search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
ASK THE EXPERTS


Any requests? How to make the RFP process better – for both buyer and TMC


undertaken by consultancy Festive Road, when asked why both parties persist with this format, each cited the other as the reason. However, it only takes one buyer to raise their head above the parapet and do it differently…


G THE BUYER ALICE LINLEY-MUNRO, global travel analyst, Oil Spill Response


I AM ALREADY DREADING the next the RFP for a TMC and it’s not until 2019. We sent out an RFI (request for information) to 12 TMCs with only four questions and we knocked four out straightaway, including our incumbent, whom we had been with for 11 years. That was a difficult conversation. We sent a 300-question RFP to eight and spent months wading through the responses until we got it down to the final two, who came in and gave presentations. I think it was like that because it was the first RFP we had ever done for


travel. We were asking about CSR and environmental initiatives, and when we got it back we thought, that’s lovely but is it going to affect the service they give us or the pricing? No, it’s not. The final two were neck and neck, and, in the end, we made the decision


on personalities, which has worked out really well for us. It would be good to give TMCs the chance to show off why they are different. I think the best way to do that is to get them in much sooner in the process and try to cut down how much they have to write. The ITM (Institute of Travel Management) does workshops with six or


seven TMCs, who get ten minutes to present to buyers. Then they go out and the buyers spend ten minutes talking about the TMCs. That gives you much more of a grounding in the TMCs than what we did. It is a nice way of doing it because I think you should have some personal experience before you start the process, and the buyer collaboration is a friendlier, more sensible way to kick it off. Hopefully, we will do that when we come back to tender.


THE TMC


VANESSA BAILEY, director of client partnerships, Business Travel Direct


A LOT OF RFPs ARE QUESTION AND ANSWER; one had more than 100 questions and all that was required was a short answer for each, not more than one paragraph. To answer all these questions can take hours, days, and then


56 BBT January/February 2018


it’s a pricing exercise. If that’s the case, they could send out a price list and then do a conversation with the questions. It is remiss not to discuss it. We always


call companies and sit down with them to find out what they want to achieve, then they can get a feel for us; but if they refuse and just want us to fill in an RFP, we do a no bid.


A consultant might send an RFI and


from that have a one-on-one meeting. That leads to a shortlist of those they want to work with and they send an RFP. Ideally, they would ask you what your values are, the type of service you are offering, to find a good cultural fit. A lot of companies overlook culture and look at price rather than trying to find the right partner.


BUYINGBUSINESSTRAVEL.COM


IVEN THAT THE AVERAGE RFP (request for proposal) for a travel management company runs to hundreds of questions and the answers can read like War and Peace, it is not surprising that both suppliers and buyers are fatigued with the entire process. And worse, according to research


THE CONSULTANT LOUISE KILGANNON, associate, Festive Road


WE LAUNCHED A CAMPAIGN during ACTE for a ‘3Cs’ sourcing model – advocating a balance of Capability, Culture and Commercials – to ensure the right choice of TMC. We realised the current model was cut and pasted for the entire industry. Although some companies had the ability to be more creative, they were starting off with long questionnaires; but buyers have to mark them afterwards, which is really time-consuming, and it limits TMCs’ ability to distinguish themselves. One of our clients did a lot of RFI activity, established their requirements and the agency’s capability early on, and then they did some great workshopping sessions. Not all TMCs were en- tirely comfortable with that; it is almost a case of be careful what you wish for. We all know that TMCs can issue tickets,


provide duty-of-care and have a technology roadmap. But, when it comes to finding the right fit, we need to go back to the 3Cs. Culture is so important, there is no one TMC that fits every customer, and the only way to see whether their company values match yours is in workshops. We are encouraging our clients to look at the


3Cs before they engage in an RFP process. From there, they may not go out to bid because you can stress-test the relationship with the incumbent and often they stand up well to that investigation. An RFP is not always the answer – sometimes you can fix what you have in place and drive the relationship forward.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148