• March 10, 2026

From RFP to Partnership: Fixing the Event Pitch Process

From RFP to Partnership: Fixing the Event Pitch Process

From RFP to Partnership: Fixing the Event Pitch Process 1024 683 micebook.

The RFP process is meant to help brands find the right agency partners. Yet for many in the events and experiential industry, it has become a source of frustration, inefficiency, and wasted effort.

Agencies across regions report many of the same pain points – unclear briefs, too many agencies invited to pitch, unrealistic budgets, and limited feedback once the decision is made – all of which place significant pressure on agency time, resources and profitability.

That was the focus of micebook’s recent US webinar, “Navigating the Broken Event Agency RFP Process,” moderated by entrepreneur and event industry advisor Howard Givner.

The discussion brought together agency leaders Adam Goodman (A*live), Lizz Torgovnick (Sequence Events), and Jenny Bronstein Basco (NVE Experience Agency) to explore what’s going wrong, and what a better system could look like.

Rather than simply vent, the panel focused on practical changes that could benefit agencies, clients, and ultimately, the quality of events and experiences.

What a “Good” RFP should include

One of the most common frustrations is a lack of context. Without a clear understanding of the business objectives, event history, or success metrics, agencies are effectively working in the dark.

As Torgovnick explained: “One of the biggest things I see left out most often is exactly what they’re looking for from the RFP. Are you looking for unique creative ideas, or more of an RFI-style understanding of whether we’re a good match?”

Understanding that distinction early can significantly shape the response. Agencies want to know whether they are responding to a brand-new experience or a long-standing programme, and why the work is going out to pitch in the first place.

Audience insights, brand guidelines and budget are equally important. As Goodman noted, agencies are often asked to design complex experiences without even knowing the budget. “You’d be surprised at the number of RFPs we get where there either isn’t a budget or it’s ‘tell us how much it costs.’ It’s very difficult to respond to something like that.”

Clear budgets and evaluation criteria such as a simple scoring framework that shows how credentials, ideas, pricing, and other factors are weighted, allows agencies to focus their efforts in the right direction rather than making assumptions.

Too many agencies, too little respect

Another recurring issue is the number of agencies invited to pitch. Examples shared during the webinar included RFPs sent to seven, eight, or even twelve agencies – with one extreme case involving twenty.

While larger lists might be acceptable for an RFI stage, the consensus among panellists was that three to five agencies is a realistic, respectful number for a full creative pitch. “The sweet spot is like three. It’s hard to imagine why someone would need more than three to choose from,” said Torgovnick.

Beyond that range, the odds of success are simply too low to justify the investment of time, money and creative energy. It also calls into question how thoroughly the client will be able to review each proposal.

This is pushing agencies to adopt more formal bid/no‑bid criteria: assessing client fit, strategic value, budget realism, agency count, resourcing, and incumbent dynamics before deciding whether to proceed. As a result, some agencies report win rates of around 40–50% on the opportunities they choose to pursue.

The hidden cost of proposals

Depending on the scope, agencies may spend 60 to 300 hours developing a proposal, often with senior leadership personally dedicating dozens of hours to strategy and oversight. External costs can also be substantial.

“I personally have probably spent 80 to 100 hours overseeing strategy work… we’ve spent $30,000 or more out of pocket bringing in specialists like freelance scenic designers,” said Torgovnick.

Proposal fees are still far from standard, but some clients are offering between $5,000 and $10,000 to offset agency costs, which does at least demonstrate the client is serious about the process.

Bronstein Basco noted that her agency sees proposal fees on roughly a third of RFPs. “It’s nowhere near enough to cover our cost, but what it signals is that the client is investing in the work and in finding the right partner.”

Sometimes those fees are positioned as buying the IP in the concepts. In those cases, agencies weigh that condition alongside other factors such as trust, fit, and long‑term potential. While misuse of ideas does happen, the panel’s experience suggested it is less widespread than many fear – and can often be addressed through open conversation.

The role of AI in Proposals

AI also surfaced as an emerging tool in the RFP process. Most agencies are using it cautiously, primarily to support administrative and research tasks, such as summarising information, structuring documents, or conducting rapid audience research.

However, the panellists agreed that AI should not replace human creativity. “Experiences are humans creating for humans,” Torgovnick said, noting that over-reliance on AI risks losing the nuance and empathy needed to create meaningful brand experiences.

Meanwhile, some clients are beginning to mandate or request AI usage, while others demand full transparency on what’s AI‑generated. That tension is driving many agencies to formalise AI policies covering ethics, disclosure and executional risk.

 From RFP to “Request for Partnership”

The panellists discussed their desire for a shift in mindset, and for the process to be treated less as a transactional pitch and more as the start of a partnership. Bronstein Basco suggested that even the terminology could evolve. “We often talk internally about how we’d love the term RFP to stand for ‘Request for Partnership’ instead of ‘Request for Proposal.’”

They also explored the potential for a standardised RFP framework for the events industry, like the common college application. Such a framework could include:

  • A core set of standard questions every RFP should address
  • Optional modules tailored to different sectors or event types
  • Clear prompts to ensure clients provide the context agencies need

The benefits could be significant: better briefs, less wasted effort, and a more transparent process for both sides.

The idea of a best‑practice manifesto was also raised: a simple set of principles on topics like ideal agency counts, proposal timelines, Q&A etiquette, feedback expectations, and when to consider proposal fees.

A shared opportunity for the industry

Ultimately, the discussion made one thing clear: improving the RFP process isn’t just about making life easier for agencies. It’s about improving the quality of partnerships, and the quality of work produced.

As the webinar concluded, the mood was optimistic. The challenges are well understood, and there is clear appetite across the industry to address them.

The next step is collective action from both agency and client‑side leaders to turn these ideas into shared standards.

Watch the full webinar here

The webinar was part of an ongoing partnership between micebook and Howard Givner, ahead of our first micebook C-Suite Event Agency Growth Summit, taking place in New York City on 12 May 2026.

Find out more and register to attend here

Join Our Community

Join our community and receive the latest trending industry news in our weekly Departure Lounge and exclusive invites to events





    WordPress Ads