Why Competitive Bidding for Architectural Services Can Save Your Project—If Done Right

Cover of an Request for Proposals for Land Planning Services for a Public Park. Managed by J. Richard Hill & Co.

I’m always elated to get an unexpected call from a potential client who reaches out about a new project. But my enthusiasm quicky crashes when I learn the potential client is already in discussions with other real estate consulting firms and needs a quick response to a RFP process that is well underway.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a highly competitive guy, but I try to pick my battles carefully and will compete when the playfield is level.

That said, competitive bidding, when approached thoughtfully, can be a game-changer for both the developer and the design professionals involved. It’s a way to bring clarity to the scope of work and defines the areas to be designed. It uncovers new challenges and sets a direction for creative solutions. And, if done well, it can even build long-term relationships with architects, whether they win the assignment or not.

Here’s how competitive bidding works when it’s done right—and why I’m a big advocate for it.

Start with Market Value

Competitive bidding is like comparing apples to apples. It helps developers see a range of fees for similar scopes of work, and different approaches for a well define development program. And no, this isn’t about picking the lowest bidder. It’s about finding the best value for great design, fee, and the right fit of personalities.

Also, by having multiple firms submit proposals, you can identify gaps in your initial project assumptions and misunderstandings in the scope of work. For example, you may discover that something you thought was straightforward—like site utilization strategies—can have different approaches and different outcomes by one architect over another.

Learn From Every Perspective

One of the most surprising benefits of competitive bidding is how much you, as the developer, can learn. Every architect brings a different way of looking at the project. One may see a scope item as being far more complex and time-consuming than another. A fair process will probe time assumptions and work toward a more efficient process that can impact fees.

And here’s where it gets fun—sometimes, the team that initially seemed like the clear favorite gets bumped down the list after you hear from other firms - a second and third time. And it’s not uncommon to have a tough choice at the end, with multiple qualified firms. That’s when you know the process worked.

Make It Worth Their Time

Now, let’s talk about the architects. Submitting a bid takes serious time, effort, and money. Many firms refuse to participate in competitive bidding as they have plenty of work from established clients. For those who do respond to RFPs, its only fair to respect their work and openly demonstrate that their proposal was taken seriously. Give feedback, ask questions, stay open-minded and in the end - even if they weren’t selected - let them know how much you appreciated their ideas.

I am also a proponent of paying a fee to several finalists in certain projects to finetune their proposals and to advance ideas.

Most of all, think of this process as building relationships, not just awarding a contract. Some of the best design teams I’ve worked with didn’t win the first project opportunity but stayed in touch with me. Over time, they refined how they approach my process, educated me how to refine my process, and we were much more aligned on the second opportunity.

Competitive Bidding Builds Teams, Not Just Projects

Here’s my favorite part about competitive bidding—it’s not just about the project you’re working on today. It’s about building a network of creative, capable design professionals who understand your goals and are eager to work with you in the future.

By being fair, transparent, and open-minded in your process, you’re not just selecting the best team for one job—you’re creating an ecosystem of trust and collaboration for future projects.

Final Thought

Competitive bidding over time brings a lot of responsibility to anyone managing the selection process. Once I identify a great team that does not initially match up with the client and project needs, I feel compelled to worker harder to find a better fit on another project.