Comments on: I Was Wrong. Canadian Council of PR Firms is Doing RFPs right http://problogservice.com/2009/12/17/i-was-wrong-canadian-council-of-pr-firms-is-doing-rfps-right/ Number one business blogging agency Tue, 22 May 2012 16:11:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: BusinessIntellPro http://problogservice.com/2009/12/17/i-was-wrong-canadian-council-of-pr-firms-is-doing-rfps-right/#comment-1075 BusinessIntellPro Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:39:37 +0000 http://problogservice.com/?p=1486#comment-1075 Erik, did you ACTUALLY read the "RFP"? If I am interpreting this correctly, there is no guaranteed revenue of any kind, not time commitment or any real awarded value. It would appear that the CCPRF will endorse or suggest to members that company X is the best solution, but as Erik mentions each firm has a specific need from each of their clients. To try and group a ‘solution’ to cover all is ridiculous and suggests these business solutions are nothing but a mere commodity. The ‘awarded’ media-monitoring firm would have to engage in the same Sales-cycle as they would have by targeting the PR firm to begin with. Even if a Monitoring firm 'looses' the RFP nothing is stopping the Agency from working with a 'loosing' bidder. In effect this is a wasted effort on all sides. It would appear the CCPRF is just trying to form a buying group and nothing more. In my opinion save your CCPRF fees/dues and engage the experts in the world of Business Intelligence and scope out a solution for your specific firm and your target market. I don’t mean to be harsh and I do see what the CCPRF is trying to do, I just think there should have been a few steps before this RFP. The scope is not clear at all and perhaps a more detailed approach would have garnered a better use of time and delivered a specific solution and not an over abundance of pricing plans and options. There is a ton of value in a media monitoring firm working with these agency’s so I will be interested in seeing who replied, who didn’t and who ‘wins’! Erik, did you ACTUALLY read the “RFP”? If I am interpreting this correctly, there is no guaranteed revenue of any kind, not time commitment or any real awarded value. It would appear that the CCPRF will endorse or suggest to members that company X is the best solution, but as Erik mentions each firm has a specific need from each of their clients. To try and group a ‘solution’ to cover all is ridiculous and suggests these business solutions are nothing but a mere commodity. The ‘awarded’ media-monitoring firm would have to engage in the same Sales-cycle as they would have by targeting the PR firm to begin with. Even if a Monitoring firm ‘looses’ the RFP nothing is stopping the Agency from working with a ‘loosing’ bidder. In effect this is a wasted effort on all sides. It would appear the CCPRF is just trying to form a buying group and nothing more. In my opinion save your CCPRF fees/dues and engage the experts in the world of Business Intelligence and scope out a solution for your specific firm and your target market. I don’t mean to be harsh and I do see what the CCPRF is trying to do, I just think there should have been a few steps before this RFP. The scope is not clear at all and perhaps a more detailed approach would have garnered a better use of time and delivered a specific solution and not an over abundance of pricing plans and options. There is a ton of value in a media monitoring firm working with these agency’s so I will be interested in seeing who replied, who didn’t and who ‘wins’!

]]> By: Joseph Thornley http://problogservice.com/2009/12/17/i-was-wrong-canadian-council-of-pr-firms-is-doing-rfps-right/#comment-1072 Joseph Thornley Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:14:35 +0000 http://problogservice.com/?p=1486#comment-1072 Hi Erik, No Mea Culpa necessary. You raised an issue that we have all seen happen too often - the RFP as research exercise. I think the act of raising it is a positive thing because it gives us an opportunity to clarify the process and shape realistic expecations. Beyond that, the fact is that you were actually paying attention. And that has real value. :-) .-= Joseph Thornley´s last blog ..<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/proprblog/~3/eoixCoKW2tk/" rel="nofollow">Canadian Council of Public Relations Firms issues Media Monitoring RFP</a> =-. Hi Erik,
No Mea Culpa necessary. You raised an issue that we have all seen happen too often – the RFP as research exercise. I think the act of raising it is a positive thing because it gives us an opportunity to clarify the process and shape realistic expecations.

Beyond that, the fact is that you were actually paying attention. And that has real value. :-)
.-= Joseph Thornley´s last blog ..Canadian Council of Public Relations Firms issues Media Monitoring RFP =-.

]]>