Low Quality Surveillance RFPs

By: Brian Rhodes, Published on Feb 22, 2012

In our international integrator survey, respondents raised numerous concerns about low quality surveillance RFPs. In this report, we explain and examine their specific concerns.

Overview

Request for Proposals (i.e., RFPs) are a common method of purchase solicitation, favored by government, institutional, and municipal entities looking to buy large or complex systems. When a lot of money is spent on systems, more often than not, RFPs are issued. The goal, at least theoretically, is to find the best possible solution at the lowest available price.

For background, see our series of reviews on RFPs, examining good and bad aspects of them.

Concerns

We frequently hear industry professionals raise concern about the effectiveness and fairness of RFPs, and by extension, the security consultants and specifiers you create those proposals. Indeed, this has been a major element in heated discussions we have had about security consultant conflict of interest and the Axis Corruption Cruise.

The Question

Given the interest in this topic, we asked 100 integrators the following question:

Here are the key findings from the results:

  • 1 in ever 6 integrators said they were not familiar enough with RFPs to comment.
  • Of the 80%+ integrators with experience, a clear majority (54%) voted that they were not very satisfied.

Here's what it looks like graphically among the integrators who were familiar with RFPs:

Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News
Get Notified of Video Surveillance Breaking News

Analyzing the survey results, 4 common 'negative' themes emerge

  • Cut 'n Paste: The "cut 'n paste" or "boilerplate" methods of writing these packages are not effective.
  • Incompetent: These packages are often written by people who do not fully understand systems being described.
  • Rigged: The final outcome of the process has been previously determined.
  • Slanted: RFPs are written for specific products that only a few vendors can provide.

Cut 'n Paste

The quality of RFP specifications are commonly viewed as poor, due to the re-using the same languge from one specification to the next. Taking a specification 'off the shelf' and then modifying select portions of that document often results in a specification that:

  • is technically impossible to satisfy
  • insufficently reflects what the customer is asking for
  • does not represent current technologies

Many integrators expressed dissatisfaction with this practice.  Here are a selection of their comments:

  • "Sometimes when cut and paste is used to reduce engineering cost, it can be confusing to get to what is really needed."
  • "most are cut and pasted from a mfr spec and are not right for the job"
  • "Most of the tendet docs issued by consultants are a lazy cut and paste with multiple contridictions and little helpful info."
  • "Typically we see canned RFPs with the same cut & paste info only changed in product quantities with very little actual information in regards to actual project objectives."
  • "Most RFP's are written around 20 year old technology taken from a boiler plate spec that's been used 1 million times in the past. Typically they are not project specific and offer nothing in the way of innovation."
  • "Just now i am bidding on an Airforce Base that has VCRs listed in the Scope of Work. no one ever re-writes specs, they only paste into them."

At best, generic specifications are so dilute of detail the do not effectively communicate user needs. At worst, these specifications are a mashup of disparate technologies that are not interoperable.

Incompetent

Integrators expressed frustration at the lack of product knowledge reflected in the specification package.  This lack of knowledge can result in an 'impossible specification' to meet or drive up system costs due to unweildy integration.

  • "RFP usually include numerous contradictions such as must be Lenel access and Honeywell video and must integrate. Or must be HD cameras with a minimum resolution of 480TVL."
  • "Most RFP's I see are a complete mess. 80% of the security consultants I come across are old school analogue guys who have no understanding of IT infrastructure and are afraid of servers and IP cameras. This is the biggest challenge in our industry in my view and one I dont see going away for quite some time."
  • "They are written by consultants who have never installed a camera or reader before. As a result, they ask for things like training DVDs, etc. They never establish criteria for service performance."
  • "Most bids/RFPs that we receive are lacking significant technical detail. We do a very good job of designing a solution to account for anything that the RFP may be lacking." "That said, we often don't win those jobs b/c our price is higher out of the shoot vs. hitting the client up with change orders later."
  • "Often written by consultants who use industry buzz-words to impress their customer but don't know what they are actually talking about."
  • "Usually they are poorly written by people who don't know enough about the product or service they are seeking."
  • "There are too many consultants that dabble in IP video or access control that don't understand the technology. Poorly written documents result in widely spread pricing results and too many loopholes. In the end, a shady contractor bids what he thinks he can get away with and then change orders the Owner for the consultants mistakes."

The RFP process is designed to solicit 'apples-to-apples' proposals, and permit a cost based comparasion. When the specification is poorly written, some responders will 'troubleshoot' discrepancies in the design and submit those costs as part of the bid quotation. Other repondents will choose not to consider solving design problems 'up front', and will wait until the project performance phase to address gaps via 'change order'. In this case, the RFP specification has not satisfied its purpose of clearly defining the proposed project.

The final outcome of the process has been previously determined.

Many integrators suggested that the RFP process is an exercise in semantics, simply a matter of lawful process in closing 'someone else's sale'.  

  • "normally not satisfied because most RFP's we do are for government facilities...lets just say the winner is already decided at the beginning."
  • "We stay away from RFP's as they are very high effort/low margin sales and usually have been pre awarded in a back room deal before the bids are opened."
  • "...unless we have helped write the spec we usually dont bid openbids because they are a waste of time and usually setup for 1-3 larger integrators"
  • "Most are either skewed to a specific vendor or do not provide enough information to prepare a proper response..."
  • "you are basically bidding on something that is flawed from the start or could be biased towards a particular party making it impossible to win."

Integrators can spend significant dollars preparing proposals, and some proposals require bid bonding. The true cost of resonding to an RFP can be significant.  When integrators are asked to engage in a process where the outcome has already been determined, it reinforces the hesistation to participate in these activities. 

RFPs are written for specific products that only a few vendors can provide.

Integrators expressed dissatisfaction with the tendancy of RFPs to 'write-in' specific equipment with no alternatives. This limits competition not only in terms of product, but also from the field of potential integrators.

  • "Unfortunately, more times than not RFP's in this area are very crafty about "specifying" particular products without identifying them by name."  
  • "RFP's are typically RFQ's with the wrong title... and most RFP's that really are proposal requests are not written to solicit competitive equality."
  • "Most of them are prepared for certain product/supplier and almost impossible to propose alternative product. For example: Camera must have MxPEG compression..."
  • "...seems most RFPs are written for very specific equipment or are not well researched."

This complaint is certainly not unique only among businesses responding to surveillance RFPs, and is often cited as a general disadvatange to the method of RFP Procurement.  

The Very Satisfied

A notable niche, 10% (8/84) of respondents, said they had 'very satisfactory' experiences with RFPs. The approach of these respondents was typically to understand and address the opportunity behind the RFP rather than focusing on only complying with the technicalities of the response. They indicate that RFPs prequalify a customer's desire for a new system, and that through the strength of initial response, these integrators are able to form a consultative sales relationship with the solicitors.

 

Conclusion

Often, RFPs intend to 'level the playing field' by specifiying performance parameters, but integrators view the people writing the RFPs often as uninformed, wastefully specific, or otherwise work to accomplish the very opposite result of the unbiased, clean result the process intends to provide.

Some integrators choose not to repsond to RFPs at all, instead opting for 'consultative sales' based on an in-depth study of customer needs. For the customer, this approach often limits competition, but results in a much more fleshed-out proposed design.  Unfortunately, this also discourages fair competition for these opportunties, and these 'public funded' opportunities become vulnerable to collusion.

1 report cite this report:

Video Surveillance Statistics Directory Vol 2 on Mar 18, 2012
In this report, we aggregate and present numerous statistics about how surveillance is being used in the real world. Recently, we conducted an in...
Comments : PRO Members only. Login. or Join.

Related Reports

Camera Course Winter 2020 on Jan 10, 2020
This is the only independent surveillance camera course, based on in-depth product and technology testing. Lots of manufacturer training exists...
Security Sales Course January 2020 - Last Chance on Jan 02, 2020
Notice: This is the last chance to register for the course. This sales course is customized for the current needs and challenges specific to...
Project Documentation Forms & Work Order Tutorial on Jan 07, 2019
This form may be one of the most important tools integrators ever have doing install and service work. Inside we provide a sample template form,...
Managed Video Services UL 827B Examined on Jan 09, 2019
Historically, UL listings for central stations have been important, with UL 827 having widespread support. However, few central stations have...
ONVIF Favorability Results 2019 on Mar 15, 2019
In the past decade, ONVIF has grown from a reaction to the outside Cisco-lead PSIA challenge, to being the de facto video surveillance standard...
Top Metrics For Ensuring Integrator Profitability - Statistics on Mar 20, 2019
How do integrators ensure the profitability of their projects? As part of our profitability study, 100+ integrators answered the following...
Manufacturer Favorability Guide 2019 on Jun 12, 2019
The 259 page PDF guide may be downloaded inside by all IPVM members. It includes our manufacturer favorability rankings and individual...
Dumber Techs, Bad Box Movers, Says Australian Distributor on Jun 10, 2019
Techs today are "dumber" than they used to be, despite better education and training and that makes a typical day "frustrating" for one...
Beware African 50,000 IP Camera Contract Scam on Jul 12, 2019
A “Nigerian Prince” scam for the video surveillance market is going around. You, or at least we, could be lucky enough to be the single bidder for...
Top Ways Security Integrators Improve Their Careers on Sep 03, 2019
With DIY products expanding and the future of integration debated, how do integrators stay sharp so they are not left behind? 180+ integrators...

Most Recent Industry Reports

'Severe Impact' Mercury Security 2020 Leap Year Firmware Issue on Jan 17, 2020
One of the largest access controller manufacturers has a big problem: February 29th. Mercury Security, owned by HID, is alerting partners of the...
Apple Acquires XNOR.ai, Loss For The Industry on Jan 16, 2020
Apple has acquired XNOR.ai for $200 million, reports GeekWire. This is a loss for the video surveillance industry. XNOR.ai stunned the industry...
Installation Course January 2020 - Last Chance on Jan 16, 2020
Thursday, January 16th is your last chance to register for the Winter 2020 Video Surveillance Installation Course. This is a unique installation...
Halo Smart Vape Detector Tested on Jan 16, 2020
The Halo Smart Sensor claims to detect vaping, including popular brand Juul and even THC vapes. But how well does it work in real world...
PRC Government Entity Now Controlling Shareholder of Infinova / March Networks on Jan 16, 2020
A PRC government entity is now the controlling shareholder of US security manufacturer Infinova as well as its wholly-owned subsidiary March...
Network Cabling for Video Surveillance on Jan 15, 2020
In this guide, we explain the fundamentals of network cabling for video surveillance networks, how they should be installed, and the differences in...
ONVIF Trashed Statement, Confirms Dahua and Hikvision Still Suspended on Jan 15, 2020
ONVIF has 'trashed' the suspension statement for Dahua, Hikvision, Huawei, etc. but confirms to IPVM that those companies are all still...
Wyze Smart Door Lock Test on Jan 14, 2020
Wyze's inexpensive cameras have grabbed the attention of many in the consumer market, but can the company's new smart lock get similar...
Wesco Wins Anixter on Jan 13, 2020
Despite Anixter earlier arguing that Wesco's bid was inferior to CD&R's by nearly 10%, Anixter confirmed that they are taking Wesco's 3.1%...
Anixter Resisting Takeover From Competitor, Bidding War Emerges, Wesco Wins on Jan 13, 2020
Mega distributor Anixter is going to be acquired but by whom? Initially, Anixter planned to go private, being bought by a private equity firm....