There’s a funny thing about how companies run RFPs for data.

They talk about “lists” as if they’re just buying names — a commodity, a spreadsheet, a static snapshot of the market. But when you zoom out, what they’re really buying is the machinery that determines who gets talked to, who gets ignored, and how accurately their GTM engine sees the world.

And the machinery matters a lot more than the spreadsheet.

Most RFPs still evaluate data vendors the way we evaluated Yellow Pages in 1998: by the size of the directory. How many contacts do you have? How many companies? How many emails?

But we’re not living in a directory-driven world anymore. We’re living in a signal-driven one — where markets change weekly, workflows shift overnight, and ownership inside companies is fluid, not fixed.

This guide is for the people who feel those shifts most acutely: RevOps and Marketing Strategy leaders. The people responsible for building systems that don’t collapse under the weight of bad assumptions.

Let’s break down how to evaluate a data partner in a world where your GTM motions can’t run on yesterday’s information.

1. Start With Your Real Problem

(And It’s Probably Not “Coverage”)

RFPs tend to orbit around one blunt metric: “coverage.”
But “coverage” is almost never the real problem.

In RevOps, the real pain usually sounds like:

• We don’t actually know who owns this workflow.
• We’re routing by job titles that don’t map to buying centers.
• We can’t see change — hiring, funding, migrations — until months after it happens.

In other words: you’re not mapping the market — you’re guessing at it.

Static data gives you the impression of clarity.
Signal-driven, custom data gives you actual visibility.

Before you compare vendors, name the problem precisely.

Because most of the time, the question isn’t: “Which data vendor has more?”
‍
It’s: “Which one can tell us what’s actually happening inside these accounts?”

‍

2. Coverage Is Not a Number — It’s Context

Vendors love to throw big numbers at you:
40 million contacts, 200 million companies, 99% of North America.

But for Marketing Strategy and RevOps, the real questions are:

• Coverage where? (SMB, international, weird verticals where titles change every 30 feet.)
• Coverage for who? (Owners of workflows, not job-title lookalikes.)
• Coverage with what depth? (Technographics, workflows, signals, intent, system ownership.)

A data vendor can drown you in contacts and still leave you with no one worth reaching.

Your RFP should force vendors to contextualize coverage — not inflate it.

3. The Question That Collapses the Entire Vendor Landscape

“Is your data static or custom?”

This is the part of the evaluation where most RFP committees unintentionally skip the plot.

Static databases — ZoomInfo, Apollo, the usual cast — are built like frozen lakes.
Solid. Wide. Impressive.
But not alive.

The moment they’re published, they begin to decay.

Custom data, on the other hand, is built like an ecosystem.
Fluid. Updated. Adaptive.

It responds to:

• New software ownership
• Hiring shifts
• Market expansion
• Funding events
• Workflow migrations
• Tool consolidation
• Organizational changes

Static data tells you what the market was.
Custom data tells you what the market is.

For RevOps and Marketing, that difference is existential.

‍

4. Evaluate the Signal Layer, Not the Directory Layer

Here’s the quiet truth most leaders know but rarely say out loud:

Names don’t move pipeline. Signals do.

Anyone can hand you a million contacts.
What matters is whether the data shows:

• New locations
• New product launches
• Strategic hires
• Funding rounds
• E-commerce shifts
• Supply chain disruptions
• Tech migrations
• Org restructures
• Positive/negative news cycles

Signals give context to timing.
Timing gives context to conversion.
Conversion gives context to pipeline reality.

An RFP that doesn’t interrogate signal depth isn’t evaluating a partner — it’s grading a directory.

‍

5. Don’t Test Outputs.

Test Methodology.

RevOps leaders understand this instinctively:
A CSV is not the product.
The methodology behind it is.

Ask vendors:

1. How is the data sourced?
Scraped? Modeled? Human-verified? Custom-generated?

2. How is accuracy validated?
Is there a human-in-the-loop layer?
What’s the refresh cadence?
What’s the error tolerance?

3. Can they scale custom requirements?
Vertical nuances.
Persona definitions.
Regional roles.
Workflow-specific ownership.

4. Do they offer transparency?
Audit trails?
Signal provenance?
Explainability?

If the vendor’s methodology is opaque, you’re not buying data — you’re buying luck.

‍

6. Evaluate the Blind Spots:

SMB, Global, and Down-Market Coverage

Every RevOps leader who has tried to run global or SMB programs knows one thing:

Static vendors collapse outside a U.S. corporate office park.

The gaps show up in:

• UK
• France
• Germany
• Brazil
• Japan
• Australia
• Argentina
• And especially sub-200-employee companies

If your GTM strategy touches international markets or down-market universes, this matters more than any other single criterion.

Your RFP should stress-test:

• Local job titles
• Local languages
• Local signals
• Franchise/branch-level ownership
• Local contactability

If a vendor cannot do this, they cannot support your real TAM — only your theoretical one.

‍

7. Workflow Fit Determines Real Value

RevOps lives or dies by workflow friction.

So the question isn’t “does the data exist?”
It’s:

• Does it match cleanly into Salesforce?
• Does it enrich in-flow or only in batches?
• Does routing logic improve?
• Do sequences get smarter?
• Does marketing automation waste shrink?
• Can the data be activated the moment it’s ingested?

Static vendors tend to hand you a file.
Modern partners take responsibility for the entire lifecycle.

This is where the hidden ROI lives.

‍

8. Proof of Value > Proof of Concept

In the AI era, buyers don’t want promises — they want proof.

A POC shouldn’t validate delivery.
It should validate lift.

A real POC measures:

• ICP precision
• Signal relevance
• Conversion impact
• Routing improvements
• Meeting creation
• SDR efficiency
• Pipeline contribution

If a vendor can’t show measurable lift within 8–12 weeks, the partnership won’t scale — no matter how pretty the demo is.

‍

9. Total Cost of Ownership Is the Only Number That Matters

This is where CFOs, RevOps, and Marketing Strategy finally align.

Cheap data creates the most expensive system in your entire stack:

• Low connect rates
• High bounce rates
• Bad routing
• Persona mismatch
• Wasted sequences
• Suppression pollution
• Reps calling the wrong humans
• MA budgets burned on dead inboxes
• Pipeline analysis built on sand

RFPs often calculate cost per record.
But the real metric is cost per effective, activated, accurate, revenue-producing record.

That number tells you the truth.

‍

10. Align the RFP to Outcomes, Not Checkboxes

Static vendors win RFPs based on checkboxes.
Custom vendors win based on outcomes.

Your evaluation criteria should map directly to:

• Better account prioritization
• Higher contactability
• Buying center coverage
• More accurate routing
• Reduced MA waste
• Higher conversion rates
• More meetings booked
• Faster movement into new markets
• Better segmentation through signals

If your RFP isn’t tied to revenue outcomes, it’s grading a fiction.

‍

Final Thought:

Markets Move. Your Data Strategy Needs to Move Faster.

This is the part Ezra Klein would linger on — the systemic shift.

The institutions we’ve built GTM around — static databases, prebuilt directories, industry picklists — were designed for a slower, more predictable world.

But today, markets move too fast for static data to keep up.
Ownership changes too often.
Signals shift too quickly.
Buyers reorganize too frequently.

The future isn’t a database.
It’s a living data ecosystem — custom, real-time, signal-rich, and built around your actual strategy rather than a vendor’s filters.

And the RFP is where that future gets chosen.

Choose well.

‍