Given the complexity of creating RFPs, organisations are not
always fully equipped to ask the correct questions, and might even
lack the required technical knowledge. This talk will demonstrate
the importance of considering input from others when setting
up your own RFP as this can save time and money – the risks
of not identifying all potential pitfalls at RFP stage can be time-
consuming and costly a few years later. This talk will apply to
all in the industry, from publishers seeking out new platform
providers to libraries sourcing vendors for specific projects.
Tracy Gardner, Renew Publishing Consultants
Yann Amouroux, Bioscientifica
Setting up an Effective RFP for Choosing a Third-Party Vendor
1. Setting up an effective Request For
Proposal (RFP) and the benefit of using
third-party knowledge
UKSG Annual Conference 2018, Glasgow
Yann Amouroux, Bioscientifica
Tracy Gardner, Renew Publishing Consultants
2. Outline of the session
•Introductions
•Hands up if.....
•In their own words – case study from Bioscientifica
•How to go about writing your RFP
•Choosing a consultant
•Q&A
14. “An RFP is a document commonly written
by an organisation seeking bids from
potential vendors. It serves as a base line
of project or system requirements on
which competing vendors may describe
and price their services”.
So what is an RFP?
15. • Vendor responses can be too vague as not enough questions to respond to/information given
• Decisions are made on insufficient information from the vendor
• Contract is signed, implementation starts, questions are raised, e.g. “what did you mean by?”
• Vendor realises that customer expectations are not in line with vendor assumptions
• Project enters are period of negotiation which should have happened before the contract was signed
• Both vendor and customer become frustrated, relationship suffers
• Customer not happy as system doesn’t meet their needs. Vendor not happy because they haven’t
delivered something the customer is happy with
Allofthiscanbeavoided
withadecentRF
E
a
s
i
l
y
A
v
o
i
d
e
d
16. Allows you to be very clear
about your technical and
business requirements
Gives you an opportunity
to communicate the use
cases of the system
Shows potential vendors
what kind of business you
are
Sets the scene for your
ongoing relationship
Helps you compare apples
with apples
Without a detailed RFP too
much is left to chance
How does it help?
17. Your chance to document what you need
We often hear “but we
just need a journals
platform/peer review
system/ERM system, our
requirements are no
different to anyone else”
Of course they are –
every organisation or
business has a unique set
of objectives,
requirements, success
factors, use cases
So your RFP needs be
very specific and detailed
– you will thank yourself
in the long run
And your (successful)
vendors will thank you
too - the more better
your RFP, the less chance
of difficulties further
down the track
18. Our Approach
We help you articulate:
• the “Why”
• the “What”
• the “How”
We then help you evaluate
the responses and select a
suitable a partner by
providing an evaluation
framework and scoring
system
19. The “Why”
Information gathering
• Marketing
• Production
• Editorial
• Senior management
• Sales
We want to know:
• What you are trying to
achieve as a
business/organisation
• What problem is it you are
specifically trying to fix
• What is working now
• What isn’t working now
• What are the key use cases
By removing
departmental
lines we can get
to the core of the
“why”.
Group
information
sharing helps
everyone get on
board with the
process
20. The “What”- otherwise known as the detail
What
specifically
does the
system need
to do
What
production
processes
are in place
and need to
be
supported
What is your
business
model
How about
industry
standards and
requirements
Who are
your
“customers”
and what do
they need
What
information
do you need
to put in
and get out
of the
system
Defining the
Use Cases
will be a
crucial
success
factor
21. The “how”
You want to ask questions which require the
vendors to answer in a detailed and open way.
• Be Specific
• Be Detailed
• Be Open Ended
Ask the vendor for their approach to solving
your difficult problems
22. Suggested structure
Brief Project Overview
Overview of your organization
Primary objectives
Key Deliverables
Key information about the organisation/business
Detailed requirements and use cases
Migration planning (if moving from one system to another)
Relationship expectations: SLA and relationship managements
Evaluation and selection process
Timeline
23. Evaluation
• Ask the vendor to answer the questions in a specific way that allows you to
compare each response point for point
• Have a scoring system so you can score each requirement
• Have a weighting for each of your requirements so the importance to your
business is taking into account. Not all requirements are created equal.
• Be specific about how you want costs to be defined in the proposal
Have a structure
which allows you to
score responses on
a like for like basis.
• We have seen favoured vendors fall at this stage
• Be specific about what you expect them to do at the presentation
stage and have questions prepared
Invite your favoured
vendors in for a
presentation
24. The Project Team
• The project team needs to include a representative from the key stakeholders and
user groups
• It may be you decide to use a third party consultant to help you. We would
recommend you choose someone:
• Who has domain expertise
• Has knowledge of the type of system you are wishing to purchase
• Is good at asking the right questions and unafraid of challenging your assumptions
• Has proven experience
Are you are a librarian, publisher, have worked on a project requiring an RFP process, have a project in mind you want to work on, If not many people we could do round the room.
If a lot then a show of hands
Bioscientifica is a small to medium company, we employ 85 people (FTE about 75 as we have quite a few P/T workers).
Our main area of expertise is Bio-Medical, we belong to the Society for Endocrinology (SfE) which is basically hormones and Bioscientifica is the commercial arm of SfE, all our surplus go to the Society.
Over half of our turnover comes from Publishing, but another major revenue stream for us is with organising conferences and events (either for clients, or meetings of our own) which ranges from a few hundred delegates to meetings of 5-6,000 professionals.
We publish 5 subscription-based titles and 4 open access titles. The trend seems to be going towards OA publishing, although subscription revenue is still by far most of our publishing income.
Our Publishing team was faced with having to undertake a major project and felt that we did not have sufficient experience internally to deal with it all.
This was a complex technical project which involved different teams together.
To give the audience in this room something more concrete about our workshop, imagine if you are a librarian and that this project would have been reviewing a Library Management System, deciding on which new one to go for?
Or for publishers in the room this could be reviewing distribution and management of print + electronic copies, together with revenue, what should we do?
Or even for anyone this could be any major electronic based related project.
For the sake of this presentation, we shall refer to this as “the project”, and I would like to take you now through our journey that led us to involve a third party in the project itself.
Our lack of experience was due to the fact that we had the same provider for quite some time and were not all that familiar of what else was available “out there”.
Due to the nature of the project and the major risks involved in getting it wrong, we needed to make sure we identified all possible pitfalls before going out to tender.
• Who would be suitable to meet our needs?
• How much would this cost?
• What parameters must we capture in the RFP?
• What if we forgot some key elements in the RFP?
• When was the last time we ever put such RFP in place…?
The last point (when was the last time…) was pretty much what made us look out for a consultant, a firm that had specific experience in this field and could assist us with their expertise.
We were not against working with consultants, having done so with many other internal projects over the years, therefore we knew that it incurs costs.
In this particular instance the risks of not addressing the RFP properly fully mitigated potential added costs with the project itself, it was decided to seek out external advice, and the importance of the project was far bigger than anything we did before now. By cutting costs going alone we could possibly incur other costs, that could potentially be a lot more than us employing a third party’s knowledge and expertise with us not getting everything right in the first place.
This project was defined as majorly important to us as an organisation, but also a massive expense in what is after all a small to medium size business.
Publishing is one part of what we do, as mentioned before, and certainly not the only thing we do. We needed to make sure that our decision to review our current service agreement was the right way forward, with the added possibility that moving away from what we had and going into a totally new agreement would be costly.
And when there is not a lot of money available in the first place, such a decision had to be absolutely right for us. We basically had little or no room for any errors, working with an expert alleviated those possible fears.
With the support of working on this project with a consultant, we quickly identified the choices available and were able to conduct some pre-review on the service providers before even engaging with any of them in RFP discussions. This pre-screening exercise was incredibly useful and saved us a lot of time in the long run.
Despite our small size, our needs were quite complex, and we quickly realised that standards between vendors would vary massively, as well as the price tags involved in the work we might require from any of them.
Our consultant guided us through this initial internal review process and we already felt the benefits of them taking things in hands for us.
Our consultant provided us with some crucial guidelines in questions we should be asking ourselves on what we wanted, and what we needed.
Taking that into consideration, would a possible vendor address those needs easily, or will it be something new to them? If this project was to become deeply involved with a vendor offering us a one-off model specially built and designed for us, do we really wanted that to be the case? Or shall we aim at other vendors that might have more off the shelf solutions?
What would be the risks of us working with someone that would need to adapt to our needs?
Did we want a bespoke product?
We soon made a decision that any taylor-made models would not suit us and based on that whittled down possible vendors.
Our consultant was key in making sure we did not dismiss anyone too quickly, also that we were absolutely happy with our internal decisions, but we were in control and had guidance.
This initial review done, we had the daunting task of going to tender and this is where most of the work with our consultant really paid off.
We quickly realised that our draft RFP would not have covered many highly specific technical requirements, or made general assumptions that would not necessarily be picked up by any vendor, but would have come to bite us at a later date.
We learned that going through requirements thoroughly beforehand is essential, and is of benefit in that it helps you understand which features and functionality you must have, would like to have, and which ones you can live without.
We found out that different vendors might have strength in different areas, and our consultant was able to help us identifying the variety on offer.
The ability to provide us with un-biased and objective opinion on a variety of possible vendors was exactly what we needed from our consultant, and was what we actually got.
With this in mind, we were able to put together a very precise RFP that took the team some time to put together, but it felt as there was possibly little if no room for errors.
This RFP was so complete, in our view, that we had listed all our requirements so clearly we knew it was strong and would attract a positive response from the vendors.
Having a quality RFP shows to potential vendors that you have done due diligence in your preparation and expect from them full and comprehensive replies.
It also mitigate the problems of not listing properly your needs, therefore getting a full picture on costs that will be involved in developing the project to your key needs.
If you are asking too much for a budget that will not be adequate to cover the basis of your RFP, the consultant is there to guide and possibly educate you in the process.
And by going out to tender with a solid RFP it makes you look like you know your subject, you have done your homework and you actually mean business. Weak or incomplete RFP do not give a good image of your company, and our consultant made sure that we avoided such issues.
When RFP are not done frequently, or even if they are, the questions we needed to ask ourselves had to be reviewed and reconsidered in some length, having a third party independent advisor does pay off when grappling with that concept.
Despite the fact that we had a very strong RFP, even receiving very complimentary comments from vendors on how good and rich in details it was, we soon realised that we still had left one or two areas uncovered by the RFP.
When work started, those forgotten details quickly showed themselves up and it was lucky that, thanks to such a solid RFP in the first place, we were able to address those gaps very soon in the process. And to our relief the costs implication happened to be minimal, thanks to having a strong RFP those small errors were only just that, small and easy to address.
As a witness to the whole process and having played only a small part in it, it was evident to me that many of us in this room might benefit in questioning how we are all working.
Shall we assume that we have sufficient internal knowledge to go to RFP, or should we get a third party to check if we have not forgotten some key elements?
Can we afford errors, most importantly can we absorb such errors into how our business?
I felt that our collaboration with Tracy and her colleagues in the project really paid off, from the start in fact. Even if the project is still ongoing at the time of speaking to you today, we have established strong systems and mechanism, safeguarding us and our chosen vendor of any possible issues.
Peace of mind comes at a price, but it is worth paying for!