Program / operations
Own workflow fit, user outcomes, service levels, operational constraints, and acceptance of business behavior.
Use this toolkit to move from an unclear technology problem to documented requirements, comparable vendor evidence, an explainable selection, a controlled migration, and a credible exit path. Each stage links to a free Zeph Tech resource built for a specific decision.
The toolkit is product-neutral. It does not require ZephCMS and does not collect contact information to use the decision resources.
The sequence is intentionally not “RFP, demos, score, contract.” It starts earlier with operating context and continues later through migration and exit so the organization keeps leverage over the full lifecycle.
Capture current workflow, users, information sensitivity, desired outcomes, dependencies, constraints, and decision horizon before naming a preferred platform.
Translate the operating problem into requirement language and explicit evidence requests across workflow, security, privacy, records, migration, accessibility, delivery, reliability, and commercial exit.
Ask how identity, data protection, development, infrastructure, detection, vulnerability handling, incident response, third parties, assurance, and exit are actually implemented and evidenced.
Scope users and workflows, evaluate ACR/VPAT material, test representative interactions and outputs, and make remediation and retesting part of acceptance rather than an afterthought.
Compare options through the same weighted criteria and evidence model while keeping mandatory legal, security, accessibility, data, and operational failures outside a misleading aggregate score.
Inventory data, files, relationships, access, integrations, validation, cutover, rollback, recovery, exceptions, and acceptance evidence before production depends on the target.
Confirm contract rights, data portability, configuration, identity transition, continuity, coexistence, deletion, and closure evidence while the organization still has leverage to require them.
A decision is easier to defend when its artifacts form a traceable chain instead of living in separate email threads, vendor demos, and meeting notes.
A polished demo can produce momentum that hides unresolved requirements. Define the conditions that require remediation, formal exception, or rejection before evaluation begins.
One person should not be expected to validate every domain. Assign ownership before responses arrive so important evidence does not become “someone else’s section.”
Own workflow fit, user outcomes, service levels, operational constraints, and acceptance of business behavior.
Own solicitation structure, contract terms, renewals, exit assistance, risk language, and commercial comparability.
Own material control evidence, identity, data handling, incident readiness, third-party risk, and required assurance.
Own applicability, ACR/VPAT review, workflow testing, defect disposition, remediation expectations, and retest triggers.
Own source inventory, retention, metadata, relationships, export, reconciliation, preservation, and deletion obligations.
Own interfaces, identity federation, dependencies, configuration, migration design, recovery, and coexistence.
Own exceptions, mandatory gates, risk acceptance, final selection, production acceptance, and lifecycle accountability.
If a solicitation has not been written, begin with the evaluation brief. If bids are already arriving, focus on security and accessibility evidence before scoring. If selection is complete, move quickly into migration and acceptance. If a platform is already entrenched, use the continuity and exit worksheet before renewal.