Paul Pinto, Managing Partner of Sylvan VI, and Barry Diamond, VP of Business Development at Pinstripe, share a new “do-it-yourself” RFP tool designed to give small-to-medium businesses the ability to better create and manage the RFP process when engaging a sourcing advisor is not an option. This online SAAS (software-as-a-service) tool incorporates industry best practices to guide companies through crafting insightful questions that will result in a better quality RFP as well as help facilitate the decision-making process.

1. RFP 2.0
Are You Ready for a
Sourcing Upgrade?
S i U d ?
December, 2009
Paul C. Pinto
Managing Partner
Managing Partner
Sylvan VI, Inc.

2. Barry Diamond, Vice President, Pinstripe
The Vice President of Business Development at Pinstripe, Inc., Barry Diamond
is responsible for cultivating, delivering and managing new business. As the
fourth executive to join the company, he was instrumental in building
fourth executive to join the company, he was instrumental in building
Pinstripe’s sales program from the ground up. In his ongoing role, Barry leads
the company’s commercial group sales strategy, and the design and creation
of customized programs, initiatives, materials, and new service offerings.
A driving force in Pinstripe’s success, Barry’s successful new business
development efforts result in the hires of more than 15,000 Fortune 1000
employees annually. Barry leverages his expertise in human resources and
p y y y g p
talent acquisition, coupled with insights gained from diverse business
experience in market research, lead generation, and operations
management, to maintain and build relationships across the industry. He is
responsible for mining new business through a network of existing and
responsible for mining new business through a network of existing and
prospective clients, as well as managing and leveraging relationships with
sourcing advisory companies
1

3. Paul Pinto, Managing Partner, Sylvan VI, Inc.
Paul Pinto, is a Managing Partner at Sylvan VI. Inc. where he is responsible for
providing a unique set of ‘Outsourcing Advisory 2.0’ services to U.S. and U.K.‐
based clients. Throughout his 25 year career, Mr. Pinto has provided advice
based clients. Throughout his 25‐year career, Mr. Pinto has provided advice
and council to a variety of fortune 2000 companies who were interested in
experiencing the benefits of outsourcing. As part of 30+ Advisory
engagements, Mr. Pinto has facilitated the outsourcing of services to vendors
located in Canada, China, Brazil, India, and Russia, and has setup captive
l d i C d Chi B il I di dR i dh i
centers in India, Egypt, Malaysia, Mexico, and Slovakia. Mr. Pinto also serves
as an Expert Witness in court cases that require the unbiased opinion of an
expert in the field of outsourcing, breaches of contract.
p g,
Sylvan VI, Inc. is a new‐breed of outsourcing advisory firm that provides
expert advice to support our clients in transforming their businesses through
the application of innovative delivery models, that leverage a new approach
the application of innovative delivery models that leverage a new approach
to providing services in a “2.0” environment. Our mission is to help our clients
align their overall business goals by reducing costs, improving operational
efficiencies, and ultimately positioning them to be free to concentrate on
becoming more competitive in their selected markets.
2

4. We offer an array of solutions for our partners looking
to us for TALENT IN SIGHT
Pinstripe Talent Spectrum provides our clients with a complete end‐to‐end recruitment partnership
solution.
Pinstripe’s Project Focused Talent Spectrum offers our complete end‐to‐end solution but focused by
i i ’ j d l ff l d d l i b f db
types of positions, location, or specific period of time.
Pinstripe Talent Point allows our clients to select points in the recruitment process to leverage our
expertise and support their HR process where they need it most.
i d h i h h di
3

5. Discussion Topics
Discussion Topics
The RFP Process
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1.0)
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1 0)
The Future State RFP Process (RFP 2.0)
Comparison and Conclusion
Comparison and Conclusion
4

6. Actors in the Outsourcing Ecosystem
Influencer
Buyer
Suppliers of outsourcing-related
outsourcing related
Consumers of outsourced services information
Advisor Provider
pp g
Supplier of customized outsourcing p
Seller and provider of outsourced
advice and guidance services
The election to involve Advisors and/or Influencers in the outsourcing process, requires a certain
The election to involve Advisors and/or Influencers in the outsourcing process, requires a certain
level of investment, while the decision to undertake a Do‐It‐Yourself approach bears a certain
level of risk.
5

7. Why Upgrade the Vendor Selection Process?
Select the most appropriate vendor within the shortest period of time, in a way that minimizes
the cost of the selection process, and builds consensus for the ultimate decision and initiative.
• Increase the speed ith hich the
Increase the speed with which the
ultimately qualified vendor will be
• Gain access to qualified
selected
Faster vendors to which you have
no prior exposure
• Administer the
process while
reducing the
amount of
amount of
Greener Better
resources being
consumed (e.g.
paper, toner,
mailings …)
• Minimize the cost associated
with selecting the ultimate
Safer Cheaper vendor
• Build consensus around
the ultimate decision, and
the ultimate decision and
lay the groundwork for a
successful relationship
6

8. Discussion Topics
Discussion Topics
The RFP Process
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1.0)
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1 0)
The Future State RFP Process (RFP 2.0)
Comparison and Conclusion
Comparison and Conclusion
7

9. High‐level RFI/RFP 1.0 Process
Process Flow Deliverables
Business
Develop Business Case Total Cost of Ownership, Return On Investment, In‐source vs. Outsource decision
Case
Long-list of
Develop RFI High‐level requirements, long‐list of potential vendors (10 – 20)
Vendors
Distribute to Prospective
p Short-list of
Vendors Vendor responses, short‐list of prospective vendors (5 ‐7)
d h l f d ( ) Vendors
Statement of
Develop RFP Detailed requirements, Service Level Agreements
Requirements
Proposed
Facilitate Due Diligence (bilateral) Proposed solutions
Solutions
Evaluation
Evaluate Vendors Selected Vendor(s)
Results
Negotiate T&Cs with Contractual
Agreement
selected Vendor(s) Agreement
Typical Scenario
• 9 Vendors favorably responding to RFI • 1 vendor negotiating contractual Ts&Cs • Focused on Math (price) and Physics (fit)
• 5 Vendors favorably responding to RFP • 6‐9 months of calendar time • Keeps the vendors at arm’s length
• 3 Vendors engaged in due diligence • 1,500 – 2,100 person‐hours of internal effort • Does not always yield a unanimous decision
• 4 Evaluators reviewing vendor responses • 4,200 – 5,500 sheets of paper produced • Uses spreadsheets, and word processers
8

10. Characteristic of RFP 1.0
Area Characteristic
Proven Process The RFP process has been in use for a very long time, and is well‐tested and proven
to build consensus for the selection of the ultimate vendor. The process clearly
yields actionable results.
Template Deliverables Most organizations have a set of dedicated word processing documents (e.g. RFQs,
RFIs, RFPs…), and spreadsheets (e.g. TCO, ROI, vendor weighting and rating…)
RFIs, RFPs…), and spreadsheets (e.g. TCO, ROI, vendor weighting and rating…)
Comfortable The majority of decision‐makers have prior experience being involved in selecting a
vendor through the use of the traditional RFI/RFP process. As such, they
understand their role in the process, and are relatively comfortable in providing
understand their role in the process and are relatively comfortable in providing
their input and feedback through this forum.
Proven Results The majority of large and medium‐sized outsourcing projects have used the RFP
process to facilitate the selection of their external service provider. The majority of
these relationships have been mutually beneficial and deemed to be successful.
Promotes Competition
p The process allows for a like‐for‐like comparison of costs between vendors, which
p p ,
enables the Buyers to aggressively negotiate the cost of services in normalized
terms.
9

11. RFP 1.0 Improvement Areas
Area Approach Area of Potential Improvement
The standard process of RFI (long‐list of vendors),
This approach, while very thorough, can take to long
to RFP (short‐list of vendors), to vendor
to complete, and runs a risk associated with the
Faster evaluations (2‐vendors), to negotiations, to final
needs of the business changing dramatically during
needs of the business changing dramatically during
selection, can take between 6 and 9 months to
the evaluation process.
complete.
The RFP process strives to develop detailed The more detailed an RFP is, the more prescriptive it
requirements, so the vendors have a clear becomes, which forces vendors to commit to
Better understanding about the scope of services and providing services in a manner in which they may
the Service Level Agreements. not be comfortable.
This approach encourages the vendors to manage
The RFP process is focused on driving the price of
the components of scope, resource skills, and
Cheaper
p services down, as opposed to driving up the value
, pp g p
quality, in order to satisfy the mandated pricing
lit i d t ti f th d t d i i
of the relationship.
requirements.
While this approach does create a level playing field
Keeping the vendors at arms‐length provides for a
for the purposes of evaluating vendors, it does not
Safer more competitive bidding process, where apples
encourage the assessment of the vendors cultural fit
encourage the assessment of the vendors cultural fit
can be compared to apples.
with the User’s environment.
This approach is extremely paper intensive, and does
The RFI/RFP process is produces a significant set not take advantage of the Internet, online
of documents (RFPs , Responses, Evaluations) and
of documents (RFPs Responses Evaluations) and collaboration tools, and available content. All RFPs
collaboration tools and available content All RFPs
Greener requires time and effort to organize, and manage can be rendered, responded to and evaluated
all of the documentation. electronically, without ever producing a piece of
paper.
10

12. Discussion Topics
Discussion Topics
The RFP Process
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1.0)
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1 0)
The Future State RFP Process (RFP 2.0)
Comparison and Conclusion
Comparison and Conclusion
11

13. High‐level RFP 2.0 Process
Process Flow Deliverables
Business
Develop Business Case
D l B i C Total Cost of Ownership, Return On Investment, In‐source vs. Outsource decision
Total Cost of Ownership Return On Investment In source vs Outsource decision
Case
Short-list of
Develop RFP Detailed requirements, Service Level Agreements, short‐list of potential vendors (2 ‐3) Vendors
Statement of
Facilitate Due Diligence (bilateral) Proposed solutions Requirements
Proposed
Evaluate Vendors Selected Vendor(s)
Solutions
Evaluation
Negotiate T&Cs with selected Vendor(s) Agreement Results
Contractual
Agreement
Typical Scenario
• 3 Vendors favorably responding to RFP
y p g • 1 vendor negotiating contractual Ts&Cs
1 vendor negotiating contractual Ts&Cs • Focused on Chemistry (cultural fit)
y( )
• 2 Vendors engaged in due diligence • 3‐4 months of calendar time • Engage the vendors in innovation
• 4 Evaluators reviewing vendor responses • 700 – 950 person‐hours of internal effort • Does not always yield a unanimous decision
• Uses SaaS‐based tools • Uses collaboration tool to manage the process
12

14. Characteristic of RFP 2.0
Area Characteristic
The Proven Process The RFP 2.0 process produces the same proven deliverable as the standard RFP
p
process, but does so through the use of an innovate set of tools and techniques.
, g q
Match Making The standard RFI process has been replaced by the use of research data that tracks
and monitors the profiles and capabilities of over 10,000 vendors. By matching the
Buyer’s specific requirements to those contained in The Outsourcing Institute’s
database, we are able to develop a short‐list of highly qualified vendors, within a
d b bl d l h l f h hl lf d d h
fraction of the standard time.
Use of Tools The RFP 2.0 process uses tools that contain the needed RFP content as a cafeteria‐
style menu from which one can select the needed requirements. These tools are
style menu from which one can select the needed requirements These tools are
provided to the User as a service (SaaS‐based), and are focused on facilitating the
Users through a very natural workflow.
Electronic The RFP2.0 process is administered through a collaboration environment where the
RFP is built, distributed, responded to, and evaluated electronically There is no need
to printout an sheets of paper.
Faster Results Proven results are reached within half the time of the standard RFP process, due to
the removal of the RFI process, and the reduction in administration time associated
with managing paper.
13

15. The Outsourcing Accelerator
14

16. Buyer Profile Questions
Recruitment Process Outsourcing
15

17. Suggested Path Through the Services
16

18. Suggested Approach to RFI or RFP
17

19. Buyer’s Dashboard of RFI/RFPs
18

20. Assigning Other Buyers
19

21. RFI/RFP Executive Summary
20

22. Scope of Services
21

23. RFI/RFP Service Level Agreements
22

24. Ask an Expert for Advice
23

25. Client References
24

26. Rate Card
25

27. Seller’s Response to Executive Summary
26

28. Seller’s Response to Service Level Agreements
27

29. Evaluator’s Assessment of Vendor Responses
28

30. Match Making Process
Buyer’s Requirement Capabilities of 10,000 Providers
Physics Physics
Math Math
Chemistry Chemistry
Short‐list of
Highly qualified
Vendors
29

31. Discussion Topics
Discussion Topics
The RFP Process
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1.0)
The Current State RFP Process (RFP 1 0)
The Future State RFP Process (RFP 2.0)
Comparison and Conclusion
Comparison and Conclusion
30

32. Changing Tenets of the RFP Process
RFP 1.0 RFP 2.0
Privileged access to proprietary outsourcing information Open access to artifacts through online communities and libraries
Low volume of large outsourcing engagements
Low‐volume of large outsourcing engagements High volume of small outsourcing transactions
High‐volume of small outsourcing transactions
Advisory assistance is required to enabling outsourcing Advisory assistance is desired to support Do‐It‐Yourself‐Outsourcing
Process focused (process for the sake of process) Outcome focused (get to the results)
Due diligence‐based sourcing (driven by Procurement) Accelerated sourcing (driven by the Line of Business)
Stand‐alone tools and point solutions Collaborative, SaaS‐based tools
‘Random‐walk’ approach to understanding the business Surgical focus on outsourcing components of the business
India is the primary destination Considerable capabilities available in multiple geographies
Focused on transitioning work (lift and shift) to offshore Focused on transforming the business
Time & Materials fees, best level of effort Performance‐based fees, paid at the outcome
Pyramid approach to project staffing, with a part‐time Senior Advisor Apply only experienced Senior Advisors (20+years) throughout the entire
coupled with a number of onsite Junior Consultants life‐cycle of the project
Traditional vendor selection process (long list, to a short list, to a bake‐
d l d l (l l h l b k l h k ll b b
Facilitated match‐making and collaboration between Buyers and Providers
off, to a selected vendor)
31

33. Are You Ready to Make the Move?
Area of Concern Traditional Approach Accelerated Approach
Organizational view The organization has had limited and/or mixed experience The organization is already a proponent of, and a firm believer
of outsourcing with outsourcing, and is undecided about its true level of in the value associated outsourcing and offshoring.
added value.
Business need There is an ongoing effort to reduce costs, and the There is an imperative business need that is driving this
organization would like to explore outsourcing / offshoring initiative (e.g. mandated reduction in headcount). The
as a potential option. organization has a strong reason to move fast.
Sponsorship This is a departmental initiative, and is being sponsored at The need is so great, that this initiative is sponsored at the
the Manager or Director level.
the Manager or Director‐level. leadership level, and is being championed by a C level
leadership level, and is being championed by a C‐level
Executive.
Involvement of The Procurement department has a rigid approach to The Procurement department understands that this is a
Procurement vendor selection and contracting that must always be different approach to the traditional vendor selection and due
followed, as part of any outsourcing event. diligence process, and is willing to actively participate in the
process.
process
Gathering of The organization feels strongly that the requirements must The organization appreciates the value of collaborating with
Requirements be fully described before vendors become involved in the prospective vendors, as part of shaping the services that will
process. be outsourced.
Approach to Solution The organization fully understands the detailed The organization understands the business objective, and is
Development components of the solution that is being sought, and interested in accepting innovative solutions from experienced
would like to put it out to bid. vendors.
Approach to working The organization prefers to keep the vendors at arms The prospective vendors will be brought into the process early,
with Vendors length, in order to negotiate the best possible commodity‐ in a collaborative mode, in order to develop the final solution
based pricing.
based pricing and value proposition.
and value proposition
Cost of Advisory The organization has budgeted dollars that are dedicated The outsourcing process is only deemed valuable if something
Services for use in seeking the advice and guidance of experienced is outsourced, and proven to yield at least a 25% savings in
outsourcing advisors. operating costs.
32

34. Questions?
Barry Diamond Paul C. Pinto
Vice President Managing Partner
Pinstripe Sylvan VI, Inc.
bdiamond@pinstripetalent.com
bdiamond@pinstripetalent com ppinto@sylvanvi.com
ppinto@sylvanvi com
(262) 754‐5065 (678) 644.6170
33