The Cost of Chasing the Wrong RFPs ~ Truth Reporters

 

By Kate Egbabor

For many consulting firms and professional service providers, responding to requests for proposals has become a default business development activity. When a new opportunity appears, the instinct is to pursue it. After all, more bids should mean more chances to win.

In practice, the opposite is often true.

Chasing the wrong requests for proposals can quietly drain time, revenue, and morale, even in capable and well run firms. The cost is rarely visible on financial statements, but its impact is felt across teams and leadership.

The Illusion of Opportunity

Not every RFP represents a genuine opportunity. Some are issued with an incumbent already in mind. Others are designed to test the market or satisfy internal procurement requirements rather than to identify a new supplier.

Many firms treat all RFPs as equal. They assume that effort alone improves the odds of success. This assumption leads to teams working long hours on submissions that never had a realistic chance of winning.

Over time, this pattern creates a false sense of activity without meaningful progress.

The Real Cost Is Not Just Financial

The most obvious cost of chasing unsuitable RFPs is financial. Proposal development consumes billable time, senior leadership attention, and operational resources. These costs are rarely tracked accurately, which makes them easy to underestimate.

The deeper cost is strategic.

When teams repeatedly invest energy in low probability bids, several things happen. Focus shifts away from high value clients and strategic growth. Delivery teams become overstretched. Proposal fatigue sets in. Confidence erodes when losses accumulate without clear explanation.

Eventually, bidding becomes reactive rather than intentional.

Why Firms Say Yes Too Often

Firms often pursue RFPs for reasons that have little to do with strategy. Fear of missing out plays a role. So does pressure to keep pipelines full. In some cases, leadership equates bidding activity with business development progress.

There is also a widespread belief that a firm must respond to every relevant opportunity to remain competitive. This belief ignores the reality that selective firms often win more consistently than those that pursue everything.

Saying yes too often is rarely a sign of ambition. More often, it reflects the absence of a clear qualification process.

The Importance of Bid Qualification

High performing firms treat bid decisions as strategic choices rather than default actions.

Before committing to a proposal, they ask disciplined questions. Is there a clear fit between the requirement and the firm’s strengths. Does the firm understand the evaluation criteria and how it will be scored. Are there indicators of incumbent advantage or predetermined outcomes. Can the firm submit a compliant and compelling response within the available time and resources.

If the answers are unclear or negative, they walk away.

This discipline protects capacity and preserves focus for opportunities where the firm can genuinely compete.

How Chasing the Wrong RFPs Distorts Strategy

Over time, indiscriminate bidding distorts how firms see themselves. They begin to describe their capabilities too broadly in an attempt to fit more opportunities. Positioning becomes vague. Differentiation weakens.

Instead of building depth and expertise in chosen areas, firms spread themselves thin. This makes future bids harder rather than easier.

Selective bidding, by contrast, reinforces strategic clarity. It forces firms to articulate what they do best and where they deliver the most value.

Choosing Fewer Bids and Winning More

Winning more does not require bidding more. It requires bidding better.

Firms that qualify opportunities rigorously often submit fewer proposals but achieve higher win rates. Their teams are more engaged. Their submissions are stronger. Their business development efforts align with long term goals.

The discipline to decline the wrong RFPs is not a limitation. It is a competitive advantage.

Until organizations recognize the hidden cost of chasing unsuitable opportunities, many will continue to expend significant effort on bids that were never worth pursuing.

About the Author

 Kate Egbabor

(Info@koteriasolutions.com), is a Canada-based consultant and founder of Koteria Business Academy, where she advises consultants and professional service firms on competitive proposal strategy. Through its flagship advisory, The Proposal Advisory™, Koteria Business Academy supports firms in building disciplined, strategic, and repeatable approaches to competitive bidding across public and private sector procurements

Info@koteriasolutions.com