Not Every Asset Management RFP Deserves a Yes
When an RFP arrives, the instinct is to respond. Relationships with institutional allocators and consultants take years to build, searches are competitive, and declining an invitation can feel like closing a door.
And with technology making responses faster, the temptation to say yes more often is growing.
But being able to respond to more RFPs doesn't necessarily mean pursuing the right mandates.
Consider two requests arriving on the same Monday.
One comes from a consultant who knows your strategy, has engaged with your team, and has shortlisted you for a $100 million mandate.
The other is a broad search for a $250 million allocation. The strategy fits, but there's no established relationship and little visibility into the competitive field.
Both have similar fee terms. Both contain 150 questions. Both are due Friday.
Which deserves more attention?
The larger mandate offers greater potential revenue. The smaller one may have a much better chance of converting. Neither tells you how much effort the response will require.
There is no obvious answer. That's the point.
RFP qualification isn't simply about mandate size or probability of winning. It's about deciding where your firm's time is best spent.
Six factors shape the decision: strategy fit, mandate economics, relationship strength, competitive position, strategic value, and response effort. Together, they help firms decide whether to bid and how much time to invest.
The Real Cost of an RFP Isn't the Questionnaire
An institutional RFP rarely stays within the RFP team.
Portfolio managers, product specialists, compliance, legal, operations, and senior management may all contribute. These are the same people managing portfolios, meeting allocators, supporting existing clients, and preparing for investment presentations.
One additional RFP may seem manageable. Five arriving in the same month can change everyone's priorities.
When producing a response gets easier, saying yes gets easier too. That is the risk.
The time saved on routine questionnaire work could go toward understanding allocator priorities, strengthening consultant relationships, and preparing a stronger case for the mandates the firm genuinely wants to win.
How to Qualify an RFP: Start with the Mandate
When an RFP arrives, teams naturally start assessing the workload. The number of questions, availability of approved answers, and deadline often drive the first discussion.
The commercial assessment should come first.
Mandate economics, strategy fit, relationship strength, and competitive position all matter. But none should be considered in isolation.
A large allocation may justify pursuing an unfamiliar allocator. A smaller mandate with a strong relationship may offer a more predictable commercial outcome. And an opportunity with limited immediate prospects may still be worth pursuing if it establishes a relationship in a new market.
Those can all be legitimate strategic decisions.
The problem begins when every low-probability opportunity gets labeled "strategic."
If everything is strategic, nothing is being prioritized.
Beyond Bid or No-Bid: Four Ways to Respond to an RFP
RFP triage is often treated as a bid or no-bid decision. In practice, deciding whether to participate and deciding how much effort to invest are two separate decisions.
There are four useful approaches.
1. Go All In
The mandate fits, the economics work, and there's a credible opportunity to win.
This is where portfolio managers and senior specialists should be closely involved, the allocator's priorities carefully considered, and the firm's positioning sharpened.
A high-priority RFP deserves more than technically correct answers. It deserves a compelling case for why the firm should win.
2. Respond Efficiently
The opportunity is legitimate, but it doesn't require extensive customization.
Reuse approved content, draw from existing manager and strategy information, and involve subject matter experts where their input adds value.
Efficiency shouldn't mean compromising quality. Every response still needs to meet the allocator's requirements.
The goal is to spend less time recreating information the firm already has.
3. Make a Strategic Exception
The immediate odds may be lower, but there's a specific longer-term reason to participate.
Perhaps it's a priority consultant, a new geography, or a strategy where building familiarity matters.
Name the reason and agree on the appropriate effort. A strategic exception might warrant a highly customized submission or a more efficient response.
What matters is that the exception is deliberate, not an excuse to pursue everything.
4. Pass Gracefully
Sometimes the mandate simply isn't a fit. It may be a broad search with weak strategy fit and no relationship behind it. The economics may not justify the effort, or the requirements may stretch beyond the firm's capabilities.
There is no virtue in being busy.
Declining doesn't have to mean ending the relationship. A thoughtful response can preserve the connection and give the allocator current information about your firm.
"Thank you for including us in this search. After reviewing the mandate, we've decided not to participate in this particular opportunity. We appreciate the consideration and would welcome the chance to stay in touch for future searches. We're also happy to share our latest strategy profile and standard institutional DDQ for your research records."
Sharing an updated manager profile or standard DDQ, where the allocator welcomes it, helps maintain visibility without committing to a full custom response.
A Scorecard Helps. Judgment Still Matters.
The challenge isn't identifying the factors that make an RFP attractive. Most experienced sales and RFP professionals already know them.
It's assessing those factors consistently, especially when deadlines are approaching and teams are under pressure.
An RFP triage scorecard brings those decisions into one place.
| Qualification Factor | What to Assess |
|---|---|
| Strategy Fit | How closely the strategy meets the mandate's investment guidelines, objectives, and constraints |
| Mandate Economics | Potential allocation size, fee structure, and long-term servicing requirements |
| Relationship Strength | Prior engagement, consultant dialogue, and access to decision-makers |
| Competitive Position | Why the firm was invited, who else may be bidding, and where the firm can differentiate |
| Strategic Value | Potential future mandates, entry into new markets, or stronger consultant relationships |
| Response Effort | Submission deadline, available approved content, and specialist involvement required |
The value isn't mathematical precision. It's making sure the conversation happens before multiple teams start working on a response.
Return to those two RFPs.
The $250 million mandate may justify a response despite the weaker relationship. But that doesn't mean it automatically deserves more investment team time than the $100 million opportunity.
A scorecard helps separate the decision to participate from the effort each response deserves.
Sales and consultant relations understand the relationships and competitive context. The RFP team understands the available content, competing deadlines, and specialist involvement required. Investment and product teams know whether the strategy genuinely meets the mandate.
No single team has the complete picture.
And if leadership decides to pursue an opportunity despite a low score, that's fine. Record the exception and why it was made.
Over time, the record of exceptions becomes evidence. It shows which opportunities converted, which exceptions built real relationships, and where substantial effort led nowhere.
A good qualification process should improve with experience, not start from scratch every time an RFP arrives.
The Goal Isn't Fewer RFPs
It's better decisions about where to invest the firm's time.
Put more effort behind the mandates you genuinely want to win. Handle legitimate but less demanding opportunities efficiently. Make strategic exceptions consciously. And recognize when declining is the better commercial decision.
Winning more mandates is the goal. Responding to more RFPs is not.
The RFP Triage Scorecard
A practical framework for institutional distribution, consultant relations, and RFP teams to qualify searches, align stakeholders, and decide where to commit resources.
Access the full, interactive RFP Triage Scorecard for your team.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is RFP triage in asset management?
RFP triage is the process of evaluating institutional mandate opportunities before committing resources to a response. It considers strategy fit, mandate economics, relationship strength, competitive position, strategic value, and response effort to determine whether to bid and how much time to invest.
How should asset managers make a bid or no-bid decision?
Start by assessing whether the strategy fits the mandate and whether the opportunity is commercially attractive. Then consider the firm's competitive position, relationship with the allocator, strategic value, and effort required to prepare a strong response. The decision should involve institutional sales, consultant relations, RFP, and relevant investment teams.
Should asset managers decline some RFPs?
Yes. Declining can be appropriate when the mandate is a poor fit, the economics are unattractive, or the firm lacks a credible reason to pursue the opportunity. A professional decline, accompanied by updated manager information when appropriate, can preserve the relationship for future searches.
DiligenceVault helps asset managers centralize institutional knowledge, streamline RFP and DDQ responses, and collaborate across teams to pursue mandates more effectively.