RFPeed OFF

Published: Oct 05 , 2012
Author: Stephen White

One of the most commented upon blogs we have posted this year is the one we published on the frustration many suppliers feel when they are in receipt of client RFPs. Comments came from suppliers in agreement of the sentiment and many buyers about the bias in the writing.  You can read this blog here.

Bit of a Marmite blog to be fair.

That said, it certainly created debate. Frankly that is what the blog is about.

Below is the second part of this blog. Batten down the hatches.

One of the irritants for suppliers in most RFPs is how the process inherently gives the client control of the process; the choice of online portal, the preconditions suppliers must agree to in order to take part, the timelines, and so on.

Here is some text a supplier might consider using to redress the balance, to be sent to the client at the point in the process they ask the supplier if they intend to participate in the RFP. Suppliers might want to modify some of the language!

Stephen White, Managing Partner


SHARE

blogAuthor

About the author:

Stephen White
No bio is currently avaliable

Latest Blog:

Muck Shift

Just when is a deal not a deal…? I heard this story from a friend of mine the other week; there are some lessons to be learned! So, my pal is a developer and is building some houses on what is essentially a square site. Two sides of the square can be accessed from the road in a neighboring housing estate and the other two are beside a field owned by another developer. There is a huge pile of muck to shift before the actual building project; this phase is known in the trade – and not unreasonably - as a "muck-shift"! As there will be 80 -100 lorries coming in and out each day for 6 weeks, it was considered more convenient to access the site over the field, so an approach was made to the developer to discuss the terms under which he would allow access. This is a standard arrangement and the deal typically is that the field would be returned to the owner in its original condition. Developer makes a bit of money, where otherwise he wouldn’t; homeowners in the adjoining estate are less inconvenienced; builder does not need to spend money cleaning the streets and getting them back to a usable state at the end of the project. Win-win.

Latest Tweet:





United States
973.428.1991
usa@scotwork.com
Follow us
cpd.png
voty2016_sign_gold.png