On today's episode of The Contract Lens Podcast Matt Patel, COO and Co-founder of Malbek, chats with Julie Riese, a seasoned proposal and contracts professional. As someone who manages the day-to-day activities of proposals and the contract lifecycle for her entire company’s business units, Julie is well-versed in all things contracts – from authoring, evaluation, and workflow, to approvals, negotiations, and milestone management. Her practical, hands-on experience gives her a unique perspective into what works and what doesn’t. The conversation touches on the evolution of contract management tech from the clunky software of yesteryear to the elegance users can enjoy today. And Julie shares how your contract management solutions should be like Legos, not cement. So grab a glass of wine, and let's talk contracts!
Intro:
Welcome to the Contract Lens Podcast brought to you by Malbek. In this podcast, we have conversations with contract management thought leaders and practitioners about everything contracts and its ecosystem. Today's episode focuses on the RFP process. We are joined by Adam Selsby, Chief Technology Officer at Justice Bid, a company dedicated to helping legal and procurement teams save time and money in their legal procurement activities using E auction SAS technology. As a technology focused executive, Adam has been a trusted advisor to leading global companies across multiple industries in the eSourcing world. And today he applies his passion for using data, combined with the latest technologies, to inspire his teams to do more with less. So now, it's time to relax, grab a glass of wine, and let's talk contracts.
Kevin:
Well, hello Adam. Thanks for joining us today. I am excited to have this conversation with you because you're one of the few people that I understand is passionate about RFPs. I'd love to understand a little bit more about where that passion comes from?
Adam:
It's an opportunity I think for suppliers to showcase their value, and I think when you create an RFP and you have that lens, you're not doing it from the standpoint of taking a box and going through the process; but it's an opportunity to use a tool to understand value and to do that, you have to give suppliers that venue to showcase why they are great at what they do, why they can meet your needs, and you need to give them kind of the guide rails in which to demonstrate that.
Adam:
And I think that's where RFP remains, a very critical opportunity for that, and you need to do it in a way that's fair for the supply base. So that's why I get passionate about it. So I look forward to our discussion today, Kevin.
Kevin:
No, that's awesome. And I sit in the sort of sales, leadership chair, when I think about RFPs, and sometimes when they land in our inbox, it's a little bit of, "It's an opportunity, so we're excited," but you never know what's in that RFP before you open it. Do you think that sometimes the process for constructing RFPs is a little bit outdated or antiquated? Sometimes we read these RFPs and they don't seem cohesive. Just wondering if you've seen an evolution in the RFP process, how they're created, and if you have an opinion on how they should be created?
Adam:
Yeah, I mean, there's certainly been an evolution. I mean, when I started in the procurement type roles and we did RFPs, they were boxes of three inch binders that would be submitted. And so, kind of a different level of effort on behalf of the supplier to actually respond. Now, certainly that's changed over the years, right? Then it went to email, and it made it easier to share that content. And so, I think the progression was, "Great. Now you can ask more suppliers to participate."
Adam:
And then it evolved further to eSourcing systems at a different level of efficiency. Again, it's still time though. And the way that you go about constructing them, it should be thoughtful. It should be geared towards understanding first your business and what you're trying to solve. If you're buying apples, don't invite someone that's selling bananas, and don't ask questions about a topic. So, I mean, it could get that widespread, but I think it's also matured. And so, people don't do that so much anymore.
Kevin:
I think the ones that a vendor appreciates the most are the ones that are more thoughtful in the sense that they may even choose to do a round of demos before they select who is going to be invited to the RFP, because they are thinking we'd rather have just a smaller field of vendors to look at. As you say, you don't want to look at bananas if we're shopping for oranges. I appreciate that approach as opposed to, kind of everybody can participate. I would just think that that gets overwhelming for the people reviewing the RFPs and kind of muddies the waters if you will.
Adam:
When you're creating and are setting out on running an RFP process, is that education piece. And, sometimes the education comes from more of a discovery type RFP, or more of an RFI at that point, to get an understanding. Because the technology certainly in the space that you're in, technology changes, and how do you know what to ask for? How do you know if you don't have a technology that exists today, or you have one that you've been using for some time, how do you know how the market's evolved? There's always challenges and new capabilities.
Adam:
So, I think your point about where there's a relationship, great. Hopefully you're staying abreast of the latest and greatest, but when you are going to ask questions, like you said, you want to give that showcase for highlighting why they're great and asking those kinds of questions where you give them the floor. Let them show you. It comes based on having some kind of insight, I think, into that particular category.
Kevin:
No, that makes great sense. And I think about the industries as well, and whether is there a difference as to how an RFP would be approached based on industry. For example, I mean, do you think there are different nuances when procuring an enterprise software solution versus say, a hospital system that is looking to source a widget or a physical product from a manufacturer kind of type situation? Just curious. I mean, do you think there are differences in the way people should approach, not only the creation, but the response based on industry and product?
Adam:
Yeah, absolutely. It's kind of the lens that you bring. Certainly from a technology, for example, you might be looking at... It's not just the product cost. It's the efficiency gains, it's the risk mitigation, it's giving you more information so that you can make a better business decision. It's kind of the value of whatever it is that you're buying can generate for you. Whereas, a pure product is... Products may last longer than others, but there's a different way of looking at it, and then there is the actual product cost itself.
Adam:
I think one similarity is there is always some level of integration, or rather implementation, that has to take place. And that's whether it's a new product or a replacement. Physical goods, for a manufacturer, for example, they have to test and make sure that the new product is going to work. For a technology and contract management, there is an implementation. Right? It's not managing anything until you load contracts. So what's that like? Does it make you more efficient to be able to catch evergreen dates before they happen? There's all kinds of things, I think, depending on the specific category. But yeah, once you're in the technology space, to me, for one, RFPs, always about value.
Kevin:
You know, another question I was hoping to ask you is about what we would call the Frankenstein factor on both sides of the RFP, and just describe what that is. Just having been on the vendor side for so long, it strikes me sometimes how different these RFPs can be. And sometimes it's so obvious to me that they sort of divvied up the creation, because you're reading through it, and it's somewhat disjointed, or you could just tell that this department contributed this, or they pulled this off the internet. And then, on the other side, I think it's difficult to respond to an RFP as a vendor. So I think the Frankenstein factor also comes into play there. We divvy it up and how do you prevent the RFP from coming across disjointed, and do you lose something there? And then, also the RFP response. I mean, do you have any recommendations to make sure that's sort of a fluid response and it reads in a way that makes more sense?
Adam:
Yeah. And I guess I would say that first, know that Frankenstein feel that you get, it's coming from a good place. Right? The company that's issuing the RFP, they're trying to represent all of their stakeholders, and each of their stakeholders have their particular interest. So, if you take an RFP, at the end of it, ultimately you're going to award some business. And whatever that is, like you said, it has to be implemented. And when you have buy-in from those stakeholders who had a voice in the process, it makes it that much, I'd say easier, because they took part. And it just goes... From a cultural change, I mean, even if it's that micro, that little spot within this implementation, it makes a big difference.
Adam:
So now how do you avoid it? There should be somebody that is controlling the bid process. There is somebody that is managing it, and it's important for them to read every question. I think that's a big part of where you add... And it's not just I sent this piece to engineering, and this part to our marketing, and this part to IT. And you just paste them in without looking. I do believe that it should be one person's responsibility to make sure there isn't that overlap.
Adam:
When it comes to then reviewing the responses, right, because it has been so efficient now, that you can invite so many suppliers, through whether it's eSourcing or even email, if you have one question that is a duplicate, and you've asked 10 suppliers, if you're doing your job and reviewing every RFP response in its entirety, now you're not reading one question; now you have to read 10 responses to that one question that should have been asked. So you, you do yourself a disservice in that regard. So I would encourage anybody that's doing RFPs, before you issue it, spend the few minutes and go through all of the questions for that continuity.
Kevin:
Well, and I always wonder that too. And then I did some anecdotal research, and I found a stat that said that the average response to an RFP is 116 pages, plus addendums. So, I wonder that often do these RFP responses get read front to back, or are they jumping to a particular area? Is there a particular area that's more important than the other area? Do you have any thoughts on that?
Adam:
Yeah, I think PowerPoint is to blame, in part. No, some could be relatively light on the content, but I think it's if they're responding to the specific questions. And you're right, I mean, they can become really massive. They're not going to be read in its entirety. I don't believe, when it's all the marketing material added in. Right? And sometimes that's allowed, right? If you ask a question, it could be a paragraph type of response, but then they throw in an attachment that supports the response.
Adam:
So it's a matter of how far do you want to drill down in there. But there's also ways of limiting that. I mean, if you don't allow attachments and you limit... It's not like the Twitter of RFP responses, but give them enough space to craft their thought and represent their response appropriately.
Kevin:
Sure, sure.
Adam:
I can say one thing that I've found, at least it seems to feel like an effective approach, is when you have that executive sponsorship. And I'm going to frame this because I'd love to get your opinion on it, is that when we do send... When I'm working with clients and we have kind of their, it could be their general counsel, or it could be some executive level that is really presenting the RFP, and presenting the business opportunity, and the impact that it can have on their business, by having the right solution, and this is why they're doing it, and kind of framing the impact. I'm curious, your thoughts on, is that something that you think you would find effective? Like would that get your sales team really excited about winning that business?
Kevin:
Yeah. Without a doubt. And I think even outside of the RFP process, executive sponsorship is one of the first things we look for. And even in the first conversation we have in the discovery call, that question gets asked in some fashion. It does get asked, "Is this a sponsor project? Is there an executive response to some of the things that are causing pain here? Do they trickle up to the executive level?" So just in some way, shape or form executive sponsorship is very important. And I think the flip side of that is, I guess goes to your last question. What vendors are trying to do is make sure that they're not fodder in that blind RFP, where you don't recall having any connection with this particular company prior, there wasn't a conversation of any kind.
Kevin:
You just worry that you might be fodder in the process. And there's so much effort that goes into responding in a meaningful way to an RFP on the vendor side. You hate to think that you're sort of fighting that losing battle going in. So, I know in past sales leadership roles, we mandated a conversation of some kind; that happens. An RFP lands in the box, or someone finds it on one of the bid sites. We cannot just throw resources at it without some kind of a validation and willingness to actually have a conversation with the vendor. So, I mean, different vendors approach it differently, different industries, but at the end of the day, again, the effort is so significant. Right? Limited resources. We've got to make sure that it's the right fit and that there's some kind of conductivity between the two companies.
Adam:
Yeah. And I like the meetings upfront. I think, certainly from a technology, I think demos are important, and sometimes you don't know what you don't know. And seeing demos... I also would say, don't just talk to one supplier at the early stages when you're crafting your thoughts. You wouldn't want to just go down that one path, so that can be kind of leading. So it is, it's getting a full spectrum. And there's also other places... Different reports certainly available online about kind of where the technology fits. On the supplier side, of other goods, for example, you can find more information. But the technology space in particular, because it can change so fast, and the way that they're being adopted, like AI and things like this, they're new.
Adam:
And then it's a matter of who's using it the most effectively? And to see that in practice and understand how it can impact your business, and the suppliers can help you see your business. Because it's kind of like, you've never seen it before. So how do you know what kind of value you put on it? And the more times you see it from different angles, it's going to help you zero in on what exactly it is that you're looking for when you get to that one question in the RFP that really could tip it one way or the other.
Kevin:
And that's interesting to me because you mentioned technology and it's always changing. I think what tends to be frustrating on the vendor side is that they feel like the RFP process can sometimes be overly rigid, and it just doesn't give them the ability to stand out in some way that they feel is what makes them different. Checking a box on does the technology do this or do that? That's one thing. And a lot of vendors can do that. Or if it's just a box check, they can fudge it a little bit. But I think we're the vendors who feel like they have something else to bring to the table and not just this great product, but also maybe a great implementation process or methodology, or this great team of customer success reps that really make the difference in their attrition rate.
Kevin:
The things that don't necessarily show up on an RFP, I think the vendors sometimes feel like that doesn't come through and I'm just sort of a box checking. So I think that's where I would love to see some kind of opportunity for kind of improvement in the process. Is again, I think the vendors that maybe your subpar for that fit, can come off a little better than they look, whereas some of the vendors who really are that great fit might not look as compelling as they will once more is understood. Does that make sense?
Adam:
100%, 100%. When I say I'm passionate about RFPs, I think it's just below an art form, right? It's a balance of box type questions, ticking... Do you do this? Yes, yes, yes. And open-ended questions. I love open-ended questions at the right place. And some things are just kind of table stakes and contract management. Do you have contract term dates? Well, yeah. But it's, how do they get there? And then it's a matter of, well, based on my business, how do I want to ask that question? Do I want to drill into it? And so that's again, where it kind of goes back to the whole doing your research upfront and understanding the market and what it is that you're buying. The education's there, it's available.
Adam:
It's just a matter of going and doing that so you know to ask the right questions. But this is where an open-ended question is perfect. It's, "Tell me about how you do X? Describe how you do X?" Even stating your situation. And if you share... I think there's a bit of sharing, kind of a setting up of the scenario. "Here's my situation. How do you solve this?" And it's a big difference whether you do... I mean, if you have 50 contracts or 10,000. Totally different set of expectations in the way that, as the buyer, you're going to make your value equation.
Kevin:
Another question I would love to ask you is, do you have any advice, for both sides really, on how to approach the pricing conversation so early in the process?
Adam:
I have to say for that exact reason is why I love reverse auctions.
Kevin:
What's a reverse auction?
Adam:
Okay. So a reverse auction is like on eBay. You have multiple people bidding for the same thing, and supply and demand, the price goes up. A reverse auction is multiple people selling the same thing, and they're competing and it really drives the price down. In which doing that is transparency. The same way on eBay, you see a price going up, that informs you, "Oh, I need to go higher to win this." In a reverse auction, it's exactly the opposite. Now, different than eBay, you don't award to the lowest bidder automatically. It's not typically done like that. It's more of a, this is the market, this is what the market is saying by going through a rigorous say RFP process, all of the suppliers here at the end, at this auction point, are arguably selling the same thing.
Adam:
And from a price point, this is where the market is. And so, it's fast from a... Because you can go back, like you said. From a pricing standpoint, it can go on and on and on, week after week, going back and forth with pricing. Can it be more competitive and it's like, how many times do you want to do that? And that's where an auction, the beauty of it is, it gets it done in an hour, you know where you stand. And then, again, that's not where you award business, it's still a value decision. So then the person that's going to award the business says, "Okay, I see all of these feature functions. I understand their capabilities, for example. And now I see the associated price."
Kevin:
Do you have any advice outside of responding in kind to what has been asked for, as to how a vendor would get selected? Anything [inaudible 00:22:34]. Do addendums matter, do cover letters matter? Anything along those lines that you would recommend.
Adam:
Send a link to a video, something that explains your business. It would be a nice way to do it, that encapsulates... So if you don't think that the confines of the RFP are really flushing out your value proposition, then I would encourage you to have a very easy to digest message that can be captured in a relatively quick... I mean, there's videos, there's explainer videos, there's ways to do it, that you can send, "Hey, I'm glad you got my RFP, but here's something just to kind of round that out, give you an idea." Or, "Here's a report." I mean, those kinds of things are helpful. Again, the earlier in the process that you can help educate them in a non-biased way, non-biased towards your particular product, it goes a lot further than, "This is why I'm awesome."
Kevin:
No, but that's helpful. And I hadn't even thought of the idea of embedding a link to a video. I think that my big takeaway there, is that if the evaluators are serious about finding the right fit for their use case and their requirements, and in the scope of an answer, there was a link to a video that explained something further, I think if I'm an evaluator, I'd be willing to click on that video; 32 second. 45 second clip that hammers that home and maybe helps that vendor stand out. And like you said, maybe it's not specific to the vendor, maybe it's something industry-wide, or something educational. I really like that suggestion. I think that's great. So, Adam, I don't know how we did it, but I think we've managed to make the RFP topic interesting, and your passion has come through here. So I really appreciate this conversation.
Adam:
Oh, terrific. Great, I appreciate the questions, Kevin. Yeah. Always happy to talk RFP.
Kevin:
That's awesome. And by the way, as we close out here, is there anything on your side that you'd like to plug or point the listeners to?
Adam:
Yes, certainly. I'd love for your listeners to check out what we're doing at Justice Bid. We have a legal department, procurement solution. I just happen to lead the technology side. So, it's my kind of mission to make the process and the RFP process, super easy for our users. And users being both our customers and the suppliers who respond. Check out justicebid.com.
Kevin:
Well, thanks so much for the conversation.
Adam:
Thank you, Kevin. Appreciate your time.