Creating a culture of tendering at a large financial services company
Navigating cultural shifts and streamlining processes for enhanced efficiency
The challenge
As part of a wider strategy to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of their legal function, a large global bank had recently implemented a new technology platform to manage their legal tenders/RFPs. However, the initial rollout model was based upon self-service use, and the function was not achieving the anticipated level of organic uptake. When the platform was being used, it often was not utilised to its full potential, due to a lack of process and guidance on how to do so.
The bank therefore engaged our Legal Operations Consulting team (LOC) to help drive increased – and best-practice – adoption of the tool and the practice of tendering more broadly.
The solution
Identifying the root causes
Given the role that user behaviour was playing in the lack of adoption, a feedback-led approach was incorporated from the outset, with a broad campaign of stakeholder engagement taking place at the beginning of the project, involving both group and 1:1 sessions.
The goal of these sessions was to gain a detailed understanding of the current usage (or lack thereof) of the tool, homing in on pain points and blockers that were hampering its uptake.
After doing so, several key factors were identified:
1. Culture
Whilst the tendering platform was initially rolled out to make the tendering process easier, there was not an existing culture of tendering within many teams. Therefore, rather than making tenders quicker and easier as intended, the request to tender using the tool was an additional burden for many lawyers who were not used to tendering in the first place.
2. Overly detailed guidance
Assumptions are often made that lawyers are sticklers for detail and word documents (usually tongue-in-cheek, but with an element of truth). However, feedback in this case highlighted that whilst some in the function preferred this, the detailed processes and manuals that were shared as part of the initial rollout felt so restrictive as to remove the autonomy of the lawyers in the function to run tenders and use ‘common sense’, in a way that best suited the nuances of their particular team and region.
3. Time constraints
Unsurprisingly, one of the main factors deterring lawyers from running best practice tenders and learning to use the new technology was a lack of time. With many lawyers used to instructing at short notice with a very light-touch quote process, or no process at all, the thought of a detailed scoping and competitive tender process simply felt like something that would stop them from getting on with their ‘real’ job.
These factors also interacted heavily, with things like detailed process documents creating a perception of a time-consuming process, feeding into a broader culture of urgent instruction and a lack of tendering more generally.
Three things were done to tackle these root causes:
1. Promoting cultural and behavioural change
To tackle the lack of a tendering culture within the function, the team took a step back from process and governance, and instead focused on creating a stronger narrative which focused on the strategic importance of tendering in general. Short, punchy materials and messages were shared repeatedly, clearly setting out how the running of tenders was an important part of the function’s role, and how doing so would directly support the bank in achieving its overall efficiency goals.
This helped to position the tool as a solution to a problem (manual, inefficient tendering), rather than a burden.
2. Principles over process
To tackle the negative feedback on the detailed manuals and guidance, the team shifted approach completely, ‘zooming out’ to agree on the common principles and outcomes seen in good tender processes (e.g., competitive tension; like-for-like submissions). Once agreed, a one-pager was created, clearly outlining the principles and desired outcomes that the function should apply to all tenders. This not only significantly simplified the general messaging around tendering, but also allowed lawyers a greater level of autonomy, ownership, and flexibility, whilst ensuring that good practice was still followed.
3. Making it easy
To tackle the concern over the up-front time burden that running a good tender process created, a concierge team was established, providing personalized support, guidance, and training making it easier for lawyers to engage with the tool and run tenders, both from a technology and process perspective.
Results and benefits
The implementation of the solutions resulted in significant improvements in the adoption and usage of the tendering tool, leading to the following outcomes:
1. Increased usage of the technology platform
In the space of approximately 6 months, the client witnessed over a threefold increase in the number of tenders running through the platform each month – a substantial improvement in engagement and adoption throughout the function.
2. Higher quality tenders
As a result of the improved guidance and concierge support, the quality of tenders improved significantly in terms of the structure of the scope, and the ability to compare like-for-like submissions. Additionally, the client saw a significant increase in pricing submissions that met its criteria for Effective Fee Arrangements (EFAs). This led to improved procurement outcomes and reduced commercial risk for the bank.
3. Healthy competitive tension and cost avoidance
The increased usage of the tendering tool resulted in enhanced competitive tension on a matter-by-matter basis, leading to more sophisticated, competitive pricing models, and significant cost avoidance.
4. A positive user experience and great feedback
The clear approach to taking on board user feedback, and directly reflecting that in the approach to the rollout, was met with a highly positive response from those that provided it, improving their experience and understanding of the process and technology.
Conclusion
Through a feedback-led approach, the client overcame the challenge of low uptake of the tendering platform.
By going beyond technology and process, and instead engaging with stakeholders, addressing cultural factors, and providing simplified guidance and human support, the team successfully increased the adoption and quality of the tendering process, with positive, tangible business outcomes as a result.
