We’ve spent 10 years optimizing P2P for IBM Maximo environments, these are the 5 Maximo RFQ Process 99% of organizations are still making

Most teams are already using the out-of-the-box RFQ tool in Maximo.

That’s what makes this interesting.

Because even with it in place, the day-to-day experience still feels off.

Sit with a buyer for a bit and you’ll see it right away.

They’re still:

• Sending RFQs manually

• Following up with vendors over email

• Comparing quotes in Excel

• Chasing updates after the PO is issued
  

So yes, the RFQ tool is being used.

But it’s not really driving the process.

It’s just one piece of it.

Why RFQs in Maximo still feel awkward and incomplete

The issue isn’t that the RFQ tool doesn’t exist.

And it’s not that teams aren’t trying to use it.

It’s that it doesn’t fully support how the process actually needs to run.

On paper, RFQs should:

• Standardize sourcing

• Improve vendor competition

• Reduce back and forth

But in practice, teams still end up working around it.

Not because they want to.

Because they have to.

If you’re in MRO procurement, this usually connects to bigger gaps like:

• PR quality and rework

• Limited interaction with vendors inside the system

• A disconnected PO process after award

The 5 RFQ mistakes we still see in 99% of organizations

1. Using the RFQ tool, but still running the process outside of it

This is the most common pattern.

The RFQ gets created in Maximo.

But then:

• Vendors are contacted over email

• Responses come back outside the system

• Comparisons happen in Excel

So even though the tool is used, the actual process is still happening elsewhere.

That’s where the disconnect starts.

2. No real interaction with vendors inside Maximo

This is where things start to feel awkward.

If your RFQ process still depends on:

• Sending emails

• Waiting for replies

• Following up manually

Then a big part of the process is happening outside the system.

And that’s the difference between RFQs and something like PunchOut.

PunchOut works well because it connects directly to vendor catalogs and keeps that interaction structured.

RFQs for Maximo don’t typically have that same level of connection.

3. Comparing quotes outside the system

Almost every team does this.

Even when RFQs are created in Maximo, quotes are still compared in Excel.

Because it’s just easier.

The downside:

• Slower decisions

• More chances for mistakes

• No clear audit trail

It becomes a habit, even if it’s not ideal.

4. The process stops at the award

A lot of teams treat the RFQ as done once a vendor is selected.

But that’s really just the halfway point.

After that, you still need to:

• Send the approved PO

• Confirm vendor acceptance

• Track delivery and status

• Follow up on invoices

If that part isn’t connected, everything slows down again.

This is where most of the frustration shows up.

5. Vendor data is out of date

Vendor contacts change all the time.

But in most Maximo environments, that information isn’t updated consistently. So...

• RFQs go to the wrong person

• Responses get delayed

• Buyers spend more time chasing updates
  

It’s a small issue that adds up quickly.

Why standardizing RFQs across sites usually doesn’t stick

A lot of organizations are trying to standardize procurement across multiple sites.

The idea makes sense:“If everyone uses the same RFQ process, things will be consistent.”

But if the process:

• Still feels awkward

• Still requires work outside the system

• Still doesn’t save time

People won’t stick with it.

It’s not a training issue.

It’s a process issue.

What a better Maximo RFQ process in looks like

For the Maximo RFQ process to actually work, the full process needs to stay inside the system.

That means:

• RFQs are sent electronically

• Vendors respond in a structured way

• Quotes are compared side by side in Maximo

• Awarding flows directly into PO creation

• Status is tracked without chasing vendors

No Excel.

No extra emails.

No gaps.

Where Quick Quote fits in

This is exactly the gap Quick Quote is designed to solve.

Instead of replacing the RFQ tool, it builds on it and fills in what’s missing.

It allows teams to:

• Create RFQs quickly

• Compare quotes side by side

• Award to one or multiple vendors

• Send clean POs

• Track updates without chasing vendors

Most importantly, it keeps the process connected from start to finish.

The real outcome isn’t just efficiency

When the process:

• Saves time

• Reduces manual work

• Gives better visibility

Teams actually use it. You get more quotes, and better pricing.

That’s what enables real standardization across sites.

Not policy.

Not forcing adoption.

Just a process that works.

If this sounds familiar

If your team is:

• Still comparing quotes in Excel

• Following up with vendors manually

• Trying to standardize across sites

• Losing time after PO award

Then the issue isn’t the team.

It’s the gaps in the process.

Fix those, and things start to move a lot smoother.

If you want to see how this works in a real Maximo environment, it’s worth looking at how Quick Quote fits alongside PunchOut and EzReq for Maximo.

Or just walk through it once, it usually clicks pretty quickly when you see the full process end to end.