A very common method for selecting print software from a set of vendors is running an RFP (request for proposal) process which typically distributes a document and/or a list of features that you require to solve a particular business challenge. Buyers who use this methodology often believe the quality of their purchasing decision is directly related to how thorough their RFP is written. I wish it was that easy. In this case, more is not necessarily better; in our grasping to capture every feature we might ever need we create a bias in the purchasing decision. You are indirectly saying that the most feature rich product is the best, when often the business challenge you face requires very deep functionality in some areas and very little functionality in others.

There are so many challenges about the RFP process; I’m not sure where to start. How about the most glaring and obvious, most vendors say yes to everything, and they can because the way RFP’s are written always leaves room for interpretation. Hence, vendors read the question and then interpret it in a way that makes it possible for them to say yes. This is unavoidable in a written document without a tremendous effort from the buyer. So you spend a lot of time crafting an RFP document and a list of requirements and at the end of this process you have responses from many vendors all of which say they can basically do everything you’re asking. What have you actually learned in this process?

The second weakness of the RFP process is that you require a few customer referrals that are hand selected by the vendors. This also produces very predictable results. Guess what the customers who are selected to be references for the vendor say about the vendor? You guessed it, all good marks and maybe one bump in the process to make it feel real. So again you’ve exerted effort and spent your time and money to get feedback from many customers which all say the same thing. What have you actually learned in the process?