The government procurement system that issues RFPs, especially when soliciting proposals for creative and other professional services, is completely broken. The system is so riddled with flaws that it is essentially useless. The process rarely results in the best selection for the issuing city, county or state. To make matters worse, it frequently increases the cost of the products and services being sought. There are more thoughts on this in the previous blog. Today, we will focus on solutions.
We are not merely suggesting a few minor tweaks to the system. The process, as it is commonly used, needs to be entirely scrapped and replaced with a better model. The RFP method simply does not work for creative services, and it never will. The inherent problem is that it tries to apply an artificial evaluation/scoring formula — one that overemphasizes pricing — to a situation that requires the judgment of professionals who have some experience in the marketing world. That outdated process needs to be completely eliminated and replaced with a system that allows people to select the a firm best suited to the need, while still safeguarding fairness and competition. When the goal is getting the highest-caliber creative work that the community can afford, instead of choosing the least expensive that is still barely acceptable, the result is maximum value for the taxpayer money.
Here are the highlights of a system that would make it possible for a government department to have the opportunity to choose wisely, while allowing the competitive procurement process to work:
- The department seeking the creative services would be required to research and reach out to a minimum of three firms or individuals that they think are suited to the project(s). There is no upper limit on the number of firms identified. They can find qualified firms via Google, or confer with colleagues in other cities, or, perhaps, they are aware of firms from trade shows or professional associations. They then communicate with each firm by phone, Zoom or in-person to discuss the details. This step allows the firms to ask questions, and possibly, offer suggestions that the department may not have thought about. The meeting or conversation gives the firm a chance to summarize its expertise, processes, and to share examples. It gives the government department a chance to ask questions and get to know the firms.
- The budget should always be disclosed. No exceptions. An honest discussion about budget allows potential bidders the chance to see if the project is even a good fit. If it is not, they part on friendly terms, and neither the bidder nor the department will have wasted any more than a few minutes of meeting time. Plus, the give and take with potential bidders might lead to an idea to actually save money. Small businesses genuinely want to be efficient and save their clients money. It can be a learning experience for the department seeking the services.
- After the initial meeting, potential bidders will have an understanding of the department’s needs and can then submit a detailed price proposal. Any good price proposal will summarize the details of the project, including deliverables and a timetable, to demonstrate their understanding of the project.
- The department seeking the services can document and report everything to the procurement department to show that fair competition exists without collusion. Otherwise, the judgments and decisions for how to proceed and how to spend their department’s budget most effectively is left up to the people who know best. After a firm is selected, the procurement team can assist in making sure the paperwork is in order, including insurance requirements, SCC registration and other necessities.
This process ensures that the spirit of competitive bidding resulted in the city, county or state selecting the absolute best firm within their budget. The final selection may or may not be the least expensive. But, if it results in the best quality creative work within the budget, that means the government got maximum value for its money. The process does not reward mediocrity by making price a greater factor than excellence, nor does it unwittingly drive up the cost with unneeded steps and processes. Price is only a factor to the extent that all of the bidders have to stay within the budget. Therefore, the department is free to select a firm solely on the merits.
Postscript
:
As long as the old, bloated, inefficient system is used, there should be at least one requirement added. After proposals are reviewed and a decision is made, it should be mandatory and standard operating procedure for the soliciting entity to not only post the decision, but contact in writing or email every bidder informing them of the outcome, and a brief summary explaining the decision. That does not seem to be an undue burden on the procurement department, considering the dozens, or even hundreds, of hours a firm might spend on submitting a proposal.
