Content

In logistics and transportation, procurement decisions have a tangible impact on costs and service quality. A complex project, for example, building a new refrigerated warehouse network, demands more than just a price quote. You’d issue an RFP (Request for Proposal) to invite carriers or consultants to propose innovative solutions and timelines.

Conversely, routine needs, such as ordering pallets of packaging or booking standard LTL (less-than-truckload) shipments, usually call for an RFQ (Request for Quotation), where price and terms are the primary focus.

Choosing the wrong document can waste time or even cost millions in inefficiency. For instance, an overly detailed RFP used for a simple freight bid delays decisions, while an RFQ on a complex supply-chain strategy may miss innovative ideas. Understanding each tool’s role in the procurement “journey” is key to logistics success.

Complex supply chains (like this freight yard) often require RFPs to solicit full-service proposals. Simple, well-defined shipments (like standard pallets) are better handled via RFQs.

Defining RFI, RFP, and RFQ

An RFI helps organizations gather information when exploring options. An RFP is used when there’s a defined project or problem and vendors are asked to propose solutions. An RFQ applies when the requirements are clear and the focus is on securing the best price. Each tool serves a distinct purpose, helping businesses communicate effectively with suppliers and select the right approach.

Boun S

Driving Growth and Innovation in Renewable Energy Solutions

RFI (Request for Information)

A Request for Information (RFI) is a preliminary document used at the earliest stage of the procurement process. Organizations issue RFIs to gather general details from a wide range of potential vendors about their capabilities, technologies, or available solutions. Unlike formal bid requests, an RFI is not binding and does not ask for pricing. Instead, it’s an exploratory tool designed to help buyers understand what’s available in the marketplace before they commit to drafting more specific documents like an RFP or RFQ.

According to industry guidance from ProqSmart, RFIs are a “great vetting tool to get in-depth information from prospective suppliers” and help procurement teams “narrow market options, refine needs based on vendor feedback, and spot suitable partners.” This makes them especially valuable when an organization knows the problem it wants to solve but is unsure which solutions or approaches are possible.

For example, in logistics, a company planning to modernize its supply chain might issue an RFI to dozens of freight technology providers. The responses could include descriptions of platforms, integration options, and case studies, giving the company a clear view of the state of the market. With that knowledge, they can craft a more informed RFP later, targeting only vendors whose capabilities align with their goals.

In short, an RFI is about gathering intelligence, not selecting a vendor. It sets the stage for smarter, more effective procurement decisions.

RFP (Request for Proposal)

A Request for Proposal (RFP) is a formal, structured document that solicits detailed proposals from qualified suppliers. Unlike an RFI, which is broad and informational, an RFP expects vendors to submit customized solutions, methodologies, timelines, and cost estimates tailored to the buyer’s needs.

Eric Parker explains that “The RFP is a comprehensive document used to solicit detailed proposals from potential suppliers … responses provide a detailed understanding of how suppliers can meet the organization’s needs and goals.” This reflects the dual nature of RFPs, as they evaluate both cost and non-cost factors, such as technical expertise, innovation, quality, and long-term value.

An RFP is best suited for complex or strategic projects, where outcomes matter more than simply securing the lowest price. For example, a university upgrading its IT infrastructure may issue an RFP that asks vendors to design an integrated solution, including hardware, software, training, and ongoing support. The responses are then scored against criteria like solution design, scalability, vendor track record, and overall value, not just cost.

What sets an RFP apart is that it invites creative problem-solving. Vendors are encouraged to showcase their unique approach, whether through technology, process design, or strategic insights. This process ensures the buyer isn’t just comparing line-item prices but rather choosing the best overall fit to achieve long-term goals.

RFQ (Request for Quotation)

A Request for Quotation (RFQ) is the most transactional and price-focused of the three documents. It is issued when requirements are specific, measurable, and clearly defined, such as quantities, delivery timelines, or technical specifications. Unlike an RFP, which invites broad solutions, an RFQ expects suppliers to provide a straightforward cost estimate for delivering the exact product or service described.

Industry experts at Arkestro highlight the distinction: “RFQs focus on pricing and obtaining competitive bids, while RFPs are detailed documents that solicit comprehensive proposals.” Similarly, the University of Washington procurement office notes that an RFQ is typically “used for seeking competition on smaller purchases” where specifications are already set.

For example, a manufacturing company that needs 5,000 identical shipping pallets by a fixed date might issue an RFQ. Vendors will respond with unit pricing, delivery terms, and compliance guarantees. The decision is usually made by selecting the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, though some buyers may also weigh factors like reliability or past performance.

RFQs are especially effective in routine or repeat purchases, where innovation is less important than efficiency and cost control. They streamline the procurement cycle by eliminating unnecessary complexity and focusing squarely on price and compliance.

RFP vs RFQ

Procurement managers often visualize RFI, RFP, and RFQ along a spectrum of complexity and information needs. An RFI is broad, “What’s out there?”, an RFP is detailed and strategic, “How will you solve this problem?”, and an RFQ is narrow and price‑focused, “What’s your best price?” The table below personifies the two:

Element	RFP (“The Strategist”)	RFQ (“The Price Scout”)
Primary Goal	Securing innovative, customized solutions and evaluating overall value (not just cost).	Obtaining transparent, competitive pricing for well-defined products or services.
Best Use Case	Complex, multi-service logistics projects (e.g., designing a cold chain network, IT systems).	Routine, repeatable shipments or goods (e.g., weekly LTL freight, pallet purchases).
Project Complexity	High: involves strategy, vendor expertise, and multiple possible solutions.	Low: requirements are standardized and fully specified in advance.
Evaluation Focus	Weighted criteria: cost, quality, vendor experience, scalability, innovation.	Primarily cost and compliance; non-cost factors matter only if they affect delivery.
Level of Detail	Long, structured documents with scope statements, timelines, scoring rubrics, and Q&A stages.	Concise documents that outline exact specs, quantities, and delivery terms.
Vendor Input	Encourages suppliers to propose creative approaches, technologies, and value-added services.	Limited: suppliers respond with straightforward price quotes against set requirements.
Decision-Making	Often slower: requires evaluation teams, scoring, and negotiations to compare proposals.	Faster: quotes are compared “apples to apples,” making selection more efficient.
Risks of Misuse	Using an RFP for a simple freight bid wastes time and resources.	Using an RFQ for a strategic project misses innovation and long-term value opportunities.
Real-World Example	A retailer seeking a 3PL partner to expand refrigerated distribution with tech integration.	A manufacturer sourcing daily shipments between two factories with fixed schedules.

These differences align with official guidance. For example, an RFP’s broader scope lets evaluators consider vendor qualifications and methodologies, not just price. In contrast, an RFQ narrows the field: since all RFQs assume the basic service is known, the buyer primarily compares pricing. Competitive bidding via RFPs or RFQs “drives down prices and incentivizes efficiency,” helping companies get the best value. However, only RFPs solicit the innovation and strategic fit needed for complex procurements.

When to Use an RFP vs. an RFQ

Use an RFP when: Your project is complex or strategic, and you need vendors to bring ideas, methodologies, and proven expertise. Typical RFP scenarios include:

Multi-Service Logistics: e.g., seeking a 3PL to design a new cold chain network with warehousing, cross-docking, and last‑mile delivery.
Technology or Integration: e.g., implementing a transportation management system or IoT monitoring that requires vendor innovation.
Unknown Best Approach: When the buyer knows what outcome is needed (e.g. reduce spoilage by 20%) but is open on how to achieve it.

For RFPs, you give vendors a broad scope statement and evaluation criteria. The researchers note RFPs often use a weighted evaluation (“best value”) considering factors beyond just cost. In practice, issuing an RFP means allowing vendors to propose their full solutions – you might even include a Q&A period or allow creative alternatives.

Use an RFQ when: Requirements are well-defined and primarily price-driven. Examples include:

Standard Freight Lanes: e.g., shipping fixed weekly volumes between two cities with specified delivery windows.
Commodity Logistics Services: e.g., LTL shipments, pallet moves, or hauling bulk materials.
Renewals or Extensions: e.g., extending an existing carrier contract or ordering repeat shipments where specs are unchanged.

In an RFQ, you list the exact specs (quantities, pickup/delivery dates, service levels) and ask suppliers to quote their best price. The process is usually quick: you identify potential freight carriers, send RFQs, wait for quotes, then analyze them. Research confirms this model: once quotes arrive from carriers, the shipper “analyze[s] and compar[e] offers, and [makes] the selection”. The emphasis is on comparing apples-to-apples prices and standard terms. Non-cost factors (like a vendor’s strategy) are minimal in an RFQ, since the service requirements are fixed.

Routine shipments (like these stacked boxes ready to ship) are often procured via RFQs, because the specifications are known and cost is the key factor.

Example Analogy

A helpful analogy is building a house. If you commission a fully custom home, you give architects the overall vision and let them propose designs, materials, and costs. This is like an RFP: you want innovative solutions (green building techniques, novel layouts), and you’ll compare both the quality and price of the plans. But if you already have a detailed blueprint and just need contractors to bid on construction, you use an RFQ. The blueprint fixes all the specs, so you simply collect the best construction bids.

In the same way, an RFP “invites [shipping or logistics] vendors to submit detailed plans” for your project, while an RFQ asks “What’s your price for this specific job?” without room for creative deviations.

A logistics-specific example makes the difference even clearer: An RFP is akin to engaging a 3PL to design an end-to-end cold chain strategy, encompassing warehouse layout, temperature monitoring technology, and last-mile delivery solutions.

An RFQ is similar to approaching three carriers to obtain quotes for rates on the same fixed trucking lane with specified pickup times and shipment volumes.

The first scenario rewards creativity and long-term planning, while the second emphasizes speed and cost efficiency.

This reflects the procurement funnel: RFI (broad market survey) → RFP (detailed proposals) → RFQ (final pricing). A quick decision guide is: Know need precisely → RFQ; Need strategy/innovation → RFP; Too early/unaware → RFI.

Pros and Cons of Each

RFP	RFQ
Pros: Encourages innovation and tailored solutions. You evaluate vendors on quality, experience, and strategy as well as cost. It’s ideal when you want the best-fit solution and can benefit from vendor expertise. Competitive bidding in RFPs often yields high value.	Pros: Fast and straightforward. You get clear price quotes for defined requirements, making vendor comparison simple. This speeds up decision-making and is efficient for routine needs.
Cons: Time-consuming and resource-intensive. RFPs take longer to prepare, to evaluate (often requiring scoring matrices), and to compare complex proposals. They can be more expensive in terms of internal staff time.	Cons: Limited creativity or options. RFQs assume the requirements are fixed, so you won’t discover innovative approaches. They may miss long-term fit factors (e.g. cultural fit, customer service) since only cost and compliance are in play.

In short, RFPs trade speed for insight, while RFQs trade insight for speed. Both use competitive bidding: getting multiple proposals or quotes ensures you find competitive pricing and value.

Real-World Logistics Use Cases

1. RFP Example: Expanding a Refrigerated Distribution Network

Scenario

A national retailer wants to expand its refrigerated distribution network to cover multiple regions. They issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to third-party logistics (3PL) providers. The scope includes:

Site Layout: warehouse footprint, dock capacity, and workflow design.
Cold-Storage Technology: energy-efficient freezers, temperature monitoring, automation.
Staffing Plan: labor allocation for peak/seasonal demand.
Transportation Integration: linking warehouses with regional trucking and last-mile delivery.
Total Cost: upfront capital, operating expenses, and projected savings.

Process

Each 3PL provider submits a full plan:

Provider A focuses on energy efficiency, proposing solar-assisted refrigeration and real-time IoT sensors.
Provider B emphasizes speed to market, offering faster construction timelines and integrated transport scheduling.
Provider C provides a balanced plan, combining cost efficiency with long-term scalability.

The retailer evaluates proposals based on total cost of ownership, operational efficiency, and future growth potential. After a structured scoring process, the retailer awards the contract to Provider C, whose design balances cost savings and scalability while still ensuring compliance with food-safety regulations.

Lesson Learned

RFPs are ideal when the buyer doesn’t know the exact solution and wants to evaluate different approaches. It drives innovation and tailored strategies from suppliers.

A process flow diagram illustrating the RFP stages: Issue RFP → Receive Proposals → Evaluate → Award Contract

An RFQ is best when the requirements are specific and the goal is to compare prices for a known product or service. An RFP is best when the objective is clear but the details are undefined, requiring vendors to propose creative, comprehensive solutions. While RFQs focus on cost efficiency, RFPs prioritize innovation and tailored approaches.

Fred C

2. RFQ Example: Scheduling Daily LTL Shipments

A mid-sized manufacturer relies on daily LTL shipments to move components between two factories. Production runs are tightly synchronized; if a shipment arrives late, an entire assembly line could stall.

Because the shipment details are routine and predictable (same route, weight, frequency, and delivery windows), the procurement team opts for an RFQ.

Three carriers are invited to bid:

Carrier A: $500 per shipment, backed by a strong reliability record (95% on-time rate).
Carrier B: $450 per shipment, the lowest price but only average service history.
Carrier C: $470 per shipment, offering flexible payment terms but limited delivery guarantees.

At first glance, Carrier B appears attractive in terms of price. However, the logistics manager digs deeper: records show inconsistent performance, with missed delivery windows that could cause costly downtime.

After weighing the trade-offs, the company awards the lane to Carrier A. The additional $50 per shipment is justified by the reduced risk of disruptions and increased supply chain resilience.

What Makes this RFQ Case Different:

The requirements were fully defined, so no vendor creativity was needed.
The procurement decision came down to balancing cost against reliability, not strategy.
The risk of choosing the wrong carrier (production halts, downstream delays) highlighted why the cheapest bid isn’t always the best.

Lesson Learned

RFQs are effective for routine, standardized shipments where cost comparisons are straightforward, but savvy buyers still look beyond the lowest quote to protect operational continuity.

Conclusion

In logistics procurement, choose wisely between RFP and RFQ based on your needs. Use an RFP for complex, strategic projects where vendor expertise and innovative solutions matter. Use an RFQ for well-defined purchases where you just need the best price from qualified suppliers. Remember that both are part of a broader sourcing strategy, often starting with information gathering (RFI) and ending with price negotiations.

Align your choice with business goals: RFPs are time‐intensive but can unlock long-term value and cost savings, while RFQs are fast and cost-focused. By following best practices (precise requirements, fair competition, and structured evaluation), you’ll ensure that each procurement process yields the right vendor and solution for your logistics needs. Ultimately, the right approach can save time, cut costs, and improve efficiency in your supply chain.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between an RFP and an RFQ?

An RFP (Request for Proposal) asks vendors to submit detailed proposals including their solution approach, team qualifications, timeline, and pricing. It’s used when you need more than just a price – you want ideas and strategies. An RFQ (Request for Quotation) asks only for price quotes on clear, predefined goods or services. With an RFP you compare both cost and quality factors; with an RFQ you mainly compare prices. In short, RFP = “Tell me how you would solve our problem.” RFQ = “How much does this service cost?”

When should I use an RFQ instead of an RFP?

Use an RFQ when your requirements are very clear and price is the main decision factor. For example, if you already know exactly what products or logistics services you need (quantities, quality standards, and delivery schedule) and all vendors will deliver the same thing, then simply ask for quotes. This is common for routine freight lanes, standardized shipments, or repeat orders. If any aspect of the solution still needs definition or you value vendor creativity (e.g. optimizing your network or offering value-added services), then use an RFP instead.

How do RFI, RFP, and RFQ fit together?

Think of RFI, RFP, RFQ as stages in the sourcing process. An RFI comes first when you’re exploring what is possible. Once you know the market or have narrowed vendors, use an RFP to ask how they will meet your needs (especially if innovation matters). Finally, after you shortlist vendors or when specs are fixed, use an RFQ to get the best price. In practice, many logistics projects start with an RFI or informal RFI stage, then an RFP for strategy proposals, and end with an RFQ for final pricing.

Is an RFQ legally binding?

An RFQ itself is not a contract – it’s just a request for offers. However, when a vendor submits a quote in response, that quote is a binding offer if you accept it. After comparing RFQ quotes, you typically issue a purchase order or contract to the chosen vendor. In contrast, RFPs often require signing an NDA and have more formal steps before a binding contract is awarded.

Janet Scott

Janet is a seasoned professional in the medical billing industry, with extensive knowledge and expertise that enhances her writing. With years of experience, she adeptly handles the complexities of healthcare reimbursement processes. Janet's proficiency spans various medical specialties, consistently delivering valuable insights and implementing effective revenue cycle solutions. She excels in coding compliance, claims submission, and denial management. As a prominent writer in the medical billing space, Janet provides concise and actionable advice, empowering healthcare providers to optimize their financial performance with confidence.