Swipe Right on Collaborative Sourcing

After nearly two decades in the IT services world, I’ve been part of more RFPs than I can count. Some good, many painful. If I’m being honest, the traditional RFP process often reminds me of stories I’ve heard of bad dating app experiences: impersonal, sometimes deceptive, misleading, with mistaken expectations, and usually ending in disappointment for both sides. There’s lots of scrolling, lots of filtering, and lots of effort—often leading to a match that looks good on paper but doesn’t work out in reality.

It’s understandable to want a structured, fair process that minimizes risk. But the reality is, these outdated, waterfall-style procurement exercises often create more risk—by boxing both sides into rigid assumptions before anyone has had a real conversation. It’s a process that prizes documentation over collaboration and control over creativity. In contrast, collaborative sourcing embraces uncertainty, fosters transparency, and leads to faster, more meaningful outcomes. It’s less like filling out a form and more like building a relationship.

Let me explain, using five key traits that define both great partnerships and better procurement outcomes.

1. Authentic Engagement

The traditional RFP process removes personal interaction at the most critical stage: the beginning. Proposals get written in isolation, responses are carefully curated, and questions are tightly limited. It’s like trying to get married based on a resume and one long handwritten letter. It feels transactional rather than relational.

Real results start with real conversations. Collaborative sourcing brings people together early—often face-to-face—to talk through the problem, the current state, and the outcomes that matter most. It’s not a one-size-fits-all answer—it’s two teams sitting down to learn about each other and determine how their strengths can align. It’s not about vendors selling features; it’s about jointly understanding the challenge and building the right path forward. It’s also the best way to assess soft factors like responsiveness, trustworthiness, and adaptability—traits that never show up in an RFP response.

2. Mutual Value Creation

In a traditional RFP, vendors often play defense, trying to guess what the buyer wants and responding with boilerplate promises. The result? “Best in class” fluff, vague timelines, and overengineered solutions designed to check boxes, not solve problems. And once the contract is awarded, both sides are often stuck with a solution that no longer reflects the real needs of the business.

Agile, collaborative methods flip the script. You invite providers to share their insights and co-design a solution, iterating together to uncover the smartest path—not just the cheapest or most compliant. This lets their distinctive strengths come through and helps you discover value that might not have been obvious in a static requirements document. That value could come in the form of a simplified technical solution, better use of automation, or a service delivery model tailored to your internal team structure.

It also encourages vendors to bring their A-game. When they know they’ll be judged on their expertise, adaptability, and partnership mentality—not just their price—they show up with ideas, not just answers.

As Pamela Meyer put it, “The illusion is that RFPs improve efficiency, when in reality they create a cumbersome process that actually constrains all parties’ ability to make new discoveries and adapt along the way. Tied to a plan, organizations actually cut themselves off from the most important cost-saving strategy of all—continuous learning and innovation.”

3. Aligned Expectations

Too many RFPs are built around the assumption that everything can be known and planned upfront. But if the business had all the answers, it probably wouldn’t be going out to bid in the first place. That gap between what’s written and what’s needed grows as the project progresses—and so do the risks.

Trying to define every detail in advance is like scripting a conversation before you’ve even met the person. That’s why Agile works so well—it embraces change, surfaces misalignments early, and keeps everyone focused on outcomes that matter. You get to see how potential partners respond to change and collaborate under pressure—which is far more telling than their ability to write a slick proposal.

Collaborative sourcing allows room for discussion, evolution, and refinement of ideas. Rather than anchoring your selection to a rigid requirements list, you can explore what’s possible, clarify ambiguous needs, and identify where trade-offs are acceptable—all before you commit.

As the Agile Manifesto teaches us, “Agility is all about trusting in one’s ability to respond to unpredictable events more than trusting in one’s ability to plan for them.” That mindset is critical to navigating complex service partnerships.

4. Flexibility and Adaptability

In my experience, the best vendors aren’t the ones who say yes to everything—they’re the ones who help you ask better questions, challenge assumptions, and adapt as you go. That doesn’t fit well in a traditional RFP, where change feels like a failure instead of an advantage. Where IT service providers are scared to suggest alternatives in fear of being disqualified. That fear stifles innovation and encourages safe, bland proposals that offer little differentiation.

Agile procurement gives you permission to evolve. You can present your current state, success factors, and desired outcomes, then iterate with potential partners through working sessions. This approach doesn’t just tolerate change—it thrives on it. You make smarter decisions as you go, rather than being trapped by the assumptions you made at the beginning.

It also mirrors how the real-world works—requirements shift, priorities evolve, and new information comes to light. Choosing a partner who can flex with you, rather than one bound to a fixed plan, is a smarter investment every time.

5. Long-Term Commitment

The truth is, the RFP process too often favors the lowest bidder, not the best partner. I’ve seen solution architects from large IT outsourcers trained to bid low, win the contract, and claw back profit through change orders. That’s not a relationship—that’s a transaction. And it often results in a frustrating experience where value is lost, momentum stalls, and the original goals fade behind budget battles.

When you invest in collaborative sourcing, you’re building toward something more sustainable. You select partners based on their proven expertise, cultural fit, and ability to deliver—not just their willingness to promise the most at the lowest cost. You’re choosing someone you’ll want to work with when things get tough, not someone you hope will stick to a contract.

A good sourcing process should simulate what it’s like to work together. Can they handle feedback? Do they listen? Do they understand your goals and offer relevant ideas? The answers to those questions should carry more weight than how polished their proposal looks.

And when you find the right match, it pays off. Focus instead on real value: Where has this provider done it before? What outcomes did they deliver? What’s their customer retention rate? What do their references say? How do they act when things go wrong? These are the questions that reveal whether you’re looking at a vendor or a long-term partner.

Final Thoughts

Collaborative sourcing isn’t just more effective—it’s more human. It acknowledges that uncertainty is part of business and creates space for both sides to bring their best. You’ll save time, reduce risk, and reach value faster by working together from day one.

It also costs less—in both hard dollars and lost opportunity. As Cal Harrison put it: “It’s my best guess that in Canada each year we jam about $5 billion worth of wasted time and effort into our economy because of these inefficient RFP processes.” The same story plays out everywhere.

Here’s a better way to source IT services, built on four simple steps:

1. Start by presenting the current state, priorities, success factors, timeline, and desired outcomes—as clearly as you know them today.
2. Host collaborative workshop sessions (ideally in person) with multiple potential partners to explore how each would approach your needs.
3. Use what you learn to iterate your requirements in follow-up workshops, refining both the solution and how it’s delivered.
4. Downselect the partners who demonstrate expertise, alignment, and differentiated value, then proceed with a competitive, fair proposal process that’s rooted in real understanding—not assumptions.

So maybe it’s time to stop swiping through PDFs and start having real conversations. The right partner is out there—you just need a better way to meet them. And just like in dating, the better the connection at the start, the stronger the relationship will be over the long haul.