Ticking the Box

“We don’t need to make a big deal about this. We just need to tick the box.”

Was there ever a more demoralising phrase to hear when you’re building pensions systems? It means “I don’t care about this feature. And in all probability, no-one will ever use it. So let’s make a half-hearted attempt, so I won’t be lying too much when I tell a prospective client that we have it.”

I see this charade as a symptom of a dysfunctional RFP process.

When you’re answering a RFP, there’s a tremendous pressure to answer “yes” to every question you’re asked. The worry is that if you don’t someone else will, and that they’ll get the business.

When you’re writing the RFP the fear is that you’ll forget something. Schemes don’t update their technology too often, so you need to think of what you need now, and what you might want in the future. Which means you end up with a “kitchen sink” RFP, that lists everything anyone has ever thought of in the history of pensions.

The end result is a bloated list of features that demands work which doesn’t add value for members or employers. And an acquiescent supplier that feels obliged to agree everything on the list, even though they may not be able to. The implementation is set up for failure before it begins. We all know the song.

I think there’s a better way. One that focuses on defining the problems you need to solve and the goals you want to achieve. Where the client and supplier can work together to decide the best way to solve the problems and can be honest about what’s achievable. And where they agree in advance how to handle changing circumstances and new requirements.

The alternative is a procurement arms race where the client tries to squeeze as much as possible for as little as possible, and the supplier low balls, intending to “make it up in change control.” And as a number of large schemes have recently found out to their cost, one way or another, the scheme loses.