Vendor due diligence for software decisions

Go / No-Go vendor decisions backed by evidence.

EvidenceOps replaces the missing internal research analyst for software and vendor decisions. You get a short decision brief, a traceable evidence sheet, and the next checks required to defend the recommendation internally.

Request scope View demo decision

VerdictThe vendor call, stated plainly

EvidenceA source-ranked claim ledger

RiskBudget, control, compliance, lock-in

Next moveQuestions your team can send today

Visible output

Example review: Notion for a 25 to 60 person team

A concrete verdict, three decisive claims, and the sheet behind the recommendation. No invented logos needed.

Open full demo case

C-017

Enterprise pricing is request-based and has no public standard pricing.

Pricing & TCO | quote needed for 60 seats

C-023

Export is available, but exit quality is still unknown.

Lock-in signal | pilot test required

C-033

Subprocessor geography needs internal acceptance.

Compliance surface | primary-source mapped

Evidence sheet preview from the demo review.

Demo libraryThree review depths, one decision format.

Rapid ScreenNotion knowledge-base rollout

Pilot is defensible. Full rollout waits on plan fit, export quality, control availability, and internal acceptance of subprocessors.

Open demo Standard DecisionFireflies.ai meeting intelligence approval

Use is plausible for non-sensitive meetings. Broad rollout requires documented retention rules, data-risk sign-off, and a narrow pilot policy.

Open demo Deep ReviewHubSpot renewal and replacement decision

Renewal can be justified only if pricing, must-have controls, migration fallback, and implementation effort are accepted against named alternatives.

Open demo

What gets solved

The work is not collecting more facts. It is knowing which facts decide the risk.

Budget exposure

Seat growth, plan limits, add-ons, and renewal exposure are pulled out of the pricing page and made decision-relevant.

Control fit

SSO, audit logs, SCIM, admin roles, and export paths are checked against the rollout your team actually needs.

Internal defensibility

Claims, contradictions, source quality, and open questions become a recommendation people can challenge and still understand.

Decision brief

Built for the internal review moment.

Short enough to circulate. Structured enough to answer the first objections from finance, operations, procurement, and technical reviewers.

VerdictGo / No-Go / conditional recommendation

WhyThe few facts that actually move the decision

Risk frameBudget, controls, compliance, lock-in, rollout

UnresolvedWhat is still unknown, and why it matters

VerificationOwner-ready checks for the vendor call or pilot

Use cases

EvidenceOps is most useful when a tool decision is already moving.

The review is not a generic research project. It fits moments where a team needs a clear answer before a rollout, renewal, migration, or approval meeting.

Before AI tool rollout

Clarify data use, training, retention, admin controls, subprocessors, and allowed use cases before adoption spreads.

Use the AI checklist

Before SaaS renewal

Check whether the current vendor still fits budget, controls, usage growth, export needs, and switching risk.

Request a risk screen

Before CRM or knowledge base migration

Separate feature appeal from plan gates, permissions, data portability, implementation load, and future lock-in.

View demo decision

Before procurement approval

Give Finance, Ops, IT, or founders a brief they can review instead of another link list.

Use the decision template

Before vendor Q&A

Send sharper questions on pricing, DPA, audit logs, export, subprocessors, and unresolved claims.

Get vendor questions

Method

A repeatable review system, not open-ended consulting.

Decision frame

Vendor, use case, budget, must-haves, deadline, known concerns.

Evidence pull

Pricing, docs, trust center, DPA/privacy, terms, status, external signals.

Claim ledger

Source quality, confidence, impact, likelihood, contradictions, follow-up need.

Verdict brief

Decision, reasons, risk frame, unresolved questions, verification queue.

Packages

Review depth matched to decision risk.

The packages are framed around decision exposure: fast triage, internal approval, or materially expensive mistakes.

Final prices. VAT is not shown under the German small-business rule (§ 19 UStG).

24h

Rapid Screen

EUR 300

Fast triage before a vendor consumes the week.

1 vendor / tool
6-10 top sources
15-30 evidence claims
Red flags and dealbreakers
1-2 page decision note
Evidence sheet

Scope guard: No market scan. No comparison matrix. Alternatives only if provided or booked as add-on.

Request Rapid Screen

48hRecommended

Standard Decision

EUR 900

A defendable vendor decision for internal review.

1 primary vendor
12-25 top sources
40-80 evidence claims
3-5 page decision brief
TCO traps and plan-fit risks
Conflict and uncertainty block
Evidence sheet
Verification queue

Scope guard: Comparison matrix optional when named alternatives are in scope.

Request Standard Decision

5 business days

Deep Review

EUR 2,200

For decisions where being wrong is materially expensive.

1 primary vendor plus named alternatives
25-60 top sources
100-200 evidence claims
6-12 page decision brief
Risk matrix
DPA / SLA / SOC 2 evidence review
Evidence sheet
Comparison matrix

Scope guard: Not legal advice. Not penetration testing. Not contract redlining.

Request Deep Review

Trust boundaries

Clear scope makes the recommendation more credible.

Inside scope

Decision support, evidence mapping, risk framing, verification queue.

Outside scope

Legal advice, security certification, penetration testing, contract redlining.

Clock starts

After scope confirmation and receipt of required inputs.

Source base

Public sources plus customer- or vendor-provided documents.

Confidential material

Non-public customer documents are only processed after scope-level agreement.

AI handling

No confidential customer data is entered into external AI tools without explicit approval.

Deliverables

Decision brief as PDF, evidence sheet as table according to agreed scope.

Sharing

Internal stakeholders and named advisors can be explicitly included in scope.

Fit

Built for teams that need a decision others can review.

Good fit

20-200 employee teams
Software, AI, ops, knowledge, procurement, or vendor tooling
Budget, controls, compliance, or lock-in matter
The decision must survive internal review
No internal analyst capacity

Not a fit

You only need a feature list
The decision is already made
Price is the only criterion
You need legal advice
You need technical security testing
You expect a full market scan inside a Rapid Screen

Free decision assets

Use the structure before you ask for a vendor review.

Vendor Due Diligence Checklist

The questions to answer before pilot, procurement, or rollout.

AI Tool Approval Checklist

Review data, training, retention, controls, and rollout conditions.

Go / No-Go Brief Template

Turn vendor research into an internally defensible decision.

12 Vendor Questions

Questions on pricing, DPA, controls, export, and unresolved claims before approval.

View all guides and assets

Request scope

Get the right review level before you pay.

Send the vendor, use case, main concern, and deadline. You receive a package recommendation, scope assumptions, and required inputs by email.

Scope fitWhich review level fits?

Decision stage

Deadline

Primary risk

Needed output

Recommended pathStandard Decision

Best when the vendor decision needs to be defended in internal review.

Use this recommendation in the scope request

Scope reply includesPackage recommendationAssumptions and exclusionsRequired inputs

Example scope replyRecommended package: Standard Decision

Assumptions

1 vendor, defined use case, public sources plus provided documents.

Required checks

DPA, export, SSO/audit logs, subprocessors, pricing gates.

Needed inputs

Vendor links, budget range, must-haves, deadline, existing notes.