Skip to main content

AI Vendor Evaluation Framework

Overview​

The AI Vendor Evaluation Framework is a systematic methodology for Fortune 500 executives to assess and select AI vendors. Unlike traditional software procurement, AI tools require evaluation across six critical dimensions that determine long-term success and organizational impact.

Why This Framework Exists​

AI procurement is fundamentally different from traditional software buying. The stakes are higher, the risks are less obvious, and the vendors often hide critical details behind "proprietary" claims. This framework cuts through the marketing noise to focus on what actually matters for enterprise deployment.

The Six Evaluation Criteria​

The framework evaluates vendors across six dimensions, represented by the acronym SCULLS (SEE, CHANGE, USE, LEAVE, LEARN, SCALE):

1. SEE - Transparency​

Can you see how it works? Visibility into system prompts, models, retrieval mechanisms, and decision-making processes.

Why it matters: You can't govern, audit, or trust what you can't see.

2. CHANGE - Control​

Can you control it? Ability to customize prompts, swap models, configure behavior, and maintain deployment flexibility.

Why it matters: Generic AI tools rarely fit enterprise workflows without customization.

3. USE - Usability & Output Quality​

Is it actually useful? Real-world output quality, user adoption rates, and practical value delivered.

Why it matters: The only metric that truly determines ROI.

4. ADAPT - Future-Proofing​

Can it evolve? Support for latest models, autonomy controls, standard integrations, and architectural flexibility.

Why it matters: AI landscape changes monthly. Your vendor must keep pace.

5. LEAVE - Exit Strategy​

Can you exit gracefully? Data portability, knowledge retention, migration paths, and vendor lock-in risks.

Why it matters: Your ability to leave is your negotiating power.

6. LEARN - Capability Building​

Does it build internal capability? Skills transfer, documentation quality, training resources, and team development.

Why it matters: Tools should reduce dependencies, not create them.

How to Use This Framework​

  1. Start an Evaluation: Use the interactive tool to answer 20 questions (3-4 per criterion)
  2. Review Category Grades: Each criterion receives a color-coded grade (Green/Yellow/Red/Grey)
  3. Generate Reports: Export comprehensive PDFs or Markdown reports for stakeholders
  4. Compare Vendors: Use pre-analyzed examples as benchmarks

Grading System​

  • 🟢 Green: Strong performance, no significant concerns
  • 🟡 Yellow: Acceptable with caveats or mixed results
  • 🔴 Red: Critical issues or deal-breakers identified
  • ⚪ Grey: Insufficient information to make determination

Critical questions are marked with 🔴. A "No" answer to any critical question automatically grades the category as Red.

Quick Start​

Ready to evaluate your first vendor?

Start Evaluation →

Pre-analyzed vendor examples coming soon.

Framework Philosophy​

This framework is built on three core principles:

  1. Transparency over Marketing: We prioritize vendors who show their work
  2. Long-term Value over Short-term Wins: Quick wins that create dependencies are red flags
  3. Evidence-based Assessment: Vague claims are insufficient; we require proof

Next Steps​