A Better Website RFP Starts With the Business Problem

By Olivia Hart

Some website Requests for Proposals (RFPs) run 20 to 30 pages and specify the CMS, sitemap, template count, integrations, design rounds, development requirements and launch date. Yet the key question can remain unanswered, according to an Entrepreneur contributor: “What is the business actually trying to change?” Such briefs can turn agency selection into price shopping for a solution.

What should the brief solve first?

A prescriptive brief can work when a company needs only execution. The contributor says organizations often define the solution in advance to make projects easier to scope and proposals easier to compare. That leaves little room for strategic thinking, including a creative agency’s ability to challenge assumptions, uncover opportunities and determine what the website should become.

The source labels the guidance as contributor opinion and supplies no completion rates, budget benchmarks or procurement results. Its case rests on process logic. The practical takeaway is to define the business problem and desired outcomes before prescribing pages, templates or technology solutions.

What should agencies be asked to challenge?

Most RFPs ask agencies how they will fulfill the requirements. Far fewer ask what may be missing, which assumptions deserve validation or what the agency would change before work begins. The contributor recommends four revealing questions:

• What the agency would challenge about what the organization has asked for.
• Which parts of the proposed scope it would revisit during discovery.
• What it would prioritize if the budget or timeline became constrained.
• What it believes should happen during the first 30 days before major design or technology decisions.

Those answers show how an agency thinks outside the instructions. A strong partner respects the organization’s knowledge while bringing an independent perspective.

If every respondent simply repeats the RFP in slightly different language, the process may select for compliance rather than judgment. The article does not supply a scoring system, so buyers must still judge response quality. The takeaway is to treat agency questions and reasoning as evidence alongside the proposal.

How much business context is enough?

The contributor uses a hypothetical B2B company grown through several acquisitions as an example. Its website has overlapping service categories, terminology from different business units and pages added over time without reconsidering the overall structure. Context tells agencies what changed and why the project exists.

A weak RFP prescribes a new 75-page website, revised navigation and a fixed number of page templates. A better one explains that customers struggle to understand the services, sales teams compensate with their own presentations and the website must present a clearer, unified offering.

That evidence leaves the agency to determine whether the answer requires a new sitemap, fewer pages, new templates or a different content model. The takeaway is to share the business problem before setting production quantities.

Which requirements are truly fixed?

Every website project has legitimate constraints, and the contributor separates them from current assumptions. Fixed requirements may include staying on a particular CMS because of internal infrastructure, or meeting specific security, accessibility, compliance, integration and SEO requirements. The existing sitemap, content structure, navigation, number of templates and parts of the proposed technology approach may deserve another look.

The brief should state which decisions are fixed and where it seeks recommendations. Deliverables should describe what changes when the work ends: customers understand the offering more clearly, sales gains stronger digital support or marketing gains greater publishing flexibility. Instead of merely requesting a website with 75 pages, the buyer should connect each deliverable to a business result.

Strategic latitude must not become ambiguity; hard constraints still need clear acceptance criteria. The takeaway is to preserve genuine requirements and reopen assumptions.

Who should control the decisions?

Marketing may lead a B2B website project, but IT has platform requirements, legal reviews claims, sales understands customer objections, leadership sets positioning priorities and subject-matter experts often hold the knowledge needed for useful content. The RFP should identify the project owner, required consultees, approval authority, business-unit participation and decisions needing executive alignment.

The contributor says this need not become a complicated organizational chart. It should show whether the agency will deliver a website project or help manage a broader organizational process. That distinction affects scope, timing and methodology, so leaving it unstated can distort the proposal. The takeaway is to make decision rights visible before agencies design their work.

How much budget context should agencies receive?

Organizations sometimes withhold budgets because they expect proposals to arrive at the stated ceiling. The contributor says secrecy creates a different problem: agencies design different engagements around different assumptions, making proposals hard to compare. A $75,000 website and a $300,000 digital transformation can address the same underlying challenge, but they represent different scopes.

A realistic range lets agencies explain what fits, what they would prioritize and what they would phase for later. The contributor cautions that a range does not automatically produce bids at its ceiling. That makes differences between proposals more useful, not less.

The source omits a method for judging whether a proposed scope is worth either price, so budget disclosure still needs an outcome framework. The takeaway is to provide enough financial context for choices, not just a number for vendors to match.

What should buyers evaluate?

A polished presentation, a long capabilities list and dozens of relevant portfolio examples can look reassuring without predicting how an agency will behave when the project turns difficult. The contributor says buyers should focus on the questions agencies ask, assumptions they challenge, risks they identify and tradeoffs they explain.

The source defines no weighted scorecard, leaving judgment central to selection. Its closing advice is direct: “If you want an order taker, write down the order. If you want a strategic partner, give them a meaningful problem to solve.”

The contributor’s ideal RFP provides enough structure without pretending every important decision has already been made. The next RFP should test agency reasoning before proposal polish, because the business change matters more than the imagined build.