Vendor & Technology Evaluation Matrix
Create structured evaluation matrices for vendor and technology selection with weighted scoring and recommendation reports.
You're evaluating 8 CRM vendors and every salesperson claims they're the best fit. Without a structured evaluation matrix, the decision comes down to whoever gave the best demo — not who actually meets your requirements. Weighted scoring with defined criteria turns vendor selection from politics into defensible analysis.
Who it's for: IT directors leading technology selection processes, procurement managers evaluating vendor proposals, CTOs comparing build-vs-buy options for platform decisions, operations leaders selecting service providers, project managers running vendor evaluation committees
Example
"Evaluate 6 project management tools for our 200-person org" → Evaluation package: weighted criteria matrix with 15 requirements scored by importance, vendor scorecards with evidence for each rating, total cost of ownership comparison, risk assessment per vendor, recommendation report with rationale, and a stakeholder presentation summarizing the analysis
New here? 3-minute setup guide → | Already set up? Copy the template below.
# Vendor & Technology Evaluation Matrix
## Your Role
You are an expert procurement and technology analyst. Your job is to create objective, structured evaluation frameworks for vendor and technology selection.
## Core Principles
- Define and weight criteria before evaluating options
- Include total cost of ownership, not just license cost
- Score independently, then calibrate as a group
- Separate must-haves from nice-to-haves
- End with a clear recommendation and rationale
## Instructions
Produce: requirements matrix, weighted scoring, risk assessment, TCO analysis, reference check guide, and recommendation report.
## Commands
- "Evaluation matrix for [vendors]" - Structured comparison
- "TCO analysis" - Total cost over 3 years
- "Reference questions" - Vendor reference interview guide
- "Recommendation report" - Final pick with rationale
Get new playbooks like this one
One email a week with new Claude Code workflows. Free, like everything here.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
What This Does
Creates structured evaluation frameworks for comparing vendors or technologies — weighted scoring matrices, requirement mapping, risk assessment, and stakeholder-ready recommendation reports.
Quick Start
Step 1: Download the Template
Click Download above to get the CLAUDE.md file.
Step 2: Define Requirements
List: must-have requirements, nice-to-haves, evaluation criteria, and vendors to compare.
Step 3: Start Using It
claude
Say: "Create an evaluation matrix comparing 4 CRM vendors against our requirements. Weight cost 30%, features 30%, integration 25%, support 15%."
Evaluation Components
| Component | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Requirements Matrix | Must-have vs. nice-to-have mapping |
| Weighted Scoring | Numerical comparison with weighted criteria |
| Risk Assessment | Vendor-specific risks and mitigations |
| TCO Analysis | Total cost of ownership over 3 years |
| Reference Check Guide | Questions to ask vendor references |
| Recommendation Report | Final pick with supporting rationale |
Tips
- Weight criteria before evaluating vendors: Prevents unconscious bias toward a favorite
- Include total cost of ownership: License is just the start — migration, training, and support matter
- Get stakeholder buy-in on criteria first: Agreement on what matters prevents post-decision arguments
- Score independently then calibrate: Each evaluator scores alone, then group discusses
Commands
"Create an evaluation matrix for [N] vendors against these requirements"
"Calculate total cost of ownership for each option over 3 years"
"Generate reference check questions for the top 2 vendors"
"Create a recommendation report with clear rationale"
Troubleshooting
Scores are too close Ask: "Force-rank on the top 3 differentiating criteria only"
Stakeholders disagree Present: "Show each stakeholder's individual scores side-by-side to surface disagreements"
Missing a key dimension Add: "Include vendor financial stability and long-term viability"