INTERCEPT Insight #3: Do's and Don'ts When Responding to a Request For Information (RFI) in Innovation Procurement

Public procurement can be used not only to purchase goods and services but also as a strategic tool to foster innovation, economic growth, achieve societal goals, and address complex policy challenges1. The Open Market Consultation (OMC) constitutes a pivotal instrument in the preparatory phase of the procurement life cycle, established as a step in the EAFIP Methodology and having its legal basis in the 2014 EU Public Procurement Directives. OMCs enable contracting authorities to engage with the market (potential suppliers, researchers, and end users) not only before the formal launch of a procurement procedure, but also as a means to explore whether and how a procurement could be initiated, ensuring that public demand is aligned with what the market (assessment of the state-of-the-art analysis) can realistically offer or develop (mapping the innovation landscape, identifying promising technologies, and testing the viability of proposed use cases) and that the appropriate procurement strategy has been selected among others. A central tool in the OMC phase is the Request for Information (RFI) questionnaire. A RFI is a structured method to collect input from potential suppliers, end users, and other relevant stakeholders (e.g. academic institutions). It aims to test the feasibility of the unmet need, identify existing or emerging solutions, and gather feedback on potential procurement strategies, including legal, ethical and/or technical barriers that might hinder participation in the potential follow-up procurement procedure. While participation in an RFI is voluntary and non-binding, the information obtained can be critical to shaping the tender documents in a way that promotes competition, innovation, as well as allowing a more efficient and realistic approach from the demand side. The use of RFIs is particularly relevant in Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP) and Public Procurement of Innovative solutions (PPI), where the available technologies and solutions are more often than not immature to address the unmet need(s) of the relevant public buyer(s). However, despite its potential, the practice of conducting RFIs remains uneven across jurisdictions and sectors, and our perspective is based on prior experience with this best practice. Overall, some contracting authorities excel in using RFIs to stimulate meaningful dialogue, while others either do not use them at all or treat them as a mere formality, reducing their strategic value and minimising potential. This insight explores the role of an RFI questionnaire within the OMC phase, with a particular focus on its structure, practical use, and value for both buyers and suppliers. It aims to provide actionable insights, guidance on the DOs and DON’Ts while responding to it and recommendations to promote more effective and transparent pre-procurement engagement.