RFP Response Best Practices: 10 Tips for Legal Professionals
RFP Response Best Practices: 10 Tips for Legal Professionals
Handling requests for production (RFPs) is one of the most detail-heavy stages of discovery. Each response demands precision, structure, and coordination across multiple people and systems.
For law firms, the goal is to deliver responses that are accurate, defensible, and compliant with procedural rules.
An effective RFP response depends on a repeatable process that fits your team’s workflow and the client’s needs. Using RFP automation tools can make this easier by reducing manual work and keeping productions consistent.
But to get the best results, we still need to go back to the basics. These are the best practices that make every response reliable and defensible from the start.
In this guide, we will share the 10 RFP response best practices trusted by legal professionals to manage discovery more efficiently.
Understanding the Typical RFP Response Process
The RFP response process can differ across law firms, but the structure stays largely consistent: review, plan, collect, and produce.
This process applies to nearly every firm managing discovery, regardless of size or the client’s industry. The objective is to deliver an effective RFP response that meets all procedural and court requirements while protecting confidential information.
When a request for production arrives, the legal team follows a defined sequence to stay organized and compliant. Here’s how the process typically unfolds:
- Review the request: Read each request carefully to understand its key requirements, including scope, date range, and document categories.
- Identify custodians: Determine which individuals or departments hold the relevant records or data.
- Preserve evidence: Issue a legal hold to suspend automatic deletions and prevent data loss.
- Collect documents: Gather files from servers, emails, cloud systems, and shared drives.
- Review for privilege: Examine each document for sensitive, privileged, or confidential information.
- Produce and log: Deliver responsive materials in the agreed format and maintain a detailed production log.
Although each firm may adjust this sequence to fit its internal systems, following a consistent RFP process helps maintain accuracy, defensibility, and smoother communication between parties.
10 Best Practices For Responding to RFPs
Responding to discovery requests can feel repetitive, but having a clear plan makes the process much easier to manage. These RFP response best practices help you stay organized, protect privileged data, and meet every deadline with confidence.
1. Read Every Request Carefully
It might sound obvious, but this step shapes the quality of your entire response. Every RFP should be read word-for-word, and this means checking for grammatical errors, unclear language, or missing definitions that could create confusion later.
Small mistakes in wording can change the meaning of a request, so it helps to compare it against past RFPs to see if the phrasing or scope has shifted.
Pro tip: Using RFP automation can make this process smoother by highlighting variations, tracking common phrasing, and flagging inconsistencies automatically.
When drafting new responses, note each request’s timeframe, topic, and format requirements. Highlight vague terms like “all communications” or “any records,” since those may need clarification before you begin collecting documents.
Many teams keep a shared tracker for each RFP, which records the assigned attorney, relevant custodians, and upcoming deadlines. That extra step keeps everyone on the same page and prevents inconsistent or incomplete responses down the line.
2. Identify Objections Early
Raising discovery objections early helps set clear boundaries for what will and won’t be produced. It also helps save time later by preventing unnecessary document reviews and disputes.
Courts expect clear, specific objections to every request, especially during propounding discovery, where each party must balance thoroughness with protecting privileged material.
That’s why it’s best to identify potential issues as soon as the RFP arrives rather than waiting until the production deadline approaches.
When reviewing each request, look for areas that might require clarification or limitation. Typical grounds for objection include:
- The request is overly broad or unduly burdensome
- The request seeks privileged or confidential material
- The information isn’t relevant to any claim or defense
- The data has already been produced or is easily accessible elsewhere
You can check out this discovery objections cheat sheet to learn more.
Documenting your objections and discussing them early gives both sides a chance to narrow the scope and focus on what actually matters to the case. You can also share your reasoning with the client to keep them informed and aligned.
Over time, tracking objections across multiple cases provides key insights into recurring issues, which can help your team respond more efficiently and consistently in future productions.
3. Communicate With Opposing Counsel
Clear communication with opposing counsel can prevent misunderstandings that often lead to disputes or duplicate work.
One of the most common mistakes during discovery is assuming both sides interpret a request the same way. Without early discussions, teams might collect far more (or far less) than what’s actually needed, making the process unnecessarily time-consuming.
For example, imagine a case where one side requests “all financial communications.” A quick call between counsel could narrow that to a six-month window and limit it to messages between specific departments.
That small clarification saves days of collection and review, especially for large corporations with thousands of files.
Open dialogue also helps level expectations regardless of company size. Smaller firms might have fewer resources and need more time to respond, while larger organizations may require agreement on custodians or data systems.
These conversations often reveal more insights about how the other side structures their review process, which can guide your own strategy.
4. Preserve Relevant Data
Once an RFP document is received, the first priority is to make sure nothing relevant gets lost or deleted. Preserving data protects your case and builds credibility in discovery.
Legal teams should issue a litigation hold right away to cover all potential sources of evidence. Failing to preserve files can lead to sanctions or weakened positions in court.
Examples of relevant data often include:
- Emails and attachments related to the dispute
- Internal chat messages from platforms like Teams or Slack
- Shared drive files, including spreadsheets, PDFs, and images
- System logs or metadata showing document history
- Archived backups that might store older communications
These bullet points show just how many areas can hold responsive information. The scope of preservation depends on the claims, time period, and other factors such as the client’s data systems and storage policies.
Documenting what’s preserved, when, and by whom creates a defensible record if questions arise later. Taking preservation seriously early in the process helps avoid complications and keeps every RFP response accurate and complete.
5. Collect Documents Methodically
A well-organized collection process keeps your RFP response accurate and defensible. Rather than gathering files randomly, follow a structured plan that aligns with the RFP requirements.
Start by identifying custodians and data sources, then coordinate with IT or discovery specialists to retrieve the information in a consistent format. Keeping a log of when and where each file came from helps maintain traceability if questions arise later.
Referencing previous RFP responses can also make the collection faster. Many firms maintain a content library of common documents, templates, or exhibits used in similar cases.
Plus, reviewing this library before starting a new collection can reveal overlaps or reusable materials, which, in turn, can save hours of unnecessary work.
During collection, avoid mixing responsive and nonresponsive data. Each file should be verified for completeness and categorized by request number or subject. When done methodically, this process prevents missed documents, reduces duplication, and simplifies later review.
6. Review for Privilege and Confidentiality
Before producing any documents, take time to review for privilege and confidentiality. This step prevents the accidental disclosure of sensitive material and maintains the integrity of your client’s case.
Both concepts serve different purposes, but often overlap during document review:
- Privilege protects communications between attorneys and clients that were made for legal advice.
- Confidentiality covers sensitive business, personal, or proprietary information that should not be shared publicly.
For example, an internal email between a company’s general counsel and a manager discussing legal risk would be privileged. Meanwhile, a spreadsheet containing customer data or trade secrets would be confidential. Both should be handled carefully.
Teams often use software filters, tagging systems, or secondary reviews to identify these materials before production. Redactions may be applied to portions of documents that contain protected content while allowing the rest to be shared.
Maintaining a privilege log listing each withheld document, its date, author, and reason, helps keep the process transparent.
7. Use Bates Numbering and Metadata
Consistent numbering and clear metadata are the foundation of an organized RFP response. Bates numbering assigns a unique ID to each page or file (for example, ABC_0001234), helping everyone in the case reference the same document without confusion.
Meanwhile, metadata adds searchable context, like author name, creation date, and file type, which keeps productions transparent and traceable.
Together, these details make document management smoother during review, motion practice, and depositions.
For example, if a deposition witness refers to “the July report,” having the Bates-stamped version (DEF_0004521) lets all parties identify the same page instantly. It also reduces disputes about what was produced and when.
Applying Bates numbers and managing metadata manually, however, can take hours or even days for large productions. That’s where RFP automation tools can change everything.
Briefpoint’s upcoming Autodoc feature eliminates the manual work entirely. It auto-drafts RFP responses, adds Bates numbering and page-level citations, and packages everything for download in just seconds.
Autodoc can process each request in 3–10 seconds, which can turn weeks of discovery work into one upload.
Join the waitlist for Autodoc today. Be first in line to end discovery work for good and let your next RFP production build itself.
8. Produce Documents in the Agreed Format
Another obvious tip, but it’s one that saves endless headaches. Before producing anything, confirm the agreed format with opposing counsel, whether that’s PDFs, TIFF images, or native files with metadata.
Producing in the wrong format often leads to rework, disputes, or even motions to compel. But when both sides understand how files will be delivered, the process moves faster and with fewer surprises.
Every production package should have clear headings and a logical folder structure. Labeling folders by request number, custodian, or topic helps everyone navigate the materials quickly. It also shows attention to detail, which can strengthen your credibility in discovery.
Once everything is reviewed, numbered, and labeled, perform a quick quality check before submission. Confirm that all Bates numbers are visible, metadata is intact, and no privileged files slipped through. This final step helps you feel confident that your production is defensible and complete.
9. Maintain a Production Log
Keeping a production log may seem routine, but it’s one of the simplest ways to improve quality and accountability in discovery.
A well-maintained log tracks what was produced, when it was delivered, and to whom. This creates a complete record that can be referenced if any issues arise later. It also makes rolling productions easier to manage and keeps your team aligned across multiple requests.
Your production log should include details like:
- Production date – When the documents were sent to opposing counsel
- Bates range – The specific numbering sequence for that batch
- Recipient – The party or firm receiving the production
- Description – A short summary of what that production includes
- Notes – Any clarifications or special handling instructions
These entries might seem small, but together they build a clear trail of accountability. Over time, analyzing your logs can also highlight recurring issues or inefficiencies that your team can fix to improve quality in future productions.
10. Review Responses Before Submission
Before sending anything out, take time to review every RFP response for accuracy and consistency. This final check ensures that objections align with what’s been produced and that no privileged or confidential documents were accidentally included.
Cross-check your production against the submission instructions from opposing counsel or the court. Make sure the file formats, naming conventions, and delivery methods match what was agreed upon.
If the instructions specify a secure portal or particular labeling method, confirm that everything meets those standards before sending.
Many teams assign a second reviewer (someone who hasn’t worked on the earlier stages) to spot inconsistencies or missing files. Reviewing responses with fresh eyes helps catch small errors, such as broken Bates sequences or mislabeled folders.
Once the review is complete and the package matches the submission instructions, you can send it off knowing your production is accurate and ready for review.
End Manual Discovery Work For Good With Briefpoint
Responding to RFPs is demanding work, especially when you’re managing dozens of requests, tight deadlines, and thousands of pages. Following these RFP response best practices helps create a process that’s consistent, defensible, and less stressful.
The more structure and documentation you build into your legal workflow, the more control you’ll have over accuracy and turnaround time.
But even the best manual process still takes hours of review and organization. Briefpoint was designed for exactly this kind of work.
Built for real legal teams, Briefpoint automates drafting and document preparation so you can focus on the parts of discovery that truly need your expertise.
And now, with Autodoc, Briefpoint is taking discovery automation to the next level. Autodoc turns productions and case files into ready-to-serve discovery responses, complete with Bates numbering, page-level citations, and auto-drafted RFP answers in just seconds.
If you’re ready to save weeks of manual review and make your next production effortless, join the waitlist for Autodoc and be first in line to end discovery work for good.
Want to see how Briefpoint works? Schedule a demo today.
FAQs About RFP Response Best Practices
What are examples of good RFP responses?
Good RFP responses are clear, consistent, and supported by evidence. They reference the exact documents or Bates numbers, explain objections precisely, and show organized handling of materials. Strong responses also follow repeatable steps, making it easy for teams to stay consistent across different cases.
How to structure an RFP response?
Start with the request number and a short, direct answer. Then cite the responsive documents, note any objections, and briefly describe what was produced or withheld. Keeping a uniform structure across all responses helps reviewers follow along easily and minimizes confusion during discovery.
What should you not do when responding to an RFP?
Avoid vague objections, incomplete answers, or inconsistent numbering. Never skip privilege review or submit files in the wrong format. These small mistakes can cause disputes or delay the case, especially when opposing counsel challenges the response.
What is the RFP response process?
The process includes reading each request, identifying objections, preserving and collecting data, reviewing for privilege, and producing documents in order. Many firms assign roles, such as reviewers, collectors, and quality checkers, to make this process faster and more accurate across large cases.
The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information.
This website contains links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser. Readers of this website should contact their attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal matter. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or refrain from acting on the basis of information on this site without first seeking legal advice from counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website authors, contributors, contributing law firms, or committee members and their respective employers.