Quotient is online quoting software, for creating professional looking quotes. Capture leads via a lead form, which can be embedded on a website, and then converted to quotes. Start a quote from a pre-made quote templates, with everything laid out and ready to go. Specify quote items to be optional, including multiple choice options). With these, customer can pick and choose, and their quote total will automatically update as they accept, which they can do…
$28
per month 1 team member only
Qvidian RFP & Proposal Automation
Score7 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
Proposal management and RFP response software
N/A
Responsive
Score8.9 out of 10
N/A
Responsive (formerly RFPIO), headquartered in Beaverton, offers their proposal management and automation software, featuring import and export, proposal knowledgebase and answer library, evaluation intake forms, and project management tools (e.g. Gantt chart) associated to proposal tracking.
N/A
Pricing
Quotient
Qvidian RFP & Proposal Automation
Responsive
Editions & Modules
Solo
$28
per month 1 team member only
Team
$48
per month 2-5 team members included
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Quotient
Qvidian RFP & Proposal Automation
Responsive
Free Trial
Yes
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Yes
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
No setup fee
Additional Details
The Team plan includes 5 Team Members. Each additional Team Member is $8 USD per month.
Sr Proposal Manager in Sales at Wolters Kluwer ELM Solutions (Computer Software, 501-1000 employees)
Chose Responsive
RFPIO has outstanding, responsive, helpful customer support located in the US in Oregon. Support techs go the extra mile to help with basic issues and functionality training. Same-day support response and problem resolution are the norms. The system is also very user-friendly …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Verified User
Chose Responsive
Qvidian, as I remember it, was clunky and difficult to use. Not user friendly at all.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Manager, Presales Enablement in Sales at Mercury Healthcare (formerly Healthgrades) (Information Technology & Services, 501-1000 employees)
Chose Responsive
RFPIO's licensing model is a bit different from others which worked better for our organization. Rather than licensing by a number of users, it's licensed by the active project. This allows us to add multiple users that are responsible for reviewing and updating content without …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Director: Proposal Writing at SHI International (Information Technology & Services, 5001-10,000 employees)
Chose Responsive
Unfortunately, I have not had the opportunity to use or evaluate other products like RFPIO. When I was hired, my company had just purchased our RFPIO software.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Senior Manager, Proposal Department at HALO Recognition (Human Resources, 1001-5000 employees)
Chose Responsive
We are a small proposal team, with a large group of resources who support our responses. Responsive is easy to use for internal and external users, doesn't require extensive onboarding for new users, and is constantly adding new capabilities and enhancements to make the product …
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
This software is very well-suited to companies who find themselves expanding their footprint, the number of their Sales representatives, their territories, and/or their products and services and need to maximize their ability to both keep up with those demands whilst streamlining their proposal resources. Further, this is a very powerful tool with a lot of features and functionality including CRM plug-in and reporting. Thus, it may be less appropriate for a very small organization with only one product and that is also blessed with lengthy cradle-to-grave turnaround windows. In addition, to better the odds for success an investment in upfront personnel training and either a dedicated periodic window of time and/or dedicated person(s) for content upkeep are prudent. Finally, working with the vendor is a delight as they make every effort to maintain and deliver a product that both meets your needs and on which you can rely.
Good use cases: - Responding to RFP's especially generic questions that are asked frequently (company size, product info, security posture) - Delegating approvals or questions to appropriate teams where the AI solution is not well positioned to provide a thorough or complete answer - Reviewing previous RFP documents that have been submitted by previous account teams Bad Use Cases: - Struggles compared to other AI tools with contextual deep questions about product functionality - Doesn't seamlessly integrate with tools where our clients submit RFP and require sign ons.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Using Qvidian as an RFP tool has made a difference in our RFP process, turn-around time, and content development. It's helped us streamline our RFP process so that we are able to produce the majority of the document before the kick-off meeting, which means we have more time to customize and refine the document before it goes to print.
Additionally, it took several hours before to gather all of the basic data we needed for an RFP, but now we can have the majority of the response ready in under 15 minutes in most cases. We are also able to start projects from our phones (iPhone thru Safari) or on an iPad. This has been extremely helpful while traveling.
Finally, our content is centrally located on a searchable database. Previously we had used several free tools to aid in content storage that would allow us access easily via search. It never seemed to do what we wanted, and when we did find something, we weren't sure if it was the most current or usable. The library functions in Qvidian have been a huge help, and has changes the way we collect data, and retrieve it.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
One area where Qvidian occasionally struggles is feature regression. For instance, the editing option that puts multiple records into one document had always been present in Qvidian; however, when the multi-edit feature that only allows editing one record at a time was released in version 9.1, the original editing functionality was removed. This caused me a lot of frustration, as it severely slowed down my work flow since I could now only see and edit one record at a time. It wasn't until a year later when version 10 was released that the old editing functionality was added back. However, one bright spot of version 9.1 was an added feature that allowed organizing records by simply dragging and dropping them into different categories. This was much easier than having to right click on a record, select Move, then right click on a folder and select paste. However, with version 10, this feature was removed and I'm now back to having to right click on records instead of dragging and dropping. It seems that with each release, I never know if something I like will be taken away or if something I don't like will be added -- sometimes it's both.
A recent change that was added in version 10.1 that I personally view as a negative is that Qvidian now handles all requests server side instead of on the user's computer. This means that if a user wants to export or edit a large number of records, they have to wait for Qvidian's server to generate a report of those records. Depending on the number of records, this can be very quick (a few seconds) or very long (I've waited up to 20 minutes before) depending on how taxed Qvidian's servers currently are. I understand the reasoning behind the move, in that it takes the load off of a user's computer so that other applications they currently have open aren't affected by added memory usage, but in practice I find that it only slows down my workflow. Any somewhat modern PC shouldn't have any trouble handling a large report request from Qvidian.
Although Qvidian is certified for use in several different browsers (Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Chrome for Windows), it doesn't offer the same functionality in each one. For instance, in Explorer, when a record is selected for editing or export, it will automatically open in Word. In Firefox, a pop-up dialog appears and a user has to click Open in order for the record to appear in Word. And in Chrome, the file is added to the download bar and a user must click on the file there for it to open, unless they add an exception to .docx file types to automatically open in Word (which I had to do, since I prefer using Chrome). Other simple features such as right clicking on a folder or record to bring up Qvidian's context menu are hit or miss depending on the browser. In Explorer, everything is generally smooth, though the browser itself is slower than the other choice. In Firefox, right clicking generally works but sometimes has some hiccups, and in Chrome, more often than not right clicking brings up Chrome's context menu instead of Qvidian's, which often leads to having to first select a folder and then click the dedicated Actions button in Qvidian to perform the desired action. No matter which browser you use, there will be some sort of functionality that doesn't quite work as expected.
Reporting and Analytics is basic, you can purchase advanced analytics though
It would have been nice to have a set structure in mind or a example/case study to structure our responses in the most appropriate way, but we are working through that with their stellar support team
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The tool provides us with the functionality we need to perform more efficiently and we have not identified another product that offers enough "nice to haves" in addition to the "must haves" to warrant a compelling reason for changing tools.
We'd be sunk without Responsive. The sales motion would slow way down in several places, and that's just unacceptable. AND I love the product. It helps me do my job efficiently. The Responsive team is GREAT. Support is getting better. The Product and Customer Experience Team is so knowledgeable and willing to help with new features and troubleshoot what's going on. It's an all-around great experience. Not to mention starting over - I can't even get my head around that.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The shift they made in architecting documents from content to outline, is now reversed allowing outline creation first, then content which is more natural. But, due to the fact that we went through a migration of content to get to the new version, it feels less optimized than if we would have re-implemented.
End users having to configure settings more often than desired
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
They are very much in support of great customer service. They respond quickly with emails and in some cases phone calls to resolve any issues and often times user questions in the past when I could not figure something out.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
If I cannot solve a problem, then I reach out to Support and they are ON IT. They always solve the problem and get back to me immediately with an answer. Our customer support person who is assigned to us (we have had several) are responsive and helpful. We have asked them to sit in on meetings and help socialize the tool.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
Live instructor training is expensive, though we have had instructors come to our offices for a ‘refresher’ before. The refresher was more of a “let us fix that for you” than a training on how to do it ourselves.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
We have been using Qvidian for years, when Compass was introduced in our company. Having spent over a year using Compass, I would not recommend it for writing proposals. In all fairness, that is not Compass' strength. Compass is ok for general document sharing for informational purposes. It does have a Presentation Builder function for creating PowerPoint presentations, but it is cumbersome and not very flexible. Specifically, the linkage is awkward and files may have to be re-linked when they are updated. In addition, the architecture only allows you to create a couple of levels of content. The search function is very limited. Compass is a newer project and has not fully matured.
While others have had a good experience with Qvidian, we unfortunately did not. Our questions were never answered by our Qvidian rep, as we used it the platform had no AI capabilities, and we had very low usage. It didn't serve our needs. Responsive has been incredible in their communication, responses, partnership, and willingness to get our feedback in order to improve the platform
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info
The positive impact has been to know we have a system that can house legally-approved responses to questionnaires. The good about this is that if we have a simple RFI that does not require a lot of response customization, we can draw upon previously-approved responses and create output MUCH quicker, without the need of laborious and time-consuming legal reviews of RFIs or DDQs we produce for prospective clients. Quicker, easier output with less internal review = efficient RFI process and quicker turnaround time to respond to our client/prospective client base.
The negative impact has only been the time it takes to orient oneself with the program, and REMAIN oriented. As we do not do RFIs on a daily basis, it is easy for us to become rusty, or to take short-cuts because we do not have time to re-train on the program. Those shortcuts and workarounds tend to cause us not to use the program to its full potential and lead to counter-productivity in some cases.
Client Confidence: the use of RFP360 has allowed us to deliver a demonstrably robust process to our clients, providing them a very high level of confidence in the quality of our work.
Time Efficiency: RFP360's services provide a great deal of time-saving in the management of virtually the entire RFP process.
A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info