Does your RFP Reflect your MPS Objectives?

Are you the person inside your organization who is preparing an RFP or bid for Managed Print Services?

If you are, join me for a few minutes while I share some thoughts and observations based on a sampling of RFPs I have recently reviewed from both private and public enterprises. Typically, these documents did not define a course of action or set of services that would fulfill the stated objective of the RFP and resulting project!

Stated Objectives

Below I have summarized the objectives stated by most of the RFPs:

• Improved user access to resources


• Enhanced support for users


• More productive workflows


• Rationalization (right sizing) of asset base


• Better return on investment in assets


• Lower overall expenses associated with document output


• Enhanced management processes and controls


• Reduced demand on internal resources

In some instances document management, sustainability and compliancy were mentioned or stated as future or secondary goals.

Does this represent what you expect from a re-engineered and better managed document output environment?

Course of Action

Of interest to me was that most of the RFPs stated a fairly robust set of objectives as summarized above but did not lay out a course of action or process that would likely deliver more than half of them.

Typically they requested assessment processes to uncover little more than device locations and meter readings; ostensibly to be used for strategy development. This type of limited data largely represents another replacement strategy and will probably not deliver solutions beyond simple fleet management. To maximize your document output environment a robust and comprehensive assessment is needed to provide the depth of understanding required for development of a strategy.

Most either implied or actually stated their focus was on network printers or copiers (multifunction devices); sometimes stating this was a first step in a larger endeavor. While I completely understand the desire to break a project down into manageable pieces and for immediate realization of savings, these pieces should not be completed without consideration of the document output environment as a whole. After all, this departmentalization and segmentation is what created the problem we are all trying to solve.

I suggest you should consider the document output environment holistically, create an overarching strategy and then break the implementation down into manageable pieces if you feel you cannot manage a broader project at once. If not, you will more than likely be developing strategies, solutions and vendor relationships based on components without the necessary interdependencies to achieve all of your objectives; again, back to the cause of the problem.

An alternative is an all-inclusive analysis of the document output environment, development of a comprehensive strategy and implementation plan for short-, mid- and long-term improvements. There will always be fairly immediate actions which can begin the expense reductions desired without compromising the larger objectives. Similar to software development, vendor contracts should be developed as components with windows that allow them to effectively interact with and support future or expanded strategy components.

Services

As would be expected, the services defined by virtually all of the RFPs were limited along the lines of the course of actions. The assessment and strategy processes were limited to network printers or multifunction devices with other important components of a document output environment as little more than secondary thoughts. Mapping locations of devices usually had greater import than understanding user behaviors and workflow.

Defined services were largely confined to supply replenishment and fix/repair services. There were often requirements for volume tracking and reporting but almost always without a stated purpose for this data and definition of the reporting. Usage statistics other than chargeback situations are very important data but only if used in a manner to and purpose of improving the document output environment. Data limited to page volumes and costs provide limited value for re-engineering and improving the document output environment. These are all remnants of technology refreshment based on replacement versus strategy.

Often device rationalization was mentioned as an organic result of the services outlined above rather than with the appropriate level of definition and focus. Comprehensive technology and device rationalization will deliver the greatest possible expense reductions and workflow improvements and should be defined in much greater detail. A limited amount of in-field observation has led me to conclude that this is one of the promises of management print services that rarely get attention after the supply replenishment and fix/repair service are in place and revenues are being realized by vendors. This is a predictable occurrence since most vendors use MPS as a marketing strategy to capture hardware, supply and service revenues with limited in-place processes for the management component.

My suggestion is that you define the management processes with as much detail and level of interest that you apply to the supply replenishment and fix/repair services. The RFPs I read usually ask an inordinate number of questions about attitudes, processes and capabilities to furnish supplies and fix/repair service and virtually none for the strategy development or management component. You should be asking for rationalization of technology and not simply devices.

Summary

After reviewing RFPs and following up with project managers I realize that this is virgin territory for most of you with few good resources to draw on. It is often obvious these documents have been influenced by vendors' sales and marketing efforts and/or the limited view of MPS within the majority of industry participants.

What does this all mean to you? If you answered yes to the question I asked earlier about your objectives it means the difference between achieving none of them, a few of them, most of them or all of them. I am confident that several of the organizations will miss savings of hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars if they accept proposals that are limited to the course of action and services defined in their RFP.

I advise you to step back and think carefully about your larger goals and objectives and independently research managing your document output environment with less influence by service providers, hardware and supply manufacturers and software developers. There are a number of resources available that bring an independent, end-user view to this market space.

If this post caught your interest and makes some sense to you I would suggest you read several of my earlier postings as well:

Managed Print Services, Blind Men & Elephants
Print Management Versus Device Management
Improving Your Document Output Environment