Compare custom software proposals against the same workflows, acceptance criteria and operating responsibilities before comparing price. Identify included work, exclusions, assumptions, customer effort and recurring costs. A lower headline figure may represent a smaller release rather than a more efficient delivery plan. This guide is a comparison method, not a market price benchmark.
Let’s plan your software project brief.
Bring your workflow, constraints and open questions. We’ll help you define the scope and work through the next decision.
Give suppliers a common baseline
Provide the same version of the brief, example workflows and known constraints. Answer material scope questions consistently across candidates. Otherwise each supplier may price a different interpretation of the idea while appearing to quote for the same product.
Ask candidates to identify uncertainty rather than burying it. An unconfirmed migration source or third-party API should appear as an assumption, investigation task or excluded item with a decision path.
Build an inclusions and assumptions matrix
| Comparison area | Ask each supplier to state | Why it changes the comparison |
|---|---|---|
| User workflows | Included roles, journeys and exception states | A module name may conceal different scope |
| Design | Research, prototype and responsive states included | Design effort and review cycles differ |
| Integrations | Interfaces, access assumptions and failure handling | Happy-path connections omit operating work |
| Data migration | Entities, transformation and acceptance checks | Importing a file is not complete migration scope |
| Quality | Security, accessibility and test responsibilities | Quality claims need a defined evaluation scope |
| Launch | Environments, deployment and acceptance process | A delivered repository may not be an operating product |
| Support and ownership | Coverage, accounts, licences and handover | Ongoing control and cost can differ materially |
| Commercials | Fees, tax treatment, payment stages and change rules | Headline price is only part of the commitment |
Use Included, Excluded, Assumed or Needs clarification in each cell, with a reference to the proposal section. Avoid a simple tick when the underlying promise is ambiguous.
Normalise differences before scoring
Consider two hypothetical proposals. One includes data migration, a staging environment and a support transition; the other excludes them. Ask for comparable scope or record the additional work and responsible party. Do not invent a monetary adjustment where no quote exists.
Review customer effort too. If your team must prepare data, write acceptance cases or manage infrastructure, assign an owner and realistic capacity. A dependency can affect delivery even when it does not appear on the supplier's invoice.
Check evidence and commercial fit
Ask how the supplier will demonstrate progress and handle changed requirements. Review relevant delivery methods, the proposed team and a permitted example of working evidence. Testimonials and attractive screens do not establish that your integration or migration is understood.
Compare recurring services over the same period and state the assumptions. Keep a list of unresolved questions before making the selection. Have contractual terms reviewed by a qualified adviser where appropriate; this worksheet does not replace that review.
Proposal questions
Should we choose the lowest quote after normalising scope?
Price remains one input alongside delivery credibility, team fit, operational responsibility and commercial risk. Agree the selection criteria before scoring candidates.
What if a supplier cannot give a precise total yet?
Ask which uncertainty prevents it and what bounded discovery would resolve it. Precision without a credible basis is not a stronger estimate.
Use the requirements guide and contract model comparison, then bring a common brief to a Drema software consultation.
