Why pilots, not RFPs, define the future of martech selection

For decades, the request for proposal (RFP) has been the default model for selecting technology vendors — a structured way to define requirements, score responses and declare winners. That approach worked when the goal was to purchase commodities like hardware, software or infrastructure. But in martech and in-house creative operations, the RFP is proving increasingly unfit for purpose.

The pace of change makes it unsustainable. 

• Typical martech RFP cycles stretch four to six months, while tools and platforms evolve in a matter of weeks, according to Gartner. 
• Proposal teams spend an average of 30 hours on each RFP — more than 5,000 hours a year, Loopio data shows. Marketing and operations staff lose valuable time in requirement workshops and scoring sessions. 

With technology evolving rapidly and consumer expectations in constant flux, lengthy, resource-heavy selection processes stall transformation instead of enabling it. When a project finally goes live, the landscape has already shifted. The RFP — once intended to reduce risk — now amplifies it.

Why the RFP is broken

RFPs aren’t inherently bad. When the goal is to compare like-for-like offers and push down costs, they serve a purpose, but martech and modern creative ecosystems are not that simple. No two stacks look the same. Integrations matter more than individual features and success depends on the chemistry between teams as much as the capabilities of platforms.

Traditional RFPs fail on three fronts:

• They are painfully slow: Old-school RFP cycles stumble while more agile processes race past them, frustrating teams while competitors forge ahead. 
• They are hopelessly ineffective: Weighted scoring systems favor cost and compliance over real-world application and what teams need to succeed at scale. 
• They are designed to sell, not solve: A glossy proposal can make almost any vendor look strong, but doesn’t adequately reflect capability or capacity to deliver.

The RFP is designed for buying paperclips, not building production ecosystems. Almost every brand has a story of a failed implementation that checks all three boxes above. An impeccable proposal and a competitive price that did not live up to expectations, an enormous investment that brought them no closer to significant transformation.

Delays are the silent killer. Time-to-market is often the difference between growth and stagnation. Every month spent circling an RFP comes at the cost of ongoing production inefficiencies and lost revenue. Misfits become long-term liabilities. A misaligned vendor locks a brand into years of underperformance and conflict, with extensive workarounds to resolve bottlenecks and disconnects.

Every delay, every misfit, hands competitive advantage to someone else.

Dig deeper: Why most martech RFPs fail and how to get vendor selection right

From RFPs to pilots

Forward-thinking brands are moving to more agile, outcome-driven models: testing in reality, not assumption. Instead of lengthy proposals, 30- to 60-day pilots with two or three shortlisted vendors are becoming the norm. 

Each vendor receives the same inputs and is asked to deliver against the same outcomes in real-world conditions. This reveals how each one handles:

• Integration challenges.
• Shifting requirements.
• The everyday collaboration that makes or breaks long-term success.

Pilots test the viability and quality of the partnership. Vendors are assessed on:

• How well they understand business objectives and solve operational needs.
• How effectively they function as an extension of existing teams.
• How quickly they communicate and adapt to changing market conditions.

These factors determine real value — yet they rarely appear on an RFP scorecard. Pilots reveal a vendor’s ability to understand, deliver, integrate into workflows, and adapt to evolving technologies and consumer demands. 

The result is a faster, fairer and far more revealing process that measures real-world performance against operational complexities and delivers tangible improvements. It’s about setting expectations and moving beyond blind trust in vendor promises.

How vendor selection needs to evolve

It’s a shift in mindset. Instead of asking “What features do we want?” start asking “What outcomes do we need?” Define success by outcomes — speed-to-market, scalability, compliance, automation, reuse and brand consistency — not by a checklist.

A structured approach to procurement remains critical, but the focus needs to shift to holistic testing of performance-based processes over simply accepting empty promises on paper.

Traditional RFPs often fall short because they lack true collaboration. Too frequently, departments operate in silos—CreativeOps focuses on defining needs, procurement manages the process, and IT directs the vendor selection. This fragmented approach limits effectiveness, and it’s clear that a more integrated, collaborative model is needed.

Procurement: Engage early with marketing and IT

• • Define practical application: Avoid the trap of asking vendors typical questions around products, competencies and previous projects. 
  • Define a set of scenarios that need to be solved and judge all vendors against their proposed solutions using the same criteria.
  • Set turnaround expectations: Overly complex onboarding or long pilot timelines are red flags. 
  • A vendor’s speed and effectiveness in solving scenarios signals what future collaboration will look like.
  • Outline operational requirements: Establish and test the proposed working relationship in real workflows during the pilot rather than attempting to bolt it on after deployment.

CreativeOps: Define pilot expectations and performance criteria

• • Determine measurable outcomes: Compile baseline data to set KPIs and OKRs — such as approval cycle times, reuse rates and compliance errors.

IT: Understand all tech variables

• • Validate potential integrations into existing stacks: Avoid integration issues by testing APIs and interoperability in live environments with real data. 
  • Identifying risks, impacts and responses is critical to effective pilots.
  • Close skills gaps around martech: Most enterprise IT teams are skilled in workplace technologies like servers, networks and desktops — but martech is a different ecosystem.
    • Teams need: Strong marketing data literacy (campaign data, asset metadata, rights usage).
    • Fluency in APIs (validating connectors and workflows, integrating technology into operations, setting security guardrails).
    • Commercial awareness of operational trade-offs in time, cost, agility and flexibility.

All teams: Align, communicate and share accountability

• Align more effectively: From the start and frequently during the process, not after hand-offs.
• Adopt shared language: Replacing jargon with outcome-based metrics that everyone understands.
• Be more selective: Shortlist smartly, using analytic reports, peer references and light-touch filters to narrow the field quickly. Don’t drag a dozen vendors into the pilot process, just the three strongest contenders.
• Share accountability: Success is judged against speed, quality, compliance and cost jointly, not in silos.

When collaboration works this way, the organization moves faster and makes better choices without sacrificing governance. And when the pilot shows precise results, don’t hesitate. Make the decision quickly, while momentum is high.

Dig deeper: It’s time for a better approach to change management in marketing

Challenging the RFP mindset

Of course, some will argue that RFPs are necessary. They provide structure, fairness and accountability — especially in regulated industries where auditors expect a straightforward process. And there is truth in that. No brand can afford a selection process held together with sticky notes and good intentions.

But structure doesn’t require bureaucracy. You can achieve those same goals by:

• Defining outcome criteria.
• Creating transparent scoring rubrics.
• Documenting decisions. 

The key is showing auditors the governance they expect. Ultimately, it comes down to proving capability in the real world. The cause and the results justify the means.

Moving from transactions to ecosystems

The more profound shift is cultural. Vendor selection is no longer about filling gaps with suppliers. It’s about building an ecosystem of partners who can evolve alongside you.

Succesful brands will stop treating vendor relationships as one-off transactions and start approaching them as part of a larger system. That means evaluating partners not only on what they deliver today, but also on how well they integrate with your existing stack, how easily they can evolve with future needs, and how effectively they collaborate with internal teams as an extension of your organization.

Experiments in AI-driven vendor matching already point the way, using live performance data to recommend partners for emerging needs. Over time, static RFPs will look even more archaic. But even before AI matures, the principle holds: dynamic, adaptive ecosystems are the new frontier.

This isn’t about tools — it’s about operating models. The right partners become extensions of your organization, not just suppliers but long-term co-creators of value. Here’s how to put this shift into practice:

• Retire the default use of RFPs: Start with pilots in martech and creative supply chain selection instead.
• Redefine selection criteria: Think beyond feature lists and checkboxes, act around business outcomes.
• Collaborate across departments: Bring CreativeOps, procurement and IT teams together early and consistently to build agile, pilot-first frameworks.

Dig deeper: How to boost operational maturity with strategic martech selection

Achieving real martech outcomes, not paper promises

Leaders talk about transformation, agility and innovation — but many still rely on a selection process built for buying commodities, not building ecosystems. The RFP delivers more of the same, while martech and in-house creative operations thrive on innovation.

The real challenge isn’t whether your martech stack can deliver — it’s whether you’re willing to let go of outdated habits. Step out of your comfort zone and into the competitive arena. Pilot-first, partnership-led models will define the next era. Anything else risks an uncomfortable conversation with your board about why you’re falling behind.

Stop awarding contracts to the best presentations. Start awarding them to the best performers.