You’ve sent the RFP. Five proposals come back. Every one is polished, every one says “we’re uniquely positioned,” and now you have to choose, often with a board or a steering committee watching. Without a framework, the decision drifts toward whoever presented most smoothly. With one, it becomes defensible and repeatable. And the stakes earn the effort: large IT projects run, on average, 45% over budget and deliver 56% less value than predicted (McKinsey), and the vendor you choose here is where much of that fate gets decided.
Score across four dimensions, and weight them before you read a word.
- Technical fit (typically 35 to 40%). Does the architecture match your real constraints: scale, integrations, data residency, security posture? Score the evidence, not the claim. In our experience, a named, comparable deployment beats a beautiful diagram every time.
- Delivery track record (25 to 30%). Has this team, the actual named engineers and not the brand, shipped something like this on time in a comparable environment? Call the references yourself, not the three they curated for you.
- Total cost of ownership (20 to 25%). Licensing, implementation, integration, support, and the cost of leaving. In our experience, the lowest sticker price often hides the highest five-year cost.
- Risk and dependency (10 to 15%). What happens if they’re late? If a key person leaves? If you want to switch later? Lock-in is a cost even when it never bites.
Here’s the framework as a picture. Four weighted inputs, one score, one decision you can stand behind.
flowchart LR A(["Technical fit, 35 to 40 percent"]) --> S(["Weighted total score"]) B(["Delivery track record, 25 to 30 percent"]) --> S C(["Total cost of ownership, 20 to 25 percent"]) --> S D(["Risk and dependency, 10 to 15 percent"]) --> S S --> R(["A defensible recommendation"])
Make it numeric, then make it conversational. Each evaluator scores independently first. Averaging before discussion stops the loudest voice in the room from anchoring everyone. Then you talk through the gaps. The disagreements are where the real insight lives.
Watch for three classic traps. The demo that was built only to pass your demo. The price that’s low because the scope quietly excludes the hard parts. And the “strategic partnership” framing that’s really a sales relationship in nicer clothing.
The output isn’t just a winner. It’s a record. For regulated and public-sector buyers, that scored, documented reasoning is what makes the award defensible if anyone ever challenges it.
Proposals on your desk and no clean way to compare them? SDCG scores technology proposals as an independent third party and hands you a defensible recommendation, with the working shown. Book a free 30-minute review and bring your shortlist.
Sources