What we solve ·Should I approve what is on my desk?
Vanguard · Guide
Does the return on that investment survive an independent review?
The business case was built by the person selling it to me.
A verdict from someone who takes no commission, with the exact assumption that would have to fail for the numbers to stop working.
Investment verdictSend this page to whoever decides
This sounds like you if
- The return case was built by whoever is selling to you.
- The committee sent the case back asking for numbers the vendor's proposal does not carry.
- The cost of operating that in year three does not appear in the proposal.
Use this today, without hiring anyone
The five costs the vendor's proposal does not carry. Look for them in the one in front of you before calling anyone: if three or more are missing, the return case is incomplete and you know it on your own.
- Operation, year two through five. Who maintains it, how many hours a month and at what cost. It is rarely there.
- The people who keep it running. The profile you have to hire or free up, and what happens if that person leaves.
- Integration with what you already have. Not the license: the work of connecting it, and the work that repeats every time something changes version.
- Exit cost. What it costs to switch it off in year three and take the data out. If nobody can answer that, the dependence is part of the price.
- The cost of not doing it. What is being lost today, calculated with the same rigor. Without that figure there is no comparison, there is one option presented as inevitable.
One question is worth the whole analysis. What assumption has to fail, and by how much, for this to stop being justified? If the vendor cannot answer it, they do not have a model, they have a spreadsheet.
How we solve it
The method, not the promise.
- The proposal and the internal case get read, and the assumptions get listed one by one with the name of whoever supplied them.
- The missing costs get filled in, which are the ones for operation and for exit.
- The sensitivity gets run until the breaking point is found: which assumption, and by how much.
- One session with your team to validate assumptions, before anything gets written.
- The verdict in two pages: do it, do not do it, or do it differently, with the condition that would change it.
What you receive
- A written two page verdict for the committee.
- The return and total cost model, editable, with the assumptions open and attributed.
- The sensitivity table with the breaking point marked.
- The cost of not doing it, calculated with the same rigor as the cost of doing it.
The proof that applies here
- Regional infrastructure budget management in banking.
- Two corporate products taken to the Gartner Magic Quadrant, assessed by an independent analyst.
- 19 years selling from HPE and IBM and buying from Citi: how the return case gets built on the other side is known here.
Before you hire
The model gets built with the numbers you provide; every assumption stays attributed to whoever supplied it, so the committee knows whose each number is.
The return case for this purchase has already been done by someone who wins if you buy. What is missing is a check from someone who gains nothing from the answer: the firm does not resell technology and takes no commission from any vendor, and that is in writing.
Where did the return figure on your table come from, and who calculated it?
If the problem is a different one
I have a call to make this week and almost everyone with an opinion has something to gain from the answer.
Verdict Session
The integrator says it works and I am the one who signs.
Independent implementation review
The vendor's dashboard shows green and the operation keeps going down.
Vendor contract and performance audit