Vendor selection
Score suppliers on fit, total cost, delivery risk, local support and compliance, and keep the trail behind the award.
- Functional fit
- 3-year cost
- Implementation risk
- Data residency
Committee decisions you can defend.
Decision Studio turns a panel's judgments into one ranked recommendation, flags where members contradict themselves or each other, and shows exactly what would change the answer.
Built on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), a method used for decades in procurement, engineering and public policy.
- Vendor Beta0.796
- Vendor Gamma0.792
- Vendor Delta0.700
- Vendor Alpha0.574
The panel set it at 32.7%. Above 34.1%, Vendor Gamma overtakes Vendor Beta. Your memo states that threshold, so the committee knows how close the call is.
Most selections are decided by the loudest voice in the room
Then someone builds a spreadsheet to justify it. Structured multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) changes the order: agree what matters first, judge second, and let the arithmetic combine everyone fairly.
| Topic | The usual way | With Decision Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Weights | Someone types 30%, 25%, 20% into a sheet. Nobody remembers why. | Weights come from each member's pairwise answers, recorded and repeatable. |
| Contradictions | A beats B, B beats C, C beats A, and no one notices. | A consistency check flags it live and points to the answer to revisit. |
| Group views | The most senior or most vocal opinion wins. | Every member is heard, with influence set openly, and disagreement is shown, not hidden. |
| The result | “Vendor B scored 78.” Is that close? Nobody can say. | “B leads unless compliance weighs more than 34%.” You know how close the call is. |
| Afterwards | An audit asks why. The answer is in someone's memory. | A decision memo with the full trail: who judged what, and how it added up. |
How it works
Agree what matters
Describe the decision. AI drafts four to seven criteria that don't overlap; the panel edits and keeps what fits.
Weigh criteria two at a time
Invite each member by email or WhatsApp. On their own link they answer simple questions: is cost more important than delivery risk, and by how much?
Rate the options
Members rate each option on the judgement criteria. Prices, years and other hard numbers are entered once, with their source.
Get a defensible result
The panel's views are combined into one ranking, and the final report shows the disagreements, the open issues and the exact point at which the answer would change, ready to sign.
Which matters more for this decision, and by how much?
Total costData residency
“Data residency is strongly more important than cost” becomes a 5 on Saaty's 1–9 scale. People judge two things at a time far more reliably than they share out 100 points across ten.
Every kind of evidence, scored on one scale
Real decisions mix prices, facts and opinions. Each criterion says what kind of evidence it takes and which direction is better, so a cheap price and a long track record both count in your favour.
| Evidence | Example | How it scores |
|---|---|---|
| Number, lower is better | Price: 1,000 SAR vs 2,000 SAR | The cheapest scores 1.0; twice the price scores 0.5 |
| Number, higher is better | Experience: 8 years vs 4 years | The most scores 1.0; half as much scores 0.5 |
| Category | Colour: red preferred, blue acceptable, grey last | The panel sets each category's preference once; every option inherits it |
| Judgment | Quality of the proposal, communication in interview | Each member rates 1–5; ratings are combined across the panel |
Every number and category carries its source and a confirmed flag. Anything unconfirmed is listed as an open issue before sign-off.
One method, many decisions
Each example opens in the app with sample data, so you can change the judgments and watch the result move.
Hiring panels
Weigh the role's competencies before meeting anyone, then compare shortlisted candidates on evidence, not on who interviewed last.
- Technical skills
- Problem solving
- Stakeholder communication
- Experience
Project prioritization
Rank initiatives competing for one budget, and show the board why the third project missed the line.
- Strategic alignment
- Annual benefit
- Total cost
- Delivery risk
AI drafts and explains. People decide.
What the AI does
- Drafts criteria from a plain description of the decision
- Merges overlapping criteria so nobody is asked the same thing twice
- Writes the decision memo from the computed results
What it never does
- Make, suggest or adjust any judgment or score
- Rate people in hiring decisions
- Add facts that aren't in the panel's inputs
Designed for Saudi teams: Arabic interface and in-Kingdom hosting are on the roadmap, and hiring templates keep candidate data to job-related evidence only.
Bring your next shortlist
Start from a template or a blank decision. No sign-up for the demo. Your decision stays in your browser until you invite your panel.
Open Decision Studio