Back in the beginning of March I posted this on Twitter:

Then, just yesterday, I posted this:

Prospective clients (often big companies with legal departments or government agencies) will require you submit your financial statements to them as a condition of an RFP. The idea behind that is so the organization can minimize their risk by making sure that you're financially solvent. They don't want to engage with a company that might be here today and gone tomorrow, because it will cost them time and money to re-engage with someone else if you end up disappearing. The information can also shed some light on how your company has (or hasn't grown) over the years, and which way you're currently trending. Its a value estimator. It all sounds perfectly reasonable on paper, right?

Well, we don't accommodate those requests.

Why? Well, I wish I had a better answer other than, "It's none of their business." But that's it.

Sure, you can sign an NDA so there are assurances they won't go discussing your numbers with anyone else. But for me, an oragnization that asks to see your books is an organization that probably didn't have you on their radar in the first place, or at least not on their short list. If you're responding to an RFP, you can be assured you're one of umpteen other companies that is also responding to the RFP. The way I see it, if an organization really wants to work with you, they won't treat you like a number. They'll take the time to look at your work, ask you tough questions, understand your history, read your articles, and talk to references you provide them (which, for the record, I think is a perfectly reasonable thing to do). The health of your organization will be evident by your longevity, your client roster, your thought leadership, and most importantly, your body of work. It won't be based whole or in part on how much profit you made or what your accounts payable balance looks like.

I see it as a filtering mechanism, much like I view requests for spec work. It's a safe bet that if you're asked to show how much money your company makes (or doesn't make) or what kind of work you'll do for free to prove your worth, you're not being considered for what makes you truly valuable.

I tweeted about this recently, but it bothers me too much not to blab about it a little bit more.

We talk to a lot of people about working on projects with them. Sometimes, we even get on a train or plane and present to them in person if we think there's some real synergy. Doing that requires time and money, is a bit of a gamble, and it takes us away from other work. But that's all part of it.

I totally understand if we're not the right fit, and there's been many occasions where that's been the case. Most often, a prospect will call or email us to explain why they're moving in a different direction and we'll all move on. However, there are occasions when a prospect will simply drop off the planet. We'll call, we'll email, we'll send notes via carrier pigeon. Crickets. It makes you wonder if (God forbid) something happened to the person we had been talking to.

This is one of the most frustrating parts of business development. No, strike that - it's frustrating on simply a human level. I'd rather lose a dozen jobs and be told about straight up about it than to be simply left hanging forever. You can apply this example to a million other life events as well.

I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. Sprawl out on my virtual couch and tell me your stories.

Our company has built a solid reputation teaching about the web, doing good work, getting projects done on time and on budget, and treating clients respectfully. Building a solid reputation over time naturally leads to folks wanting to work with you. It's an enviable position to be in, and one I never take for granted.

I wrote an article back in October last year for A List Apart called 'Getting to No'. It detailed some common warning signs one should look for when considering project opportunities. I suppose this post can be considered a short addendum to that.

We like leads where a prospect knows who we are and what we bring to the table. They've done their homework. They know that our founder has written the web design bible, they know we speak at SXSW and conferences across the country, and they realize we have some of the smartest folks in the industry on our payroll. When we work with folks like this, we spend less time evangelizing our position and more time working toward solutions.

There are occasions, however, when even if the prospect sought us out directly it's amazingly difficult to convince them that we're the firm for them. Even if we put our people on a plane to pitch the job in person or modify our approach a couple of times, they'll still ask for more detail or clarity. We'll give them references, and they'll ask for more references. We'll show them work we've done, and they'll say, 'Great. What else you got?'. They'll send us multiple follow-up emails chock full of questions.

So, is this simply a prospect being thorough, or is this a prospect being difficult?

I can certainly appreciate an organization performing their due diligence, and I can also appreciate someone who comes to the table saying, 'You know, I don't care who you are, I am going to make damn sure you are the right firm.' However, when you're presented with this kind of pushback before you've even reached the starting gate, is it worth it?

I've said it before - the prospect you're considering is the client you'll have. My gut tells me that come project time you'll spend an extraordinary amount of time justifying yourself every step of the way. Every deliverable will have a magnifying glass applied to it (moreso than usual). Even if you feel the work is spot on, the client will likely think it's off.

Have you had this experience? Am I being too selective? Am I whining? Am I on the money? Do tell.