Research report · 153 senior leaders surveyed

What Procurement Really Think About Workforce Solutions RFPs And a blueprint for better workforce solutions RFPs.

At Guidant Global, we believe the way these partnerships are bought is as important as the partnerships themselves. So we went to the source: what do procurement leaders really think about workforce solutions RFPs, and what does it mean for the next era of work?

An industry at an inflection point

The workforce solutions RFP process is under real pressure.

153

senior procurement and workforce leaders shared their perspective.

Procurement leaders are not unfamiliar with the mechanics of running workforce RFPs. Despite lengthy, disciplined RFP cycles every three to five years, confidence in outcomes remains weak.

The issues are structural rather than tactical. Buyers struggle to make genuine like-for-like comparisons, find it hard to meaningfully differentiate between suppliers, and frequently encounter friction between HR and Procurement during evaluation. At the same time, supplier responses often fall short of what buyers actually value.

All of this is playing out against a backdrop of rapid capability change. AI and automation, skills-based hiring and workforce analytics have moved rapidly up the agenda, but the RFP process itself has not evolved at the same pace.

This research report uses new survey data to highlight where the process is misaligned with buyer need and sets out a practical blueprint for a more intelligent, outcome-led approach to workforce solutions procurement.

From complexity to clarity

Workforce solutions being procured

Scope is crucial, as RFP complexity increases scope creep. Our research shows most organisations are procuring multifaceted workforce programmes rather than a single service line.

MSP remains the most widely procured solution (55%), followed by SOW Management (50%) and RPO (45%), with direct sourcing and consulting also featuring strongly.

An RFP that needs to evaluate capability across MSP, RPO, SOW and direct sourcing simultaneously is a fundamentally different exercise from a single solution tender, and far more challenging to design and manage.

This multi-solution reality makes true like-for-like comparison intrinsically difficult. Any attempt to improve the RFP process has to start by acknowledging the structural complexity that buyers are dealing with.

Hybrid or partially outsourced programmes account for around half of all respondents, with fully in-house (25%) and fully outsourced (20%) models making up most of the remainder. Fewer than 5% describe their programme as genuinely integrated and optimised.

This matters. Many organisations are operating in a grey zone - still figuring out what they want to keep in-house, what they want a partner to own, and how success should be measured. That ambiguity makes it significantly harder to write a precise, outcome-focused RFP, because the organisation itself may still be working through what “good” actually looks like.

Is your current workforce programme:

Answered: 153 · Values approximated from supplied chart

Partially outsourced (Hybrid)~51%

Fully in-house~28%

Fully outsourced~18%

Not currently implemented~3%

How organisations run RFPs today

Infrequent, lengthy and substantial undertakings

Workforce RFPs are not frequent exercises, with 40% of respondents running them every three to five years and 30% on a one-to-three-year cycle. When they do happen, they are substantial undertakings.

Almost half take between 3 and 6 months from launch to supplier selection, with an additional 30% extending to 6 to 9 months. Less than 15% manage to complete the exercise in under 3 months. Shortlisting practices reflect this seriousness. Most organisations invite 5 to 6 suppliers, with most of the remainder inviting 3 to 4.

How often are RFPs run?

Approximate values from supplied chart

Every 2-3 years~41%

Every 3-5 years~27%

Contracts expire~16%

Typical time to supplier selection

Approximate values from supplied chart

3-6 months~46%

6-9 months~25%

<3 months~15%

How many suppliers are invited?

Exact values visible in supplied chart

5-639.87%

3-433.99%

10+15.03%

7-1011.11%

The confidence crisis

Confidence is weak considering the significance of the decision.

Perhaps the most important headline in this research is that confidence in RFP outcomes is not strong considering the significance of the decision involved.

Only 25% of respondents describe themselves as very confident that their RFP process identifies the right partner. This lack of assurance highlights a pressing need for reforms that can instil greater trust and transparency in the selection process.

How confident are you that your RFP identifies the best partner?

Exact values visible in supplied chart

Somewhat confident56.21%

Very confident30.72%

Neutral10.46%

Not very / at all confident2.62%

How buyers validate supplier capability

Evidence builds confidence. Written responses do not.

Given this confidence gap, it’s important to look at how buyers try to validate capability beyond the written response.

Data and performance validation tops the list, followed by site visits, technology demonstrations, client references and meetings with the proposed delivery team.

Written responses sit at the bottom, cited by a small minority as a primary source of confidence.

Ironically, the written RFP response takes the most amount of time for both buyers and suppliers, yet it is the least trusted aspect of validation.

How do you validate supplier capability?

Select all that apply · Exact values visible in supplied chart

Data / performance validation56.21%

Site visits / reviews51.63%

Technology demonstrations50.98%

Client references49.67%

Meeting delivery team48.37%

Pilot / proof of concept45.75%

MI packs / samples33.33%

Written responses9.80%

The biggest challenges

Comparison, differentiation and internal alignment

Respondents chose their top three challenges from a set list, highlighting both process issues and interpersonal tensions.

Like-for-like comparison and supplier differentiation

The two greatest challenges are two sides of the same coin: 43% of respondents struggle to compare suppliers on equivalent terms, and 38% find it difficult to differentiate between them.

This issue has two causes, the first from process design. Broad or vague RFP questions allow varied responses, while insufficiently detailed scoring frameworks make differentiation subjective. The second, in a highly competitive, established industry vendors clearly need to work harder to stand out, or at least apart, from the pack.

The HR / Procurement fault line

30% say internal misalignment between HR and Procurement is a significant and often underestimated friction point. HR leads workforce strategy and understands operational needs, while Procurement manages the commercial process and suppliers. If these functions lack alignment on evaluation criteria, weighting or decision authority, the RFP process becomes an internal negotiation as much as an external one.

Technology assessment remains poorly served

29% state that it is evaluating technology capability, despite technology demonstrations being a leading trusted validation method. Buyers are recognising the need to assess technology, but standard RFPs aren’t enabling this. Written descriptions of platforms and AI are hard to judge without real demonstrations.

Biggest challenges when running workforce RFPs

Select up to 3 · Exact values visible in supplied chart

Comparing suppliers like-for-like43.14%

Differentiating suppliers37.91%

Internal alignment30.07%

Evaluating technology29.41%

Time and resource demands28.76%

Innovation vs operations24.84%

Understanding pricing22.88%

Leading frustrations

The lived experience of reading supplier responses

Challenges reflect structural difficulties; frustrations reflect the lived experience of reading supplier responses.

Generic and verbose responses

37% highlighted either generic answers or excessively lengthy responses as the leading frustrations for buyers respectively - suppliers are submitting extensive documents that fail to address the buyer’s specific needs.

Pricing opacity

31% of respondents state lack of pricing transparency is their leading frustration. In a market with varied commercial models, buyers want clearer pricing frameworks. Unclear costs add to the challenge of making like-for-like comparisons.

Claims without evidence

22% of respondents name bold claims without supporting data. Buyers want proof, not empty claims, so making unsubstantiated statements without data or case studies fails to gain trust.

What frustrates you most about supplier responses?

Select up to 2 · Exact values visible in supplied chart

Generic answers36.60%

Overly long responses36.60%

Lack of pricing transparency31.37%

Claims without data22.22%

Poor workforce strategy understanding21.57%

Overpromising innovation18.95%

The capability shift

What matters most now

The research looking ahead to the future highlights a major strategic shift in the workforce solutions market, with the value of key capabilities evolving significantly in the past three years.

AI and automation: The defining shift

AI and automation tops the “much more important” list (42%) and crucially sits among the lowest for “less important” responses. AI and automation are no longer a differentiator - buyers expect providers to show genuine AI capability.

Skills-based hiring

Skills-based hiring - which 41% named as “much more important” - reflects a broader market shift away from role-based hiring models towards capability and adjacency mapping. Providers unable to show their solutions support skills-based methods are now at a strong disadvantage.

Workforce analytics and planning

Workforce planning (37%) and workforce insights and analytics (35%) both also rank highly, reinforcing that buyers are looking for strategic partners, not just transactional vendors.

Capabilities rated “much more important” today

Exact values visible in supplied chart

AI / automation42.76%

Skills-based hiring41.45%

Workforce planning37.50%

Workforce insights35.81%

Scale27.63%

Integrated MSP + RPO27.63%

A practical blueprint

A blueprint for better workforce solutions RFPs

The research findings clearly highlight a gap between how RFPs are currently designed and run, and what procurement leaders actually need from them.

This is the gap Guidant Global helps clients close. We sit on both sides of these processes every day, running SOW programmes for clients and responding to RFPs across the market, so we see exactly where they break down and what separates a process that builds confidence from one that doesn't. The blueprint that follows is our answer. It isn't a theoretical wish-list but a hands-on framework built directly from what the data tells us works, and from what we've seen deliver better partnerships in practice.

01Start with outcomes, not outputs

The most common RFP problems named are often symptoms of poorly structured questions. An outcomes-first approach means defining exactly what success looks like before the RFP is written:

What performance metrics matter
What workforce outcomes the organisation is trying to achieve
What the criteria for selection are

Questions should then help suppliers demonstrate their abilities in delivering those specific outcomes.

02Build a structured scoring framework before inviting responses

Like-for-like comparison is impossible without a structured, pre-agreed scoring framework. Define the categories, relative weighting and cross-functional alignment before any supplier receives the brief.

Late-stage scoring realignment, driven by internal disagreement, is a major source of process delay and outcome uncertainty.

03Redesign the written stage: less volume, more precision

Evidence clearly showed that written responses are the least trusted validation mechanism, with verbose responses a primary frustration. Written stages should be dramatically tightened:

Shorter word counts
More specific questions
Mandatory evidence rather than assertion

Reserve detailed narrative for where it genuinely adds value; use structured templates for capability and pricing.

04Build evidence-based validation into the process by design

If data, site visits, technology demonstrations and client references are the most trusted methods, they should be formal, weighted stages, not informal add-ons.

A shorter, structured written stage
A mandatory technology demonstration
Validated client reference calls
A delivery team presentation

05Create a dedicated technology assessment protocol

Given that a third of buyers struggle to evaluate technology capability, technology assessment deserves its own structured module covering:

Current platform capability
Integration architecture
AI and automation roadmap with evidence of delivery
Data and analytics outputs

06Require standardised pricing disclosure

To create a level playing field and enable genuine comparison, mandate a standardised commercial disclosure template covering:

Fee models and management fees
Supplier margins where applicable
Technology costs
Variable or outcome-based elements

Pricing should be evaluated on total cost of service, not headline rates.

07Align HR and Procurement from day one

Internal misalignment between HR and Procurement is the third most common challenge in workforce RFPs. It is solvable, but requires deliberate process design.

A joint kick-off that establishes shared objectives, evaluation criteria and decision-making authority before the RFP is issued dramatically reduces friction. Consider appointing a joint steering group with both functions represented.

08Future-proof the capability framework

The rapid rise in importance of AI/automation, skills-based hiring and workforce analytics means evaluation frameworks built even three years ago may be materially out of date.

Build in a mandatory review at the start of each RFP cycle. Ask: “Does this framework reflect where we want to be in three years, not just where we are today?”

Conclusion

The RFP is not broken. It is under-engineered.

The Workforce Solutions RFP is not broken, but it is under-engineered for the complexity it is now being asked to handle.

The market has evolved rapidly, the scope of services being procured is broader, the technology dimension is more significant, the strategic expectations of providers are higher, and the capabilities that matter most have shifted substantially.

We need to bring the process through which these partnerships are formed on that journey.

This blueprint for a better RFP is not a radical departure; it is a disciplined application of what the data already tells us works.

Organisations that redesign their workforce solutions procurement process around these principles will not just make better selections. They will signal to the market that they are sophisticated, outcomes-focused buyers and attract the calibre of response, and the calibre of partner, that they deserve.

The research shows buyers face:

Written responses that buyers don't trust
Scoring frameworks that emerge too late
Pricing models that can't be compared
Technology claims that can't be validated
Internal misalignment that undermines consistency

Procurement leaders know what they want:

Evidence over assertion
Specificity over scale
Transparency over complexity
A process that gives genuine confidence

Solutions

Latest from Guidant Global

About

What Procurement Really Think About Workforce Solutions RFPs And a blueprint for better workforce solutions RFPs.

The workforce solutions RFP process is under real pressure.

Workforce solutions being procured

Infrequent, lengthy and substantial undertakings

Confidence is weak considering the significance of the decision.

Evidence builds confidence. Written responses do not.

Comparison, differentiation and internal alignment

Like-for-like comparison and supplier differentiation

The HR / Procurement fault line

Technology assessment remains poorly served

The lived experience of reading supplier responses

Generic and verbose responses

Pricing opacity

Claims without evidence

What matters most now

AI and automation: The defining shift

Skills-based hiring

Workforce analytics and planning

A blueprint for better workforce solutions RFPs

The RFP is not broken. It is under-engineered.

The research shows buyers face:

Procurement leaders know what they want:

Access the full research and blueprint