give a really aggressive bid that would for sure be the low price point, just to do a test. I did not get the job, and when I went in to inspect the various packages, it was obvious my bid was by far the lowest.
    I asked the purchasing agent if there was any way I could have won that account at any price point. He said “No, Bob. We already knew who we were going with before we sent it out for bid.” I told him that I appreciated his candor and left.

    • Charles H. Green
      Charles H. Green says:

      As you note, all too often this is the case.

      At the same time, though, it’s not always the case. There are sound reasons for RFPs, and professional procurement people who do sound jobs of using RFPs for buying. In those cases, the sellers like you and I have to remember to respect the process, to treat the people in charge of the RFP process as we would treat any client, and so forth.

      It sure helps when both parties are playing by the same rulebook, however.

  2. David Kutcher
    David Kutcher says:

    There are always good and bad RFPs, and I’ve seen thousands of both running the RFP Database at

    The issuer of a bad RFP is going to get a bad project, and no matter how hard you try, you’re not going to convince them to go with another strategy. The trick for you, as the vendor potentially bidding, is to be able to determine which type of RFP it is. A go/no-go decision tree is often the best tool:

    And you can always send them this post on how to run a considerate RFP process:


Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] 1[Charles H. Green and I collaborated on this jointly-written blog post. It also appears on his Trusted Advisor Blog.] We’ve all been asked to respond to Requests for Proposal (RFPs). Many Requests for Proposal […]

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *