Translate your volumes, order profile, facility constraints and integration needs into requirements every supplier must answer the same way.
Identify suppliers whose technology fits the requirements, rather than starting from whoever called first.
Structure the request so proposals arrive comparable: common scope, stated assumptions and itemized pricing.
Normalize scope and exclusions, check reference sites and test throughput and labor assumptions against your data.
Support the conversation on performance commitments, acceptance criteria, service levels and expansion pricing.
Illustrative sample — not client work
This blank framework shows how suppliers can be compared on consistent criteria. No supplier has been scored or ranked here.
| Evaluation criterion | Example weight | Evidence required before scoring |
|---|---|---|
| Operational and throughput fit | 30% | Representative order data, peak-volume test and acceptance criteria |
| Integration and facility readiness | 25% | Interface responsibilities, infrastructure requirements and integration plan |
| Five-year cost of ownership | 20% | Comparable itemized pricing, exclusions, recurring costs and expansion costs |
| Implementation and support | 15% | Delivery plan, escalation process, service levels and reference checks |
| Commercial and delivery risk | 10% | Milestones, warranties, change control and performance commitments |
Illustrative weights total 100%; agree project-specific weights before reviewing bids. Rate validated evidence from 1 (weak fit) to 5 (strong fit). Weighted total = sum of weight × score ÷ 5. Mark missing evidence “Not assessed,” not zero. Must-have safety and acceptance criteria are gates, not trade-offs against price.
Tell us the technology and where you are in the process. We start with an initial screening conversation.