Workflow software scorecard
A fictional requirements trial built around a four-site rollout. Scores record observed trial evidence, not general product claims or a buying recommendation.
Scenario MS-031 · Juniper Dental (fictional). Candidate “Platform A” is an unnamed fictional evaluation target. Its scores do not describe Spectra or any real supplier.
Weighted evaluation
0 not shown · 1 weak · 5 strong| Requirement | Weight | Trial score | Weighted result | Observed evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site-level scope and status | 5 | 4 | 20 | Trial kept four site records under one fictional job |
| Proof and revision control | 5 | 3 | 15 | Current proof visible; superseded export required manual check |
| Owner / next-action visibility | 4 | 4 | 16 | Each open dependency had one named owner |
| Exception reporting | 4 | 2 | 8 | Pilot variance could be logged but cross-site view was unclear |
| Data export | 3 | 3 | 9 | CSV opened successfully; attachment export not tested |
| Total | 21 | — | 68 / 105 | Decision deferred pending open tests |
Unknowns and decision
Trial owner: operations lead| Unknown / assumption | Owner | Next test |
|---|---|---|
| Role permissions were not tested beyond two fictional roles | Security reviewer | Run the agreed role matrix with synthetic records |
| Attachment retention and deletion behaviour is unknown | Data owner | Obtain current supplier evidence and test in approved environment |
| Score assumes pilot users completed the same scripted tasks | Trial owner | Reconcile notes before comparison |
Decision: no selection. Resolve role, data and exception-reporting unknowns before comparing total cost or accepting terms.