“You will probably ask for feedback as to why your company was not selected to participate in the next stage of our RFP. We can only tell you that the selection process was very complex. Because your responses were partially evaluated using a computerized grading system, we cannot pinpoint one exact reason that your company may have been eliminated.”
That is how a global pharmaceutical company said “no thanks” and “don’t bother us again” to one of our partner companies who participated in an extremely long and arduous RFP process involving several phases, requiring literally hundreds of person-hours and expensive expertise to provide detailed information and recommendations in Big Pharmaceutical’s recent request for proposal.
Every company that participated in this RFP was in the same boat – hundreds of hours of work and expertise went into their responses. And Big Pharmaceutical, who had admitted they had at least partially computerized the process, couldn’t offer a few minutes and a few clicks to give something in return for all their efforts and ideas – a little well-deserved feedback on their product or service. Not only that, but think about the lost opportunity for Big Pharmaceutical. By providing feedback they could be teaching potential suppliers what features, products or services Big Pharma needs – thereby encouraging suppliers to develop offerings to meet those needs and maybe even expanding Big Companies capabilities or reducing their costs.
This vignette underscores two things: 1) the brand damage done in this increasingly interconnected world because of lazy, thoughtless and myopic communication like this; 2) how often companies miss market opportunities staring them in the face.
I have to believe these kinds of interactions are simply “off the radar” for most CEOs because they are “outside” the “normal channels.” But I suspect it is more that CEO’s do not yet understand the interconnected world in which their companies operate.
Big oversight.
Comments