Case Study 06 | Research Operations & Vendor Selection

Selecting a research platform through collaborative evaluation and negotiation.

Sinclair needed a research platform that could support more studies without overspending on the wrong tool. I led a collaborative evaluation across researchers and stakeholders, selected Dscout through a weighted comparison, and negotiated approximately $10K in first-year savings.

Research operationsVendor evaluationNegotiation
Project overview: from vendor options to a defensible platform choice
01
Define six criteriaFunctional fit, scalability and price were weighted in one shared model.
02
Compare fit and costThe scorecard used 60% functional fit and 40% price weighting.
03
Recommend the platformDscout ranked first at 79% in the weighted comparison.
04
Negotiate and reuseAbout $10K in first-year savings was negotiated and the scorecard became reusable.
79%top weighted score
~$10Kfirst-year savings negotiated
20% YoYincrease in research volume
$10K
saved on the final contract through vendor negotiation
20% YoY
increase in research volume after Dscout adoption
79%
Dscout weighted score, the strongest platform fit across the six criteria
Influence

How my work influenced the decision

1

Define decision criteria

Collaborate with researchers and stakeholders on six weighted criteria.

2

Score the options

Weight functional fit at 60% and price at 40%.

3

Make pricing tradeoffs visible

Request multiple proposals with different seats, support hours and activity credits.

4

Recommend the platform

Select Dscout as the strongest overall fit based on the weighted comparison.

5

Negotiate savings and create a reusable model

Secure about $10K in first-year savings and retain the scorecard for future decisions.

Strategic tension

The tradeoffs that shaped the work

Cheapest option vs minimum fit

Loop11 was cheapest but did not meet the minimum functional threshold.

Functional fit vs price

Balance capability and scalability with cost rather than optimizing one alone.

One-time purchase vs scalable operating model

Choose a platform that can support more research over time.

01
Overview

The team needed one scalable research platform and a defensible decision

This was not only a procurement exercise. The tool would shape how the team recruited participants, ran studies and scaled research delivery. I built a shared evaluation process so the final recommendation balanced functional fit, team needs and cost.

Collaborative evaluation

I defined six weighted criteria and aligned the research team and stakeholders on how functional fit, scalability and price should influence the decision.

Negotiation and savings

I requested multiple pricing options rather than accepting the first proposal, creating a clearer tradeoff and approximately $10K in savings.

02
Decision Framework

Six criteria created one clear comparison

The scorecard weighted functional fit at 60% and price at 40% so the cheapest tool could not win if it could not replace the fragmented stack.

Weighted scorecard showing Dscout ranked first at 79%.

Weighted scorecard showing Dscout ranked first at 79%.

View full visual
03
Tradeoff

Functional fit mattered and price still mattered

UserTesting

Matched Dscout on several functional criteria but lost ground on price.

Loop11

Cheapest option, but below the minimum functional threshold needed to consolidate the work.

04
Negotiation

Make the cost tradeoff visible

I requested two Dscout proposals with different seats, support hours and activity credits so leadership could choose with the trade-offs visible.

Two Dscout proposals compared before negotiation.

Two Dscout proposals compared before negotiation.

View full visual
05
Results

The tool became part of the research operating model

Dscout adopted

The platform replaced the ad-hoc qualitative stack and supported the diary study behind the persona program.

Research volume increased 20% YoY

Research volume increased 20% year over year after adoption.

Reusable vendor framework

The weighted scorecard became a template that other researchers could use for later tool decisions.

Recommendation used to socialize the final platform choice.

Recommendation used to socialize the final platform choice.

View full visual
PreviousFaster product decisions through usability testing and behavioral analyticsBack toAll case studies
The 20% YoY research-volume increase is retained as a documented outcome supplied for this case.