33
CANADIANLAWYERMAG.COM/INHOUSE JANUARY 2016
ISSUING A REQUEST for proposal for external legal ser-
vices is becoming more commonplace — and it's no longer
the domain of government or health-care organizations.
But, as many in-house legal teams have discovered, issuing an
RFP is a lot of work, particularly if they don't have much experi-
ence with the process. On the fl ip side, responding to RFPs can
also be a lot of work, taking 40 to 50 hours of staff and lawyer
time, according to a 2013 Lex Mundi paper called "Best Prac-
tices in Preparing and Responding to Requests for Proposals."
Both sides put in a lot of time and effort, but, oftentimes,
neither side is satisfi ed with the outcome. Some law fi rms
complain that RFPs are often too vague, with too many as-
sumptions that can lead to misunderstandings down the road.
Or, conversely, they're too prescriptive, which can hamper
creativity and innovation.
For in-house counsel, the process requires a considerable
amount of tedious work, and they may not get exactly what
they want in the end, when the winning law fi rm argues
certain items fall outside the scope of the RFP.
Lex Mundi recommends keeping the RFP pro-
cess within the legal department, since procure-
ment departments may not have the same un-
derstanding of the relationship between inside
and outside counsel — and in-house counsel
will always oversee the work being done.
But Fred Headon, assistant general counsel for labour and
employment law at Air Canada, says there could be a role
for procurement departments. "Lawyers are not necessarily
equipped to have this conversation," he says. "These are not
things we learned in law school."
L a w D e p a r t m e n t M a n a g e m e n t
Building a better RFP
In-house tend to point fi ngers at the law fi rms when they feel
their RFP has not been answered the way they hoped, but is
the sophistication actually lacking from the client side?
BY VAWN HIMMELSBACH
