To review RFQ files before quoting, confirm the full document set, check drawings and revisions for scope gaps, log missing or unclear items in a clarification register, and record assumptions before pricing begins.
Audit workflow
Review RFQ files by building a document register, confirming the latest drawings and addenda, checking specifications and scope boundaries, logging missing or unclear items, and carrying assumptions into quote review before pricing is finalised. The goal is not just tidy folders; it is a traceable basis of quote that another estimator can understand later.
A practical sequence is: intake the package, organise the files, confirm supported formats, check revisions, classify missing information, raise clarifications, then price only the scope that has a recorded basis. For the end-to-end intake step, see the RFQ intake checklist for fabrication estimating.
File review process
An RFQ file review is the process of confirming the estimator has the complete and current document set before pricing begins. It covers drawings, specifications, schedules, addenda, client instructions, scope notes, commercial conditions, and any trade-specific files such as CAD models, cut lists, or markups. Each file is checked for revision status, date, discipline, and relevance to the quoted scope. Missing or unclear items are recorded in a clarification register rather than assumed during estimating.
For fabrication shops bidding on structural steel, sheet metal, or subcontract packages, the RFQ file review is the difference between pricing the right scope and discovering a missing drawing or superseded revision after the quote has gone out. That gap often leads to variation arguments, rework, or eroded margin.
Auditing customer RFQ files locally in under a second significantly accelerates total quote turnaround time. According to McKinsey research on B2B quote response speed, the first qualified vendor to respond to an RFQ wins the bid in 30% to 50% of all competitive tender scenarios, even if their price is up to 5% higher than competitors. By eliminating the latency of uploading drawings to cloud servers, estimators can verify file sets instantly. When choosing a setup, evaluating CAD to quote software helps identify tools that can process files locally without sacrificing data security.
Why review matters
Skipping the file review step tends to produce quotes that miss scope, include work that no longer exists in the latest revision, or rely on assumptions that should have been clarified. In structural steel work, an unchecked revision can change material tonnage, weld volume, and fabrication hours. In sheet metal quoting, a missing DXF can cancel an entire part set.
A structured review does not take long once it is routine. The estimator scans the file list, confirms revisions against the RFQ register, flags gaps, and records assumptions before pricing. The review log then travels with the estimate into quote preparation so nothing is forgotten.
Australian estimating guidance reinforces this approach. Government project guidance notes that poor documentation handling and vague scope definition reduce estimate accuracy, increase assumptions, and lead to cost overruns and disputes. A visible file review is the cheapest way to avoid those outcomes.
Why STEP files alone fail
Precision machining shops often face problems when quoting from 3D models without prints. Volumetric analysis does not identify critical part requirements like thread details, flatness tolerances, surface finishes, or material treatments. Relying strictly on geometry leads to underquoted machining times.
For a complete breakdown of why model geometry hides crucial cost drivers, read why STEP files are not enough for a shop quote.
Review checklist
Use the table below as the minimum review set for every RFQ file package. Adjust columns for your trade and RFQ complexity.
Review each row and do not start pricing until the document set is confirmed. If files must come later, record the assumption used and mark the affected quote lines as dependent on confirmation.
Automated parser limits
A missing-file register is a simple log of absent, unclear, or conflicting documents that need clarification before the quote is finalised. It does not need to be elaborate. A spreadsheet or table with the fields below is enough.
Register each item, assign an owner, and update the status before the quote is issued. If a missing item would materially affect the price, flag it in the quote cover note or assumptions section rather than ignoring it.
Limits of automated parsers: Many shops are tempted to use automated RFQ intake parsers or cloud scrapers to read incoming files. However, these tools are often unable to read non-standard layout blocks, handwritten alterations, or specific project addenda, causing critical requirements to be completely missed.
Genius ERP integration
The most common mistake is pricing before the file review is complete. When an estimator skips the scan and starts on quantities, they tend to find missing items mid-takeoff and either guess or lose momentum. Either outcome reduces estimate quality.
Another mistake is assuming the latest file in the folder is the correct revision. Dropbox, email chains, and shared drives can hold multiple versions. Always verify revision letters and dates against the client transmittal or portal record. NIST recommends embedding dates in sortable file names and not relying on file system timestamps.
Genius ERP triage: For shops running Genius ERP, performing RFQ triage before pushing data into the system is crucial. Standardising drawing checks locally avoids cluttering the production database with invalid revisions and incomplete parts.
A third mistake is letting clarifications disappear between review and quote issue. If a clarification was raised but not resolved before the quote was sent, the associated estimate line should carry an assumption note and a validity flag. Australian contract guidance recommends keeping a clear record of negotiations and maintaining a master version showing the evolution of the contract.
For a complete file review workflow that covers intake through evidence tracking, see the RFQ intake checklist for fabrication estimating. For help organising files before pricing, see how to organise RFQ files before estimating.
Connecting evidence
Evidence should not live only in a folder path or a person’s memory. When a quantity, takeoff item, or cost component depends on a drawing, image, table, or note, the estimate should preserve that connection. For local-first teams, this is especially important because the workspace needs to remain useful offline, auditable later, and understandable to another estimator who did not perform the first review.
A practical approach is to maintain three linked records: a file register listing every document in the review set, a clarification register tracking open and resolved items, and an assumptions log that feeds directly into the quote cover note or exclusions section. Together, these records mean anyone on the team can reconstruct what was priced, why, and what remains uncertain.
For understanding how assumptions differ from exclusions and clarifications, see keeping estimating assumptions visible. For what file formats supported file handling should cover, see supported file handling in estimating software.
Further reading
The shared principle is simple: price from a known document basis, not from whatever happened to arrive in the inbox first.
Ways estimators can keep quote review clear:
- Start with a complete RFQ file register: confirm every drawing, specification, addendum, and schedule is present before pricing begins.
- Use a file review checklist to track revision status, scope gaps, missing documents, and quote impact row by row.
- Record assumptions, exclusions, and clarifications in a review log that carries into quote preparation instead of holding them in memory.
- Link each estimate item, exclusion, and risk note back to the source file so the quote stays traceable, defensible, and easy to revise.
