Rethinking RFPs: Why Stakeholder Engagement Defines the Future of Procurement

When you’ve sat on both sides of the table — drafting proposals and reviewing them — you begin to see RFPs differently. Recently, in conversations with an RFP writer from a leading consulting firm and previously an evaluator working with the Government of Ontario, it became even clearer to me: RFPs are not just about compliance, pricing, or polished documents. At their best, they’re a mirror of how organizations listen, respond, and commit to the communities they serve.

That’s why the future of RFPs isn’t only about speed and structure. It’s about meaningful engagement.

Beyond the Checklist

Too often, RFPs are treated like checklists: respond to the criteria, highlight qualifications, and hit “submit.” But when I was on the evaluation side, the proposals that stood out were the ones that gave context — the ones that explained not just what would be delivered, but why it mattered.

A highway expansion proposal that acknowledges community concerns about rural traffic, then offers mitigation strategies.

A housing project that outlines consultation with low-income residents before finalizing design.

A healthcare services bid that shows early dialogue with Indigenous communities to ensure programs reflect lived realities.

These are not extras. They are the heart of public procurement today.

The Weight of Engagement

Engagement is no longer optional. Municipal, provincial, and federal governments now demand to see how projects will impact — and be shaped by — those affected.

• Indigenous Engagement: Authentic consultation is a policy requirement and an ethical responsibility. Proposals that only mention it in passing often fall flat; evaluators look for genuine collaboration, documented feedback, and evidence of adaptation.
• Public Voice: From safe injection sites to community centers, people want to know their voices are heard. Surveys, town halls, and digital forums are more than tactics — they’re proof of respect.
• Sector Alignment: Ministries of Health, housing boards, infrastructure authorities — each sector has distinct expectations. Winning proposals show not just compliance, but alignment with evolving priorities.

And here’s the truth: evaluators can tell when it’s tokenistic. They look for proof that voices weren’t just collected, but actually influenced the plan.

Lessons from the Reader’s Chair

As a reviewer, I’ve read proposals that ticked every box yet left me unconvinced. Then there were the few that stayed with me — because they told a story.

One banking project didn’t just describe a client survey. It showed before-and-after evidence of how feedback shaped implementation, complete with adoption metrics. That single case study told me: this team doesn’t just listen; they act.

That is the difference between compliance and conviction.

Where Platforms Like Novilo Come In

This shift in RFP culture creates new challenges: how do teams collect, organize, and present feedback in a way that evaluators can trust? How do they ensure alignment with both technical criteria and community voices?

That’s where Novilo is changing the game. It isn’t just a document tool. It’s a collaboration engine — capturing past project knowledge, structuring proposals against scoring frameworks, and giving space for documenting engagement processes.

In short: it helps organizations write proposals that are not only competitive but credible.

A New Era of Procurement

The RFP world is evolving. Cost still matters. Structure still matters. But increasingly, meaningfulness matters most.

The proposals that win will be the ones that combine technical excellence with community accountability. They will be the ones that demonstrate not just what an organization can deliver, but how it listens, adapts, and respects the voices around it.

At Novilo, we believe that’s not just better procurement. It’s better leadership.