From an Open Market Search to a Confident Relocation Supplier Selection

 The Opportunity

The company needed to reassess its relocation management company’s (RMC) capabilities, technology and service delivery model against a program that had grown more complex: domestic and international volumes, flexible policy structures, and rising expectations for technology, data, ESG, DEI, and duty of care. Running the process internally would have pulled Global Mobility, HR, Procurement, Finance, and Legal away from their day-to-day work and risked responses that were hard to compare. Given The RFP House’s expertise on both the corporate and supplier side in global mobility, our team stepped in immediately to run the entire process, with no training or onboarding needed.

The engagement required:

• A full picture of the current program, its known challenges, and what success should look like.
• A well-structured and organized RFP document containing specific questions and a detailed pricing matrix   to draw high-quality, directly comparable responses. 
• A dedicated project management team to cut the internal effort of managing suppliers, questions, and evaluation while keeping the selection objective. 

 Our Approach

We structured the engagement in five phases:

• Discovery and RFP Strategy: We interviewed stakeholders and ran workshops across Global Mobility and reviewed current RMC arrangements, service levels, pricing, policies, entitlements, and the previous RFP. We clarified geographic coverage, volumes, policy flexibility, technology and reporting needs, and ESG, DEI, duty of care, and compliance expectations. The output was a requirements framework, a recommended RFP strategy and supplier participation model, and high-level evaluation criteria.

• RFP Design and Documentation: We built the full RFP package: mandatory and rated criteria, and a detailed service questionnaire covering domestic, international, destination services, policy administration, and expense management. It also addressed technology, integration, data privacy, and security; service levels, KPIs, and governance; scenario and case study simulations; and ESG and employee experience. Pricing and cost-comparison templates and supplier response guidance kept every submission consistent, all aligned with Procurement and Legal requirements.

• Supplier Management and RFP Q&A:We managed supplier clarification questions, issued formal Q&A responses and addenda, and reviewed each submission for completeness and compliance.

• Evaluation and Recommendation Support: We developed a weighted scoring model, scored responses, and compared suppliers across service, technology, and commercial dimensions, narrowing the field to a top three.

• Best and Final Presentations: We set a standardized agenda and supplier briefing, coordinated logistics, and aligned the company’s stakeholders on roles and criteria. We attended every finalist presentation, captured structured notes and differentiators, and facilitated a client debrief.

Throughout the entire engagement, we treated the RFP as a decision-making tool rather than a document, so supplier answers could be compared like for like from the first submission to the final presentation. 

 The Outcome

The process gave the company a structured path from requirements to recommendation:

• Aligned Requirements: Five internal functions agreed on one requirements framework and one set of evaluation criteria before suppliers were approached.
• Comparable Responses: Standardized questionnaires, pricing templates, and response guidance produced submissions that could be scored side by side.
• Reduced Internal Workload: We managed Q&A, addenda, and compliance checks, keeping internal teams focused on the decision rather than the administration.
• Objective Shortlisting: A weighted scoring workbook and a comparison summary narrowed the field to three finalists on a defensible basis.
• Confident Final Selection: Consistent agendas, scorecards, and a structured question set let stakeholders assess each finalist on equal terms. Our recommendation set out the preferred supplier option(s) and the rationale.
• Reusable Framework: The requirements framework, scoring model, and templates can be reused in future sourcing events.

This case shows that a successful RMC selection depends less on the final presentation than on the work before it. Clear requirements, comparable responses, and an evaluation model agreed in advance makes the final decision confident.

Following completion of the project, our client had this to say about their experience working with The RFP House: