Here's a form I was asked to fill in for a tender the other day.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Key information about your agency
1. Key skills and experience
Please list any key skills or experience that you think are relevant to XXX and make you stand out against other candidates
2. Relationship and Communication
Please explain the relationship that we would have with you in terms of the way our account is managed and your preferred frequency and methods of communication
3. Quality procedures
Please explain the quality procedures that you have in place to ensure the work that you deliver is of the highest quality standard.
4. Project Management procedures
Please explain how you would go about managing complex projects, for example we often have projects that involve the production of several different versions of a piece of literature to serve all of our European markets. What procedures do you have in place for complex project management?
5. Responding to a brief
Please explain your strategic approach in terms of responding to a brief.
6. Capacity and capacity planning
What procedures do you have in place for capacity planning and dealing with capacity issues?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What do you think of that?
What I want to know, is did you fill it in?
Posted by: Dave Oscroft | May 12, 2008 at 10:10
I did, yes.
Posted by: Ben | May 12, 2008 at 10:14
i don't think that a company that would send me this kind of a thing is not a company i would want to work for.
Posted by: kai | May 12, 2008 at 10:34
I think that this info form is brilliant.
it starts to eliminate the, getting to know your supplier stage of taking on a new one.
Very smart
Posted by: Jacob Hinson | May 12, 2008 at 10:55
I'm still stuck on the fact that its just a form for a tender. My tax form was easier than that.
Posted by: Mat Ranson | May 12, 2008 at 11:08
Any relationship, between people or businesses, that starts with one party asking the other to fill in a form is not off for a good start.
Posted by: nuzzaci | May 12, 2008 at 11:28
Will you get fined if you don't keep to the preferred frequency of contact?
If they think writing copy in multiple languages is complex, what word do they use for something that actually is complex?
How did they react to the questionnaire you sent them?
Posted by: John | May 12, 2008 at 12:04
We get these type of forms all the time, I'm not sure if they are actively damaging or just a waste of time.
Some of them are a lot worse than this, it often depends what procurement at the client is like. An agency I was at was once told by the client's procurement they they saw buying design as no different from buying paperclips; we declined to pitch.
Posted by: Graham | May 12, 2008 at 12:20
I don't have an issue with this style of form , it all depends on what they ask and how they word it. At least it shows that they are aware of such issues and want to do something about them. I myself have had occasion to issue a short questionnaire to clients when there is no face to face meeting or even phone contact (rarer now). Only one was bothered by it, but that turned out to be a painful job anyway.
Posted by: Steve O | May 12, 2008 at 13:40
In its defence, it is clear.
However it wouldn't make me jump up and down with excitement at which methods of communications they prefer.
Posted by: claire | May 12, 2008 at 14:24
I trust you suggested that all communications between the respective parties should be carried out by means of questionnaire, with the top and blue copies going to the addressee and the pink copy whizzed over to accounts.
Posted by: davidthedesigner | May 12, 2008 at 15:37
Was this a Public Sector, or to be more precise, Regional Development Agency tender Ben?
Posted by: Blair Thomson | May 12, 2008 at 16:01
Blair - nope.
Posted by: Ben | May 12, 2008 at 16:29
i wonder why they did this? so robot-like. are they looking for a specific way of doing things? if they are, isn“t that counterproductive?
it seems who ever did this comes from a very unattractive place. i see no room for hoolahoop hips.
un-a-bore yourself. imagine the "using your brief responding strategy" and draw it.
Posted by: f.m. | May 12, 2008 at 17:36
I like it. They're all important things. The format doesn't have to negate discussion and it get's the nitty-gritty out of the way. In fact, I'll use it in my business plan.
Posted by: Richard | May 12, 2008 at 18:12
I think that 'a production of several different versions of a piece of literature' is NOT a 'complex project'.
Posted by: Tom | May 12, 2008 at 19:57
The big risk is that they'll end up short-listing people that are good at form-filling and telling them what they want to hear and potentially filter out people who are good at what they're actually seeking.
p.s. Good to see Tom agreeing with me.
Posted by: John | May 12, 2008 at 20:31
We used to do loads of Pan-Euro projects and being able to manage them was as important as being able to come up with the creative goods. Perhaps they know you can do the creative bit, but don't know if you can handle the volume. And it's a tender, I presume not a creative pitch, so they need some criteria to work with. I like it most because I know what they're asking; as Claire said, it is clear. I'd be encouraged that they know what they need. Of course, you're not giving us the full picture; only you know what you're tendering for. Is it something good?
Posted by: Richard | May 12, 2008 at 22:38
i think they're very polite - they use please a lot. but it's not really all that clear, just very repetitive. repeating something doesn't necessarily mean you're making it any clearer.
Posted by: lauren | May 13, 2008 at 02:11
I think it's rather good.
Posted by: Marcus | May 13, 2008 at 07:21
So now you have to pitch to pitch?
Shows a lack of confidence to me. I can't imagine such a procedure in any other industry.
Posted by: Tom | May 13, 2008 at 11:17
It reminds me of all the awful study skills forms we were made to fill out on my foundation year. Soul-draining just through the very language they use and the way the want to package creative processes and what would hopefully be a friendly, productive working relationship into small, neatly typed boxes.
Posted by: Alicia | May 13, 2008 at 11:28
Necessary it may NOT be - but believe me, Tom - it's a whole world of worseness in a lot of other industries - but particularly outside of the private sector. Designers get an easy ride of this one.
Posted by: Tom | May 13, 2008 at 16:13
"they'll end up short-listing people that are good at form-filling"
Perfectly put John. It's not a great way to begin an equally balanced relationship. It also seems very focussed on how you will behave, without any indication of how they will behave. We only agree to stick to deadlines if the client meets their deadlines.
Posted by: martyn reding | May 13, 2008 at 16:22
I confess, I think it's pretty good but I'm on the "other side" where I've had to look for designers and had trouble knowing where to start, hence the need for questionnaires like this. I'd be interested to know what you think prospective customers should be asking you. What would your form look like?
Posted by: Anne | May 13, 2008 at 16:23
If you haven't yet completed it, my advice is don't bother. This is another dreary 'painting-by-numbers' filter. They clearly don't understand that you choose the best for the job if you like what people have done and, importantly, the people who have done it. It's about fit and synergy.
This GCSE questionaire has clearly been put together by procurement - the bean counters - give it a wide birth. Should you win your tender, the relationship you have with them will probably be similarly sterile.
Posted by: Sue Turner | May 15, 2008 at 11:46
This is quite simple compared to the info we have recently been requested to submit for a public sector tender. I think they even want to know my sleeping patterns.
Posted by: Creative Agency Manchester | Oct 15, 2008 at 09:29