Vendor evaluation scorecard with weighted criteria for a 6-figure software purchase

# Vendor Evaluation Scorecard — Customer Data Platform **Category:** CDP for mid-market B2B SaaS **Budget:** $180k–$300k annual **Stakeholders:** Marketing Ops (primary), Engineering, Data, Security, Finance --- ## Weighted Criteria (Total 100 points) | Dimension | Weight | Rationale | |---|---|---| | Product fit and core features | 25 | This is why we are buying | | Integration ecosystem | 15 | 70% of value comes from connected tools | | Time to value | 15 | We need to be in production within 90 days | | Security and compliance | 15 | SOC 2, GDPR, PII handling are hard blockers | | Total cost of ownership (3-year) | 15 | Hidden costs routinely double sticker price | | Vendor viability and support | 15 | Implementation partners and roadmap confidence | --- ## Scoring Scale with Anchors ### Product Fit - **5** — Covers every must-have and 80% of nice-to-haves out of the box - **4** — Covers all must-haves, requires light config for nice-to-haves - **3** — Covers must-haves with documented workarounds - **2** — Missing one must-have that requires custom engineering - **1** — Missing multiple must-haves ### Integration Ecosystem - **5** — Native integrations with 100% of our current stack and 2+ on our roadmap - **4** — Native for current stack, roadmap items via API - **3** — Covers current stack, some via middleware - **2** — Requires custom integration work for key tools - **1** — Closed ecosystem or poor API docs ### Time to Value - **5** — Production use case live in 30 days with vendor professional services - **3** — 60–90 days with standard implementation - **1** — 6+ months or requires internal engineering sprint ### Security and Compliance - **5** — SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, GDPR DPA ready, EU data residency - **3** — SOC 2 Type II, can sign our DPA with minor edits - **1** — Only self-attestation, no third-party audit ### Total Cost of Ownership (3-year) - Score inversely proportional to all-in cost including implementation, training, and staffing ### Vendor Viability - **5** — Public or late-stage, clear roadmap, named customer reference at our stage - **3** — Series B/C, lukewarm references - **1** — Early-stage, no comparable customer references --- ## Stakeholder Weighting | Criterion | Primary Scorer | Secondary Scorer | |---|---|---| | Product fit | Marketing Ops | Data | | Integrations | Engineering | Marketing Ops | | Time to value | Marketing Ops | Engineering | | Security | Security | Engineering | | TCO | Finance | Procurement lead | | Vendor viability | Procurement lead | Marketing Ops | The primary scorer's number is the number of record. Secondary scorers can flag if they would have scored 2+ points different — that triggers a discussion before the final meeting. --- ## Dealbreakers (Override Any Score) - Cannot sign our DPA without redlines we consider unacceptable - No SOC 2 Type II report available - Requires more than 1 FTE in year one to maintain - Pricing model penalizes growth (e.g. charges per contact above 2x expected volume) --- ## Final Decision Meeting Template 1. **Scores on screen** — each vendor's total and breakdown (5 min) 2. **Anomalies discussion** — any scores that varied significantly between primary and secondary scorers (15 min) 3. **Dealbreaker check** — any blockers that override the math (10 min) 4. **Reference check debrief** — what we heard from at least 2 customer references per finalist (15 min) 5. **Recommendation vote** — each voting stakeholder states their preference and one-sentence reason (10 min) 6. **Decision or next steps** — commit or name the specific follow-up needed The score is guidance, not verdict. The meeting is where judgment enters the process.