The RFP Tool Revolution is Happening—Just Very, Very Slowly
There's a growing number of legal-focused RFP solutions on the market, but corporate attorneys who struggled to use more general solutions in the past may be reluctant to engage with such tools even as their companies are looking for ways to save money.
May 20, 2020 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
There are plenty of reasons for law firm and legal departments to use legal industry-specific request for proposal (RFP) tools—but whether they actually are using those solutions or not remains something of a question mark.
While automated tools can help organizations expedite certain facets of the RFP process, allowing them to analyze, compare and respond to proposal requests at a faster clip, it remains uncertain whether corporate legal departments are actively engaging with RFPs at all or simply relying on a time-tested list of favored law providers.
Natham Cemenska, director of legal operations and industry insights at Wolters Kluwer's ELM Solutions, indicated that he hasn't seen too many legal-focused RFP providers arise over the last few years. "There's starting to be some more. There's not too many. There's never going to be too many because legal is like less than 1% of the U.S. economy. … There's just not much profit to be had in the legal industry," he said.
One reason may be that corporate attorneys—much like their law firm brethren—are creatures of habit. Cemenska said corporate legal departments often have a list of preferred firms or providers they turn to for a given matter. RFPs are used as negotiating leverage to keep costs down rather than as an urgent attempt to find legal help.
"Corporate legal departments don't really do RFPs all that often," Cemenska said.
However, that reluctance could have as much to do with some of the pre-existing RFP solutions on the table as it does with corporate attorney habits. Josh Kalmus, VP of sales at the outside counsel engagement platform Persuit, pointed out that many of the general RFP solutions on the market are geared towards procurement experts—which the average lawyer is not.
"They are quite complex tools. They have lots of checkboxes and elements, so if you try to get an attorney into one of those tools, they'll never adopt it. That's why RFP in legal has traditionally been carved out and legal has been left to its own devices," Kalmus said.
When attorneys did engage with the RFP process, they were mostly using spreadsheets and email, a habit that legal-focused providers like Persuit are trying to break through making the RFP process seems less intimidating. The Persuit platform, for example, was developed so that users could dive-in after watching a 40-minute training video and make use of various templates and pricing models broken down by practice area.
But making RFP tools easier to use is only half the battle. Ray Meiring, CEO of the sales enablement and proposal management platform Qorus, believes the market for legal-focused RFP products is growing, in part due to the rising levels of competition among global and even smaller-sized law firms. For law firms, the value of using an RFP tool built with legal in mind is likely tied directly to pitching new corporate clients.
Where generic RFP tools can help users automatically generate responses to an incoming proposal request, law firms' services are distinct from, say, an organization focused on sales or marketing and thus may require a more tailored answer.
"It's very much around representing your best experience in your law firm, making sure that you are highlighting the best attorneys that you have, representing your experience, your case studies and résumé in a very attractive way inside of an RFP response. That's where it differentiates from the more generic RFP responses that you might see," Meiring said.
With more legal-friendly RFP solutions on the table, could the economic fallout from COVID-19 drive more legal departments to leverage those tools in an effort to cut costs? Cemenska thinks it's possible, but that companies may also be reluctant to sink resources into new products right now.
"I'm not sure it's time to buy an RFP solution if it's time to save money like yesterday," Cemenska said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1‘The Decision Will Help Others’: NJ Supreme Court Reverses Appellate Div. in OPRA Claim Over Body-Worn Camera Footage
- 2MoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
- 3Antitrust in Trump 2.0: Expect Gap Filling from State Attorneys General
- 4People in the News—Jan. 22, 2025—Knox McLaughlin, Saxton & Stump
- 5How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be Open to Opportunities, Ready to Seize Them When They Arise,' Says Lara Shortz of Michelman & Robinson
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250