Part II Preparation and vendor selection
Chapter 9: How to choose a software vendor
The lowest price is the most expensive criterion. Give quality a 50–70% weight in the evaluation, and evaluate the team that will actually do the work. Verify references yourself, check the company in public registers, and before signing, try out a paid trial sprint with the finalists.
Quality should outweigh price
According to the vendor association, the Ministry of Culture (MK) weighted price at 30%, the quality of the solution at 50%, and the technical arrangements for development at 20% in the Kreativní Česko contract Lupa.cz, 2026 (chapter 8). The Best Value method gives price 30% and quality 70%, of which the interview with key team members can account for 20–30% AIR, Best Value. As a rough guide, with a price weight of 80% or more, quality has little effect on the result, and an underpriced proposal wins, which is then made up for with additional work (chapter 10).
A higher weight for quality does not mean a more expensive contract. In one of the cases the association described, the best-rated proposal was also the cheapest Lupa.cz, 2026. Evaluate the total price, including operations and support for 5 years (chapter 4), not just the day rate.
Score against described levels, not by eye
A criterion such as “solution design: 0–40 points” with no further description leaves too much room for subjective evaluation. So for each quality criterion, write down in advance what 0, 1, 3, and 5 points mean. For example, for the solution design: 0 = generic text, 1 = repeats the brief, 3 = a specific design and some risks, 5 = named risks with solutions and realistic stages.
Evaluate quality before you open the prices (two-envelope method). Do not reward the length of the proposal itself. For price, watch out for simple linear price scoring: according to the Digital and Information Agency (DIA), it leads to extreme proposals being selected DIA, ISSS 2025. Ask for an explanation of an abnormally low price.
Before you start scoring, check three things in each proposal. The first is the effort breakdown: does it show analysis, testing, security, and management separately, or just “development”? The second is the assumptions: what the vendor takes for granted, for example that the data is clean or that you will provide interfaces to other systems. The third is the list of what the price does not include: licenses, operations, data migration, or training. Two proposals with the same price can have a completely different scope.
The team, references, and a trial sprint
Evaluate the people who will actually work on the project, not just the sales pitch. Invite the architect and the team lead to an interview or a workshop. If different people sit at the presentation than those named in the proposal, that is your first red flag.
Verify references yourself, not through the vendor. Call the contact person at the customer and ask:
- Did they deliver on time and on budget? If not, by how much, and why?
- Did the same team work on the project as the one being offered to us?
- How did they handle changes and problems?
- Did you receive the source code and documentation?
- Would you choose them again?
Also ask for contacts at two customers who stopped working with the vendor. Logos on a website are not references.
A paid trial sprint will show you the most. As a rough guide, plan for 1–2 weeks of work with 2–3 finalists on a real brief, with criteria known in advance. You will see how the team communicates, asks questions, and delivers. According to the cited article by the vendor association, the town of Žďár nad Sázavou required a demo of the key processes before signing the contract for an information system worth CZK 15 million Lupa.cz, 2026.
Vendor due diligence takes twenty minutes
Public registers reveal the worst risks before you sign. Check the financial statements for at least 3 years.
| Where | What to check | Red flag |
|---|---|---|
| ARES | company ID number (IČO), founding date, business activities, registered office | company younger than the project, virtual office |
| Commercial Register | statutory representatives, shareholders, changes, links between people | frequent changes of statutory representatives and owners |
| Collection of Deeds (with the Commercial Register extract) | financial statements for 3 years: turnover, profit, equity, liabilities | negative equity, missing financial statements, turnover smaller than the contract |
| Insolvency Register | the vendor, statutory representatives, the parent company | any insolvency petition, even a rejected one |
| Register of Beneficial Owners | who really owns the company (extract from the vendor) | unclear ownership structure, refuses to provide an extract |
| Register of Contracts | public references, prices, amendments | nothing but amendments |
| ISO 27001 / 9001 certificate | scope, certification body, validity | the scope does not cover development |
| LinkedIn and website | actual headcount, staff turnover | promises more people than it has |
Access to the Register of Beneficial Owners is available to public authorities, to obliged persons under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, and, on request, to contracting authorities in public procurement. A company can ask the vendor for an extract.
Since December 17, 2025, the Czech Register of Beneficial Owners has not been accessible to the public BusinessInfo.cz, 2025. So ask the vendor directly for an extract. Treat an ISO certificate as a signal, not a guarantee, and always check its scope: a certificate “for business activities at the company’s registered office” says nothing about development. Small studios often do not have one.
For a project lasting several years, the vendor’s stability is as important as its technical capabilities. For a large contract, attach the due diligence results to the evaluation report so it is clear that someone did it.
Red flags in the sales phase
- A price well below the others or a rate below the MV lower quartile, with no explanation.
- “Yes” to every requirement and no questions about the brief.
- A fixed price without a list of assumptions; one average rate without a breakdown by role.
- Refuses to name key personnel in the contract; different people at the presentation than in the proposal.
- Pressure to sign quickly.
- “We’ll sort out the license later” or “license according to our terms and conditions.”
- Refuses to hand over source code “for security reasons.”
- References only “under NDA,” impossible to verify.
- Promises a team of 15 people but has three in the register and on LinkedIn.
- Refuses paid discovery and wants the whole implementation straight away.
| How it goes wrong | How to do it right |
|---|---|
| How it goes wrongThe lowest price wins; quality is just a “condition.” | How to do it rightQuality 50–70%, price 30–50%, total price over 5 years. |
| How it goes wrong“Solution design: 0–40 points” with no description. | How to do it rightEach scoring level is described in advance; quality is evaluated without knowing the price. |
| How it goes wrongThe thickest proposal gets the best score. | How to do it rightYou evaluate understanding of the brief, risks, and the team, not the number of pages. |
| How it goes wrongReferences = logos on the website. | How to do it rightPhone calls to customers, including one who left, and a verified team. |
| How it goes wrongThe director and a salesperson present. | How to do it rightAn interview with the architect and team lead who will be on the project. |
| How it goes wrongSigning after three presentations. | How to do it rightA paid trial sprint or a demo on a real brief. |
- Under Section 116(3) of the Public Procurement Act (ZZVZ), quality criteria must be set so that bids are comparable and fulfillment of the criteria is verifiable. Justify the evaluation in detail.
- A quality criterion must not consist of contractual terms that secure the vendor’s obligations, or of payment terms (Section 116(3)), typically contractual penalties. So put the license, code handover, and exit into the tender documentation as mandatory conditions, not into the evaluation.
- DIA evaluation cards offer templates for quality criteria, for example the quality of the implementation team DIA, Delivery team card. The law also explicitly lists user accessibility as a criterion (Section 116(2)(c)).
- Before concluding the contract, you can require proof that the financial statements have been published (Section 104(f)). For the selected vendor, you find the beneficial owner in the register and state them in the documentation (Section 122(5)).
- Instead of a trial sprint, use a demonstration of a sample or a demo version.