Add Q1–Q15 for a raw score out of 45. Then apply the mandatory gates below. These bands are editorial routing thresholds, not probabilities of implementation success.
| Raw score | Readiness band | What it means in this rubric | Recommended next step |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0–14 | Establish the foundations | Too much of the buying brief is unowned, undefined or unsupported. | Approve a sponsor, first workflow and responsibility model. Use the Minimum Viable GRC Scope Builder specification to produce a scope charter before seeking comparable proposals. |
| 15–26 | Build the buying case | There is a credible problem, but suppliers would still need to make substantial assumptions. | Complete the Requirements Scorecard, Migration Readiness X-Ray and preliminary TCO Calculator. Limit supplier engagement to discovery against explicit questions. |
| 27–35 | Prepare a controlled shortlist | Much of the brief is documented, but material weaknesses need targeted attention. | Close failed gates, investigate the weakest domain and issue the same workflow requirements to each candidate. Prepare an Integration Check and buyer-specific Demo Script. |
| 36–45 | Ready for rigorous supplier evaluation | The buyer has assembled a strong evaluation brief and evidence base for the defined scope. | Run scenario demonstrations, technical proof, implementation scoping, reference checks and commercial due diligence. Use an Operating Plan and Exit Planner before final commitment. |
Tool names identify recommended desk worksheets or outputs. No landing-page availability is assumed; the evidence requirements in this quiz can be used to build them internally.
Which mandatory gates override the score?
If any listed question scores below 2, label the result “Readiness hold” and identify the failing gate. You may continue research and bounded discovery, but this rubric does not recommend advancing to a scored shortlist or preferred-supplier decision until the gate is closed.
| Gate | Questions that must each score at least 2 | Required correction |
|---|---|---|
| Mandate and scope | Q1, Q2 | Establish accountable sponsorship and approve the first-release boundary. |
| Accountability and ongoing ownership | Q3, Q11 | Resolve process responsibilities and provide an operating owner with a funded sourcing plan. |
| Security preparation | Q7 | Approve workflow-specific security requirements and the due-diligence route. |
| Delivery capacity | Q10 | Allocate buyer-side work and document dependencies. |
| Affordability preparation | Q13 | Create the ownership-cost model and identify the funding route. |
Illustrative result: a team scores 39/45, but Q7 scores zero because sensitive findings have not been classified. Its result is “39/45 — Readiness hold: security preparation”, not “ready to buy”. The next action is to approve the information-handling requirements, not to use the remaining points to offset the gap.
Closing a gate means producing the missing evidence and rescoring the question. It is not a verbal waiver. Any actual contractual or regulatory decision remains with the organisation’s authorised owners.