Why consulting firms need more than a CV database to respond to RFPs

At many consulting firms, CVs tend to accumulate wherever they are most useful at the moment. Individual consultants keep their own versions in personal files, sales teams store copies from past proposals in shared folders, and HR systems hold a basic profile created when the consultant first joined. Somewhere along the way, “the latest version” gets shared by email and reused again later.

On a normal day, this feels manageable. Then an RFP (Request for Proposal) lands.

Sales needs three to five relevant profiles, fast. The requirements are specific, and the deadline is tight. There is no time to “fix things properly”.

People start searching. Someone checks the CV folder. Someone else asks in Slack. A senior consultant is tagged because they worked on something similar. Another profile is reused from a previous proposal because it is already prepared and mostly fits the RFP requirements.

What gets sent is not the best representation of the firm’s current capability. It is simply what could be assembled in time.

Once the RFP is out the door, the reactions are familiar. The CVs were outdated. The formatting was inconsistent. The templates didn’t look professional. And someone inevitably says, in frustration: “We need a better CV builder.”

But the scramble did not happen because of templates, or the lack of them. It happened because no one knew, with confidence, which consultant profiles were accurate, relevant, and who was actually available to deliver the work.

Under RFP pressure, teams fall back on whatever CVs are easiest to find. Those profiles are often incomplete or outdated, and the consultants best suited to the work may not be identified quickly enough to be included. That directly reduces the quality of the proposal and the chances of winning the project.

So the issue here is not document quality. It is the absence of a single, trusted source of truth for consultant capability. Until that exists, RFP responses will continue to rely on memory, urgency, and shortcuts rather than real data.

New tools, same outcome

When consulting firms repeatedly struggle to assemble CVs for RFPs, the response is usually to look for a better CV builder to produce professional-looking profiles faster, and a CV database to keep everything in one place and make it easier to search.

On the surface, that makes sense.

The limitation is that neither approach changes the underlying information being sent out with the RFP.

CV builders work with whatever content already exists. They take the experience and skills on file and present them  well, but they do not improve the accuracy or relevance of that content. If the information is outdated or incomplete, the resulting CV will be too.

Similarly, CV databases are genuinely useful in that they centralise CVs and make them searchable. But that is where their usefulness tends to end. They store CVs as static documents and surface whatever was last uploaded, without context about how current that experience is, how relevant it is to the work at hand, or whether the consultant is actually available to deliver.

The result is incremental improvement. CVs look better. Storage is more organised. Friction is slightly reduced. But when an RFP lands, these tools still cannot give you insights that show who is actually ready to deliver the work, why a particular consultant is the right fit, or what trade-offs you are making by proposing them.

The tooling improved. The outcome did not.

From CVs to CV Inventory

Once you take a step back, the problem becomes clearer.

Consulting firms are not struggling to send quality RFPs because they lack CVs, templates, or storage. They struggle because they do not have a reliable, up-to-date view of the skills and certifications they are actually selling and delivering.

What is missing is not another CV tool, but a live inventory of skills and capabilities. What consulting firms actually need is not a choice between a CV builder and a CV database, but a single source of truth for consultant skills and capabilities. That source must be structured, current, and trusted. It should reflect skills gained through real project work, validated over time, visible in the context of availability and demand, and able to generate client-ready CVs when required.

This is the problem MuchSkills set out to solve. Over time, working closely with consulting and professional services firms, we developed an approach that treats skills, certifications, and experience as living data rather than static documents. From that foundation, CVs can be generated when needed, combining up-to-date skills profiles with the core information clients expect, such as work experience, education, roles, and certifications. We refer to this solution as CV Inventory.

The logic behind CV Inventory

Think about what customers of consulting companies are actually trying to buy.

They are buying skills. More specifically, they are buying the skills and capabilities of people who can solve their specific problems, using the right methods and tools, based on real experience.

That is why every serious RFP, regardless of how it is worded, ultimately tries to establish the same things:

·  What skills and experience your consultants actually have

·  At what level

·  Based on what kind of work

·  And how recently those skills have been used

Through our work with consulting and professional services firms, MuchSkills repeatedly saw the same challenge. The way most consultancies operate today makes it difficult to provide this level of detail without spending a disproportionate amount of time assembling it.

As a result, the process defaults to what is easiest rather than what is best. Profiles that are already at hand are reused. Stronger-fit consultants are not always identified quickly enough to be included. CVs are sent out with incomplete or outdated information, not because anyone is careless, but because the underlying data is hard to assemble on demand.

This was the gap MuchSkills saw again and again.

As a result, the core idea behind the creation of CV Inventory was simple: instead of reconstructing capability at the point of the RFP, capability should be maintained and recorded as part of normal operations, and the same system should be used to generate CVs when they are needed.

That is exactly what CV Inventory does. Because it is built on MuchSkills’ skills and certifications mapping, it already contains the information RFPs depend on. Skills are mapped at defined levels, linked to delivered work and certifications, and reviewed over time through everyday flows such as delivery reviews, development conversations, and one-to-ones. Availability and utilisation are visible alongside capability, rather than checked separately.

So when an RFP arrives, responders such as sales teams are not starting from scratch. They can search for consultants based on the skills and experience the client is asking for, see who is realistically available to deliver the work, and understand the trade-offs involved. From that same, current capability data, they can generate client-ready CVs that include not just skills, but also work experience, roles, education, and certifications.

The important shift is this: CVs are no longer the place where accuracy has to be recreated under pressure. They are generated from information that has already been kept up to date as part of how the organisation works.

That is what allows consultancies to respond faster, with better-matched teams, and with greater confidence in what they are putting forward.

Conclusion

Once you look at the problem this way, the solution is clear.

The challenge consulting firms face while responding to RFPs is not primarily a CV problem. It is a skills and capability visibility problem. CVs are simply where that problem becomes visible under pressure.

As long as consultant capability lives across documents, folders, and people’s heads, RFP responses will remain reactive. Teams will continue to rely on what is easiest to assemble, rather than what best represents the firm’s current strengths. Even well-intentioned improvements to templates or storage will only ever deliver incremental gains.

MuchSkills’ CV Inventory represents a different operating model. It treats skills, certifications, and experience as organisational data that is maintained continuously through normal delivery and development work. CVs are no longer the mechanism for keeping information up to date. They are the output generated from that information when it is needed.

Importantly, this does not add another administrative layer. It works because skills, certifications, and experience are maintained as part of normal delivery and development flows, not as a separate CV maintenance exercise.

That shift matters beyond pre-sales. When firms have a trusted, current view of capability, they can make better decisions about what work to pursue, how to staff it, and what they can confidently sell. They reduce risk in delivery, avoid over-committing scarce expertise, and respond to opportunities with speed and clarity rather than urgency and guesswork.

In that sense, CV Inventory is not about producing better CVs. It is about aligning what consulting firms sell with what they can actually deliver, based on real, current capability.

For firms operating in increasingly competitive, skills-driven markets, that alignment is no longer optional. It is foundational.

If this reflects challenges you recognise, you can read more about how CV Inventory works here.