After processing 400,000+ procurement documents at Arphie, we've identified three patterns that separate high-response-rate RFIs from those that get ignored: specificity in scope definition, structured question frameworks, and clear evaluation criteria. Here's how to build an RFI template that actually works.
A Request for Information (RFI) sits at the beginning of the procurement cycle—before you're ready to request formal proposals or price quotes. The purpose is intelligence gathering, not vendor selection. According to procurement research from Gartner, organizations that use structured RFIs reduce their RFP cycle time by an average of 23% because they enter the formal procurement phase with clearer requirements.
Here's what distinguishes RFIs from other procurement documents:
Many teams skip the RFI phase entirely, jumping straight to RFPs. We've seen this backfire when teams at mid-market SaaS companies spend 60+ hours evaluating RFP responses, only to realize their requirements were unrealistic or that they missed a crucial vendor category entirely.
For more context on how RFIs fit into the broader procurement process, see our guide on strategic procurement workflows.
Based on analyzing thousands of successful RFI exchanges, here are the eight sections that generate the most useful vendor responses:
Don't just describe what you need—explain why you need it. Vendors provide better responses when they understand your constraints and goals.
Example of weak context:
"We need a new CRM system."
Example of strong context:
"We're a 200-person B2B SaaS company currently using spreadsheets to track 1,500 active enterprise opportunities across a 9-month sales cycle. Our pipeline visibility breaks down after initial contact, causing a 34% drop-off rate between demo and close. We need to understand what modern CRM architectures can handle complex deal cycles with multiple stakeholders."
Include 3-5 bullet points about your existing setup, team size, and key pain points. This helps vendors self-qualify and saves everyone time.
Example structure:
These questions help you quickly filter vendors before investing time in detailed evaluations. We recommend 5-8 binary or short-answer questions:
At Arphie, we see teams waste weeks evaluating vendors who can't actually meet basic requirements. Front-loading qualification questions in your RFI template eliminates 40-60% of unsuitable vendors before you invest in detailed conversations.
This is where you dig into functional requirements without the full detail of an RFP. Structure questions by user workflow or business process.
Framework that works well:
"Describe your approach to [specific workflow]. Include:
The last bullet point—asking about limitations—is critical. Vendors who honestly describe trade-offs are usually more reliable partners than those who claim their solution does everything perfectly.
For any software or technology RFI, include questions about:
Organizations implementing AI-powered automation platforms particularly need to understand how vendor systems expose data for model training and integration workflows.
Ask vendors to outline their typical implementation process, including:
In an RFI, you're not asking for firm quotes—you want to understand the pricing model so you can budget appropriately.
Useful questions include:
Request 2-3 relevant customer references with:
The vendors you invite to respond determine the quality of information you'll gather. Here's a three-tier approach we've seen work well:
Tier 1 - Known Quantities (2-3 vendors):
Established players you've already researched. These responses set your baseline for capabilities and pricing.
Tier 2 - Emerging Alternatives (2-4 vendors):
Newer or mid-market vendors that might offer better value or innovation. These responses often reveal capabilities you hadn't considered.
Tier 3 - Wildcards (1-2 vendors):
Non-obvious solutions from adjacent markets or different approaches to solving your problem. These responses challenge your assumptions about requirements.
For complex procurements, allow 10-15 business days for vendor responses. For simpler RFIs, 5-7 days is reasonable.
Create a simple scoring rubric before you distribute your RFI. This prevents "analysis paralysis" when responses come back.
Sample scoring approach:
Involve 2-3 stakeholders in evaluation to balance perspectives. We typically see best results with one technical evaluator, one business owner, and one procurement or operations representative.
Modern AI-native platforms can analyze vendor responses against your requirements, flagging gaps and highlighting differentiators. This is particularly valuable when you receive 6+ responses.
At Arphie, our customers use AI to:
This reduces RFI evaluation time from days to hours while improving consistency.
The mistake: Including 50+ detailed questions appropriate for an RFP, not an exploratory RFI.
The fix: Limit your RFI to 15-25 substantive questions. If you need more detail, that signals you're ready for an RFP phase with a shortlist of vendors.
Real example: A financial services company we worked with initially sent a 40-page RFI document. Response rate was 30%. After restructuring to a focused 12-question RFI, response rate jumped to 85%, and responses were more detailed because vendors invested time on fewer, clearer questions.
The mistake: "Tell us about your capabilities in [broad category]."
The fix: Provide specific scenarios or workflows you need to support.
Better question structure:
"Our compliance team needs to review and approve 200+ vendor questionnaires per quarter, with an average of 120 questions per questionnaire. 60% of questions repeat across questionnaires. Describe how your platform would help us:
This level of specificity generates responses you can actually evaluate.
The mistake: Ending your RFI with "thank you for your response" and no indication of timeline or next steps.
The fix: Include a section titled "Timeline and Next Steps" that specifies:
This professional courtesy significantly improves vendor engagement and response quality.
The mistake: Creating an RFI based on one department's perspective without input from other affected teams.
The fix: Before finalizing your RFI template, conduct a 30-minute review with representatives from:
We've seen companies get to final negotiations only to have deals collapse because security requirements weren't surfaced until late-stage reviews.
The mistake: Letting vendors respond in any format they choose.
The fix: Specify exactly how you want responses structured. For example:
"Please respond to each question in the numbered order provided. Include the question number and text before your response. Maximum 250 words per response unless otherwise specified. Submit as a single PDF document."
Standardized responses reduce evaluation time by 40-60% because you can quickly compare vendor answers to the same question.
When evaluating software vendors, prioritize questions about:
For consulting, implementation, or managed services:
For vendors providing physical goods:
You've completed your RFI phase successfully when you can answer these questions:
That last question is crucial. A good RFI process should refine your understanding of what's possible, what's expensive, and what trade-offs you'll need to make.
For guidance on transitioning from RFI to formal proposal requests, explore strategic RFP best practices.
Before sending your RFI, verify:
An effective RFI template isn't just a procurement formality—it's your first strategic interaction with potential vendor partners. The quality of information you gather in the RFI phase directly impacts the success of your eventual vendor selection and implementation.
We've seen companies reduce their total procurement cycle time by 30-40% by investing in better RFI templates upfront. The clarity you create in the RFI phase eliminates confusion, reduces back-and-forth, and helps both your team and potential vendors make efficient decisions about fit.
Start with the template structure outlined here, customize it for your specific needs, and refine it based on the response quality you receive. Over time, you'll develop RFI templates that become valuable strategic assets—capturing institutional knowledge about what questions actually predict vendor success in your environment.
For organizations managing multiple RFIs, RFPs, and other procurement documents simultaneously, modern AI-powered platforms can help you standardize, distribute, and evaluate responses at scale while maintaining the quality and specificity that generates actionable intelligence.
Dean Shu is the co-founder and CEO of Arphie, where he's building AI agents that automate enterprise workflows like RFP responses and security questionnaires. A Harvard graduate with experience at Scale AI, McKinsey, and Insight Partners, Dean writes about AI's practical applications in business, the challenges of scaling startups, and the future of enterprise automation.
.png)
