Enterprise AI Vendor Evaluation Scorecard
A free structured scoring tool for evaluating enterprise AI vendors across six weighted dimensions. Compare shortlisted vendors against the criteria that matter before you commit.
Enterprise AI vendor selection has a common failure mode. The shortlisted vendors are all capable. The evaluation runs for several weeks. Then the final decision gets made on who presented best, which sales team was most responsive, or which interface felt most intuitive during the demonstration.
Months after contract execution, the gaps that should have been caught during evaluation become deployment problems. Governance capability that was not assessed. A commercial model that scales poorly at enterprise volume. An integration architecture that does not fit the existing environment.
This scorecard is a structured tool for evaluating shortlisted enterprise AI vendors before you commit. It applies consistent weighted criteria across six dimensions, allows you to compare up to four vendors side by side, and produces a results summary you can share with stakeholders and use as a procurement record.
What the Scorecard Evaluates
The scorecard assesses each vendor across six dimensions. Weights are adjustable to reflect your organisation's specific deployment requirements and risk profile.
Functional Fit. Whether the vendor's platform performs reliably on your use cases, not just on the vendor's selected demonstration materials. Scoring focuses on output quality across representative inputs, consistency across repeated runs, and fit with your defined requirements rather than the vendor's marketed strengths.
Governance Capability. The controls available to your organisation for managing how AI is used, monitored, and updated. This is typically the most consequential dimension in enterprise deployments and the one most commonly underweighted during evaluation. Scoring covers audit logging, access controls, model update disclosure, version pinning, staging environment availability, and deprecation notice terms.
Commercial Model and TCO. Cost predictability at your projected usage profile, not just headline licence price. Scoring covers consumption exposure, exit cost, data portability provisions, and what is included in the proposed tier versus what requires an upgrade. Vendors with lower headline quotes but higher exposure to cost overruns or lock-in should score lower on this dimension than vendors whose total cost is higher but better controlled.
Integration and Architecture Fit. Whether the vendor's platform connects to your existing environment without significant custom build. Scoring covers pre-built connector availability, compatibility with your data architecture and identity infrastructure, and the quality of technical evidence provided for integrations in your specific environment.
Vendor Stability and Support. Confidence that the vendor can sustain the product and support your organisation over the contract term. Scoring covers enterprise support responsiveness based on reference feedback, product roadmap clarity, uptime track record, and terms that apply in the event of acquisition or product discontinuation.
Australian Context and Compliance. Data residency within Australia or in jurisdictions compatible with Australian Privacy Principles obligations, availability of Australian-based support, familiarity with the Australian regulatory environment, and willingness to engage with Australian-specific contract requirements.
How the Tool Works
Add the vendors you are evaluating. Score each vendor across the six dimensions using a 1 to 5 scale. Use the Adjust Weights tab to set the weighting for each dimension based on your organisation's priorities. The Results tab produces a weighted total for each vendor and a side-by-side comparison.
Vendor names are editable. You can score up to four vendors in a single session. The tool runs entirely in your browser and does not transmit or store any data.
When to Use This Tool
The scorecard is designed for use after shortlisting, once you have reduced the field to two or four vendors who have passed your non-functional requirements as gating criteria. Using a weighted scorecard at this stage, before vendor demonstrations have the opportunity to anchor your preferences, produces evaluation outcomes that reflect your requirements rather than vendor presentation quality.
If you have not yet defined your non-functional requirements or established your shortlisting criteria, the Enterprise AI Readiness Assessment is the recommended starting point.
Free for members. Create a free account to access this tool and all other tools on this site.