{"id":15,"date":"2026-07-04T20:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-07-05T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/uncategorized\/rfp-rfq-itt-what-is-the-difference"},"modified":"2026-09-14T17:12:49","modified_gmt":"2026-09-14T21:12:49","slug":"rfp-rfq-itt-what-is-the-difference","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/bid-room\/rfp-rfq-itt-what-is-the-difference","title":{"rendered":"RFP, RFQ, ITT and RFSO \u2014 what the difference means for your bid"},"content":{"rendered":"

Open two government solicitations and you’ll notice they’re built differently. One asks for a single price against a fixed specification; another asks you to propose an approach and scores your methodology. Getting the solicitation type<\/em> wrong is one of the quietest ways to lose \u2014 you write a persuasive narrative for a document that only cares about price, or you submit a bare quote where the buyer expected a detailed proposal. This guide decodes the main types you’ll meet in Canadian procurement.<\/p>\n

\"Engineer
Photo by Thatselby on Unsplash<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Why the type matters more than the title<\/h2>\n

Buyers don’t always use these acronyms consistently, and provincial and municipal bodies have their own house styles. So don’t rely on the label alone \u2014 read the evaluation section to confirm how you’ll actually be judged. That said, the type tells you three things instantly: what the buyer already knows they want, how much of your response is price versus approach, and how much effort the bid deserves.<\/strong> Match your effort to the type and you stop over-investing in low-odds quotes and under-investing in winnable proposals.<\/p>\n

Request for Quotation (RFQ) \u2014 lowest price wins<\/h2>\n

An RFQ is used when the buyer knows exactly<\/em> what they want and the only real variable is price. The specification is fixed \u2014 a part number, a defined quantity, a clear scope \u2014 and the award almost always goes to the lowest compliant bidder.<\/p>\n

How to respond:<\/strong> don’t write an essay. Confirm you meet every specification, fill in the pricing exactly as requested, and make sure your quote is complete and on time. The winning move here is operational: accurate costing, tight margins, and zero compliance slips. A common loss is a quote that’s cheapest on paper but non-compliant on format \u2014 right number, wrong form.<\/p>\n

Invitation to Tender (ITT) \/ Invitation to Bid (IFB) \u2014 price against a fixed spec<\/h2>\n

Common in construction and defined works, an ITT (sometimes "Invitation for Bids") is like an RFQ scaled up. The buyer provides detailed specifications, drawings, or a statement of work, and bidders compete primarily on price, subject to meeting all mandatory technical and administrative requirements. Bonding, insurance, and prescribed forms are usually strict.<\/p>\n

How to respond:<\/strong> treat compliance as the whole game. Every mandatory \u2014 bid security, certifications, completed schedules \u2014 must be present and correct. Once you’re compliant, sharpen your estimate: in a price-driven ITT, your cost accuracy is your competitive edge.<\/p>\n

Request for Proposal (RFP) \u2014 best value, and where narrative wins<\/h2>\n

An RFP is used when the buyer knows the outcome<\/em> they need but not the exact solution, and wants suppliers to propose an approach. This is where writing quality genuinely matters. Bids are scored on rated criteria \u2014 methodology, team experience, understanding of the requirement, risk management \u2014 usually combined with price to determine best value<\/strong> rather than lowest cost, per how government actually evaluates and scores bids<\/a>.<\/p>\n

How to respond:<\/strong> answer the rated criteria directly, in the evaluators’ order, with evidence. A slightly higher price can win if your technical score is strong enough, so don’t reflexively undercut. The RFP is the type most worth your time, and the type where a strong capability statement<\/a> and a disciplined writing process pay off most.<\/p>\n

\"Team
Photo by CoWomen on Unsplash<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Request for Standing Offer (RFSO) & Request for Supply Arrangement (RFSA)<\/h2>\n

These don’t award a contract to deliver work today \u2014 they pre-qualify suppliers to deliver later<\/em>, as needs arise. A standing offer<\/strong> lets a buyer "call up" goods or services at pre-agreed prices over a period, without re-tendering each time. A supply arrangement<\/strong> creates a pool of qualified suppliers who are invited to bid on specific requirements as they come up.<\/p>\n

How to respond:<\/strong> getting onto a standing offer or supply arrangement is a strategic win, not a single sale \u2014 it can generate call-ups for years. The bid effort is front-loaded: prove your qualifications and pricing once, then reap repeat business. If you serve a category the government buys repeatedly (IT services, office supplies, professional services), these are among the highest-leverage opportunities you can pursue.<\/p>\n

Request for Information (RFI) \u2014 not a bid at all<\/h2>\n

An RFI is market research. The buyer isn’t awarding anything; they’re gathering information to shape a future solicitation. There’s no contract to win, so don’t treat it like a bid.<\/p>\n

How to respond:<\/strong> respond anyway, thoughtfully. An RFI is your one chance to influence the requirement before<\/em> it’s written \u2014 to flag an unrealistic timeline, suggest a more open specification, or make sure the eventual RFP doesn’t accidentally exclude your solution. Suppliers who engage at the RFI stage often find the resulting tender fits them better. It also puts your capabilities on the buyer’s radar early.<\/p>\n

A quick decision table<\/h2>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Type<\/th>\nBuyer knows the solution?<\/th>\nAward basis<\/th>\nYour effort goes into<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
RFQ<\/td>\nYes<\/td>\nLowest compliant price<\/td>\nAccurate pricing, compliance<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ITT \/ IFB<\/td>\nYes (detailed spec)<\/td>\nLowest compliant price<\/td>\nCompliance, cost estimate<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RFP<\/td>\nOutcome only<\/td>\nBest value (score + price)<\/td>\nMethodology, evidence, writing<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RFSO \/ RFSA<\/td>\nCategory, recurring need<\/td>\nQualification + pricing<\/td>\nPre-qualifying once, for repeat work<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RFI<\/td>\nNo \u2014 researching<\/td>\nNothing awarded<\/td>\nShaping the future requirement<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The takeaway<\/h2>\n

Before you write a word, identify the type and read the evaluation method to confirm it. Then calibrate: pour your energy into RFPs and standing offers where approach and positioning win, run RFQs and ITTs as tight operational exercises where compliance and price win, and use RFIs to shape the opportunities you want to see. Matching your response to the solicitation type is the difference between busywork and a bid that’s built to score.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Canadian public buyers use a handful of solicitation types, and each one changes how you’re evaluated and how you should respond. Here’s how to tell them apart.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":14,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-bid-room"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":214,"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15\/revisions\/214"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tendarix.ca\/resources\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}