Five Words to Replace in Your MarTech RFP

Over past two decades, several hundred enterprises have relied on Real Story Group evaluations and templates to help guide their selection of marketing technologies. Yet, we've seen that a good template alone won't guarantee success. You need solid requirements. There's a lot to say on that subject, but for now, consider this modest advice to help point you in the right direction.

In technology product selection, as in life, the key to differentiating among possible alternatives is clarity. Vague, wordy RFPs (or "tenders") only beget vague, wordy responses.

You can really help your enterprise by replacing conveniently ambiguous buzzwords with terms that help get to the bottom of what you really need. Here's five terms you should seek out and replace in any RFP.

1) From "Must" to "How"

Nearly all RFPs contain a goodly number "musts." OK, fine: there are some make-or-break capabilities, limitations, or deadlines you will need to delimit. But too many RFPs sprinkle the word around way too liberally, like a feudal lord constantly remonstrating their serfs. "Your platform must do this and must do that..."

This is not giving you the sense of control and rigor you think. Vendors have seen these requirements and can frequently check all the boxes, especially if you pose your needs in simple checklists or spreadsheet rows.

Vendors differentiate less on what they do than how they do it. So ask that! Care about HIPPA compliance? Then ask "How is your system HIPPA-compliant?" You'll get a much more useful answer. Same for things like "performant messaging," "Salesforce integration," and such.

2) "Integrate" to "Show"

Speaking of "integration, all too often word allows you and the vendor to conspire in postponing discussion of the hard work coming your way.

Making systems "talk to each other" can be surprisingly easy or devilishly hard -- but usually the latter. Unfortunately, it can be very difficult to know in advance just how hard, so companies tend to postpone a meaningful discussion of specifics during the technology selection phase. That's bad.

Instead of vaguely asking whether two systems can integrate, come up with some actual test cases. Articulate specific needs for read- or write-access to repositories, as well as event-triggers across systems. Describe all-important customer or marketer experiences as they complete tasks that span back-end platforms. Then you'll begin to start laying a roadmap for integration -- without ever having to use the word.

Extra credit: lose the word seamless too. Seams are part of the fabric of all software. They allow specific systems to be good at distinct things. Focus on where, when, how, and why you'll want to stitch those things together.

3) From "Intuitive" to "Hands-on"

We see the "i" word a lot in generic RFPs. But intuitive to whom? Vendors are justifiably proud of their tools and deem them easy to use. Yet many if not most customers report significant usability problems even with simpler MarTech platforms.

Instead focus on usability. Usability is fitness to purpose. Therefore, you need to discover your colleagues' true purposes in employing any tool. Note that different personas are going to require different experiences based on distinct purposes. You do this by holding competitive, hands-on bake-offs with your own staff. Never consider a vendor that won't train you to do a reasonable trial run like this.

4) From "Robust" to "Fit for Purpose"

Robust is a useless marketing term typically employed by vendors and their analyst shills. Don't ever type it yourself. Some of the most overburdened and soul-deadening MarTech implementations I've ever seen were self-evidently "robust." Make sure you're carefully weighing business value here, rather than just setting up an abstract set of wishes based on someone else's feature list.

What most people mean here is "richly capable." That sounds like a good thing, but richness brings complexity, so If you mean "multifunctional," or "extensible platform," you may unintentionally mitigate against the ease of use we were just seeking above.

Get clear about the functionality you really need, and try not to buy any more than that, since "robustness" always comes with a cost, especially around usability. So run those hands-on tests...

5) From "User" to "Persona"

"User" is another vague word that allows you to avoid clarifying key personas. Trust me: you will want to enter any technology procurement with a clear list of actors and their roles in any system. That enables you to better ensure that features match their needs .

So go ahead and eliminate your users. And then raise up the personas who really matter: Customers, Campaign Managers, Customer Service Reps, Prospects, Partners, Distributors, Suppliers, Developers, Designers, Authors, Editors, Data Analysts, Community Managers, Marketing Leads, Directors -- the list is endless. But for the system you're trying to deploy, there's a handful of personas that matter a lot. Call them by name.

Let's End on a Positive Note

Here's a word to employ more frequently at the beginning of any question. Sometimes MarTech leaders will exhibit surprise after a successful, team-based selection process. On the one hand, those low expectations are kind of sad, but on the other hand, it proves there's some joy in your future if you do this right!

If you need help with technology selection, please don't hesitate to call on my colleagues at RSG.