Imagine you work for a company, and see a Request For Information (RFI) from Defence published on AusTender. The subject area is relevant to your product. But the decision in your company’s planning meeting is to just wait for the Request For Tender (RFT) before you provide a response. OK, fair enough; a response to an RFI does take up time. This blog post explains why you should at least submit a basic response, even if it’s just some brochures.
1. Make Defence aware that you exist.
Chances are someone (in a project support role, like me) has already trawled the internet to see what products and technologies exist. But, if you can contextualise your brochures into how your solution applies to the ‘problem’, then that gets you on the map. And not just for the project, but in general. Defence is a small place, and project teams talk to other project teams, usually informally at morning teas with limp carrot sticks or a latte in R2.
2. Encourage open procurement method
Also, imagine if every company with a potential or partial solution said ‘yeah nah, we’ll wait for the RFT’. And you didn’t have any existing contracts or RFT responses with Australia’s allies. And your website is full of marketing blah and no technical substance. Well guess what, after the lacklustre responses from the RFI, the recommendation by Defence’s procurement arm Capability Acquisition and Sustainment Group (CASG) to government may be ‘there are no viable solutions at this time; recommend postpone the project.’ This actually happens. So those tens of millions of dollars you could have had signed up in two years’ time now might be moved to 10 years, by which time you may not have the competitive advantage.
Don’t forget there is the dark horse: ‘let’s just buy what the Americans use.’ And yet, there is a big push to have sovereignty and Australian input. If Australia is going to spend a gazillion dollars wouldn’t it be great if some of that went back into the Aussie economy? But guess what, if no useful information come from an RFI, then the customers (eg Army, Navy, Air Force) have a strong case to say to CASG ‘let’s just go Foreign Military Sale (FMS)’. Yes, there are advantages to that, BUT it might not be the best solution for the warfighter.
3. Plan ahead for future procurement
You have a partial solution. Great, Defence wants to hear about it.
An example: you have a widget that does the mobility very well, but you don’t have the optical thingee or maintenance operations in Australia. That is OK. Please submit information about your solution, or better yet, find other companies who can supply the missing pieces, and encourage them to submit a response. Even better yet if you submit a group response. The fewer contracts Defence has to negotiate and manage, the better. Consortiums are fine. A common example is if you’re a company in the UK or US and your widget is great, but you don’t have any Australian content. This is a big deal. Because who Defence eventually choose is not just about whose widget is the best technically - it’s about support, through-life costs, flexibility with Intellectual Property, and Australian content.
4. You might get funding to improve/finish your solution
Maybe you have a product that is great for the civilian market, and with some tweaking (hah! Say the engineers), it’d be perfect for Defence use. But that takes investment. Well guess what, if Defence has the opportunity to steer the design of something to be what they need, then it’s win-win. The Defence Innovation Hub technically handles this, so if you haven’t already hit them up for some money, CASG can put you in touch with the customers (eg Army) and get the ball rolling there. You can get feedback and ideas straight from the operators.
5. Become RFT-ready
Defence is full of red tape. ‘One does not simply respond to Approaches to Market’ as the meme would go. One day that RFT will hit AusTender, and key documents like the OCD and FPS might be classified. Even to look at those documents would require some level of membership through the Defence Industry Security Program (DISP). This can take months to prepare for, let alone the months to be assessed. Responding to an RFI means you can gauge how relevant your solution is to Defence. If your RFI response leads to more communication and interest, well then it’s smart to sort out all the red tape such as policies and procedures, and personnel security clearances. And if you’re not even based in Australia, then it’s handy to have local contacts in the relevant Systems Program Office (SPO) help you find the right advice.
So next time you see a Defence RFI relevant to your product or service, think of responding as an investment and not burden. Even a basic response can go a long way in setting up future sales success.
About this rant/advice
I’m not an expert. I only worked for four years in CASG (2017-2021), and during that time I was by no means the top dog. As a contractor (aka consultant), I had no power: not allowed to spend money, nor sign any documents asking for money. My role was to help project managers (mostly contractors too) to follow the processes of the Capability Life Cycle (CLC) (now called ‘One Defence Capability System’), within the Defence procurement area (CASG). Our team was responsible for finding a solution to the problem as defined by the customer (Army). The Australian Department of Defence is a government agency and as such must follow the Commonwealth Procurement Rules. Depending on the estimated cost of the procurement, there is more scrutiny from internal and external parties. Therefore much evidence is required for these parties to justify ‘we want to buy this’ and ‘this is why it costs this much’. Response to RFIs and the analysis therein form part of this evidence.
I’m sure anyone can pick apart every sentence within this post, with a ‘yeah but what about blah’. Fair enough. But if I had to caveat and explain everything, this post would turn into a manual.