The buyer decision
Judge the confidence of vendor-fit evidence, excluding the Workflowfield vendor-evaluation sequence and generic procurement policy.
Criteria & methodologyA useful demo scorecard distinguishes what the buyer saw from what the supplier said would work. A feature checklist with every box ticked does not establish that a product fits the required configuration.
The framework below is an editorial decision aid. It is not a benchmark, an industry standard or a tested scoring model.
Record evidence states before totals
| Evidence state | Meaning for the decision |
|---|---|
| Demonstrated in proposed configuration | Relevant behavior observed under the intended conditions |
| Documented for proposed edition | Official source supports the requirement; demonstration remains open |
| Supplier assurance only | Claim recorded without sufficient supporting evidence |
| Unresolved | Requirement has not been established |
| Does not fit the demonstrated condition | Specific gap identified for the buyer’s scenario |
Avoid converting all five states into an arbitrary numeric average. A critical unresolved requirement should remain visible even if many optional features look impressive.
Make the requirement observable
Instead of asking whether a product has permissions, describe the action one participant must perform and another must be unable to perform.
Ziflow’s reviewer permission documentation supplies a concrete example: review permissions distinguish commenting, decisions and management actions. A statement that the product supports reviewers is less precise than identifying the actual permission needed.
The example illustrates evidence specificity. It is not a recommendation that every buyer needs proofing software or those exact roles.
Use the same proof request across candidates
Give each supplier the same harmless scenario, proposed edition and participant conditions. Ask for the outcome supporting the requirement, then record the evidence state and source.
Include an exception, such as a participant who must comment without making the final decision. Inspect the actual setting rather than accepting an administrator’s unrestricted demo account as representative of every user.
Where a supplier cannot demonstrate the proposed package, keep that limitation in the scorecard. Do not silently upgrade the evidence state after a promising presentation.
Decide with the unresolved requirement visible
A candidate can remain on the shortlist while a non-critical question is open. A mandatory capability should not be treated as established solely because the supplier expects it to work.
The scorecard should explain the buyer’s confidence and next evidence needed. It need not create a single winner before the relevant facts are known.
No hands-on evaluation is claimed by this publication. The proposed method helps the buyer record their own evaluation. Browse the Buying Evidence hub or see the Filestage and Ziflow comparison for a concrete selection job.