For CFO · Procurement · Vendor Manager

Vendor Renewal Decision.

One vendor, six honest scores (value · usage · overlap · switching · alternatives · leverage), one verdict from six options: Renew · Renegotiate · Reduce · Migrate · Replace · Kill. Optional cost-vs-strategic prioritization toggle. Inputs stay in your browser — share via URL, print to PDF for procurement committee.

Your inputs

Score each dimension 0–10. Verdict + impact band update live.

Value delivered (0–10)0 = unused/regret · 10 = mission-critical workflow 6

Usage depth (0–10)0 = orphan licenses · 10 = daily, broad, growing 5

Overlap with other tools (0–10)0 = no overlap · 10 = ≥80% feature parity exists 3

Switching difficulty (0–10)0 = drop-in alt · 10 = year+ migration 5

Quality of alternatives (0–10)0 = nothing close · 10 = 2+ stronger competitors 4

Your negotiation leverage (0–10)0 = vendor knows you're stuck · 10 = active POC 4

Annual cost (USD)List price × seats. Excludes one-time setup.

Verdict · 6 outcomes

—

Score breakdown

Each dimension and its weight contribution to the verdict.

Annual spend impact band

Today's spend vs estimated post-action spend.

Sensitivity tornado

Each row shows how the result changes if you perturb that input. Bigger bar = more sensitive.

Move strengthens KEEP signal Move weakens KEEP signal

The math, openly

Keep score = (value × 2) + (usage × 1.5) − (overlap × 1.5) · range −15 to +35

Action score = leverage + alternatives · range 0 to 20

Verdict tree (6 outcomes):

keepScore ≥ 22 + action ≥ 14 → Renegotiate (15–25% impact band)

keepScore ≥ 22 + action < 14 → Renew (0% impact)

10 ≤ keepScore < 22 → Reduce (20–40% impact)

keepScore < 10 + switching ≥ 7 → Migrate (40–60% impact)

keepScore < 10 + alternatives ≥ 6 → Replace (30–60% impact)

keepScore < 10 + neither → Kill (100% impact)

Cost-prioritized modeAt annual cost ≥ $250K, even a Renew verdict is downgraded to Reduce — the cost-of-capital makes the tier-down conversation mandatory.

Strategic-prioritized modeValue weight doubles (×4) and overlap penalty halves (×0.75). Use when this vendor is in your critical path and you can't afford to optimize for cost over function.

Six honest scores produce a recommendation, not a decision. Take this to your procurement committee and have the conversation it implies.