Choose between options

Vendor Selection

Compare suppliers, vendors, or partners across key decision criteria. Useful for procurement, outsourcing, technology purchasing, and partnership evaluation. The criteria can be changed, added to and weighted.

What the framework is

Vendor selection compares a shortlist of suppliers against the criteria that matter to you, each given a weight. The output is a ranked shortlist with a visible reason for the winner. That reason is what you'll need when someone asks, six months later, why this supplier was chosen.

What the result looks like

EXAMPLE
Which supplier should we contract?
Top ranked
Northwind Supplies
Cost Effectiveness 92% · 1st
Reliability 63% · 1st
Quality 38% · 3rd
Support 75% · 1st
Strategic Fit 50% · 2nd
63%
Weighted win rate

Overall

Options Weighted win rate
01
Northwind Supplies
Cost Effectiveness 1st · Reliability 1st · Quality 3rd · Support 1st · Strategic Fit 2nd
63%
02
Harbour Logistics
Cost Effectiveness 2nd · Reliability 2nd · Quality 1st · Support 3rd · Strategic Fit 1st
52%
03
Summit Partners
Cost Effectiveness 3rd · Reliability 3rd · Quality 2nd · Support 2nd · Strategic Fit 3rd
35%

Overall with the criteria

Rank
Options
Cost Effectiveness
20%
Reliability
20%
Quality
20%
Support
20%
Strategic Fit
20%
Overall
Weighted win rate
01 Northwind Supplies
92%
1st
63%
1st
38%
3rd
75%
1st
50%
2nd
63%
02 Harbour Logistics
42%
2nd
58%
2nd
71%
1st
33%
3rd
54%
1st
52%
03 Summit Partners
17%
3rd
29%
3rd
42%
2nd
42%
2nd
46%
3rd
35%

By the options

01 · Northwind Supplies 63% weighted win rate
–
Cost Effectiveness
92%
1st of 3 · 22 Wins · 2 Losses
–
Reliability
63%
1st of 3 · 15 Wins · 9 Losses
–
Quality
38%
3rd of 3 · 9 Wins · 15 Losses
–
Support
75%
1st of 3 · 18 Wins · 6 Losses
–
Strategic Fit
50%
2nd of 3 · 12 Wins · 12 Losses
02 · Harbour Logistics 52% weighted win rate
–
Cost Effectiveness
42%
2nd of 3 · 10 Wins · 14 Losses
–
Reliability
58%
2nd of 3 · 14 Wins · 10 Losses
–
Quality
71%
1st of 3 · 17 Wins · 7 Losses
–
Support
33%
3rd of 3 · 8 Wins · 16 Losses
–
Strategic Fit
54%
1st of 3 · 13 Wins · 11 Losses
03 · Summit Partners 35% weighted win rate
–
Cost Effectiveness
17%
3rd of 3 · 4 Wins · 20 Losses
–
Reliability
29%
3rd of 3 · 7 Wins · 17 Losses
–
Quality
42%
2nd of 3 · 10 Wins · 14 Losses
–
Support
42%
2nd of 3 · 10 Wins · 14 Losses
–
Strategic Fit
46%
3rd of 3 · 11 Wins · 13 Losses
Scoring Explanations
CRITERIA WEIGHTINGS — The % weighting for each criterion is shown in the table header. Unless this was entered in the setup, the weighting is equal across criteria.
WEIGHTED WIN RATE — Each criterion's result, in the measure they share, averaged using the assigned weightings.

When it earns its place

Use it after proposals are in and you have three to six real candidates: software, agencies, venues, caterers, consultants. The template starts with five criteria; rename them to fit your purchase.

Two things usually go wrong. One person fills in the scoring sheet alone, so the people who'll use the product never get a say. Or the weights get adjusted after the scores are in, until the favourite wins.

How to run it with a group

  1. Agree the criteria and their weights before anyone sees how the vendors score. Write them down.
  2. Add the shortlisted vendors as the options.
  3. Invite everyone the choice affects: budget holder, daily users, IT or operations, and whoever manages the contract.
  4. Each person compares the vendors two at a time on each criterion. Participants do not need an account to respond.
  5. Read the overall ranking, then the ranking per criterion. A vendor that wins overall but comes last on one criterion needs a conversation before you sign.

Answer a short example

Get started