The RFP—Request for Punishment: or A Tool for Selecting an Automated Library System
| Published date | 01 January 1987 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb047674 |
| Date | 01 January 1987 |
| Pages | 15-21 |
| Author | Joseph R. Matthews,Stephen R. Salmon,Joan Frye Williams |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
The RFP-Request for Punishment:
or A Tool for Selecting an
Automated Library System
Joseph R. Matthews, Stephen R. Salmon,
and Joan Frye Williams
A request for proposals (RFP)
may be required by purchasing laws
and regulations of a local jurisdiction.
A library may choose to use the RFP
to determine the capabilities and
limitations of a number of possible
systems. However, the RFP can be badly
conceived, constructed, and applied,
resulting in few responses by vendors and
disappointment, lost time, and wasted
resources for the library. Advice
is presented on when to use the RFP,
how to construct it, and how to use it
to achieve maximum success: selection and
implementation of the product that
best meets a library's specific needs.
Requests for proposals (RFPs) are different
things to different people. When a vendor receives
an exceptionally lengthy RFP, the prospect of prepar-
ing a response (disregarding the suitability, or match,
of the vendor's systems to the specifications) often
seems daunting. A librarian who is inexperienced
in library automation may also view the task of
assembling the request for proposals document as
overwhelming. Yet, increasingly, libraries are turning
to the request for proposal process as a means
of selecting an automated library system. Is it
worth everyone's effort? Are there ways that
a library can maximize the number and quality
of responses?
A request for proposals is a statement of
requirements for an automated system. The RFP
typically contains three sections: instructions to
the vendors on the rules and regulations governing
the procurement process, instructions to the vendors
on how the proposal should be prepared, and the
specificiations describing the desired system. Speci-
fications can be fairly general and occupy a few
pages,
or be extremely detailed and span several
hundred pages.
Some people view the RFP as a wish list.
In fact, they openly acknowledge that the RFP
contains specifications that no existing system can
meet. This approach is taken in hopes of encouraging
vendors to develop systems that more closely match
the library's desires. The wish list approach, while
intellectually challenging, can be misleading. For
example, a vendor may be persuaded that a particular
function or feature is an absolute requirement.
It is not uncommon for nearly every item in such
an RFP--regardless of the current conditions in
Matthews is Vice President for Operations
at Inlex, Inc.; Salmon is Chairman of the Board
of Carlyle, Inc.; Williams is also with Inlex, Inc.
ISSUE 17 15
To continue reading
Request your trial