Partner Reference

Vietnam DMC RFQ Workflow & Proposal Timeline

How Vietnam quotations are built in practice — what inputs stabilize costing, what timelines are typical, and where certainty checkpoints protect feasibility and partner commitments.

Purpose
Expectation clarity
Timelines, checkpoints, and revision logic.
Audience
Travel professionals
Groups • Incentives • MICE • Series operators.
Tone
Operational, not sales
A shared workflow reference.

RFQ speed is not only about “how fast a DMC replies.” It’s mostly about whether the input data allows feasibility checks, capacity alignment, and clean supplier confirmations without repeated loops.

This page complements Vietnam DMC Operations & Planning and How We Work With Partners.

1) The RFQ → Proposal Workflow (Practical View)

A. Input check
Routing, dates, group size, expectations.
B. Feasibility
Timing realism, access windows, constraints.
C. Costing
Supplier checks and rate validation.
D. Proposal
Assumptions + options + trade-offs.

For stable planning, proposals should make assumptions visible and show what must remain true for the plan to hold under real conditions.

2) Inputs That Speed Up Quotation (What We Need Early)

Core inputs

  • Dates (and flexibility window if any)
  • Group size + leader count + rooming assumptions
  • City routing + preferred pacing (relaxed vs dense)
  • Hotel level target (3–4★ / 5★ / mixed) and location preference

Stability inputs

  • Fixed-time events (meeting blocks, gala, awards, site visits)
  • Special requirements (VIP, dietary, mobility, religious needs)
  • Flight details (if booked) or arrival/departure time targets
  • Decision boundary: what can change vs what is fixed

If some details are unknown, we can still progress — but timelines improve when decision boundaries are clear.

3) Typical Timeline Expectations (Not a Guarantee)

Timelines depend on season, scale, and complexity. The ranges below are guidance for planning expectations.

RFQ Type What it usually involves Typical timeline tendency
Simple leisure group Single city / simple routing, standard services Fast
Multi-city program Flights/transfers, more coordination density Moderate
MICE / incentive Fixed windows, venues, run-of-show protection Moderate to extended
Very large scale / peak periods Capacity risk, limited options, extra confirmations Extended

Practical note: timelines stretch when supplier confirmations must be repeated due to changing inputs or peak availability pressure.

4) Certainty Checkpoints (Where Plans Become “Real”)

Feasibility checkpoint
Timing logic, routing realism, access constraints surfaced.
Capacity checkpoint
Hotels, coaches, guides, venues aligned to the same window and scale.
Confirmation checkpoint
Supplier commitments and change boundaries become binding.

These checkpoints reduce surprises later and protect both partner credibility and guest experience.

5) Revision Logic (How to Reduce Loops)

  • Keep one variable stable during each revision cycle (dates or cities or hotel level).
  • Define what is fixed (must-haves) vs what is flexible (nice-to-haves).
  • Use options (Plan A / Plan B) instead of reworking the same plan repeatedly.
  • Confirm decision lanes early to avoid last-minute structural changes.

Context note: This page provides workflow guidance for travel professionals. Scope boundaries and escalation lanes are defined in Service Scope & Boundaries and Planning Stability & Contingency.

Need a clean RFQ template?

If helpful, share your routing, dates, group size, and fixed-time elements — we’ll confirm feasibility checkpoints and the fastest quotation path.

RFQ Workflow FAQs

Short clarifications that reduce planning uncertainty before confirmation.

Clear dates (and flexibility), group size, routing, hotel level preference, and fixed-time elements. These inputs allow feasibility checks and cleaner supplier confirmations.

Peak periods reduce availability and increase confirmation effort. Supplier options narrow, and revisions may require re-checking capacity across hotels, transport, guides, and venues.

Yes. We can progress using planning assumptions, but certainty improves when decision boundaries are clear (what is fixed vs flexible) and the date window is defined.

A point in the workflow where feasibility, capacity alignment, and supplier commitments become sufficiently validated to support stable confirmation and reduce later surprises.

Keep one variable stable per revision cycle, define must-haves vs flexible items, use Plan A/Plan B options, and confirm decision lanes early to avoid late structural changes.

Note: These FAQs correspond to the structured data on this page.