01 — Strategy & Transformation

Business & Vendor Evaluation

Objective assessment of business cases, vendors and proposed solutions. We define the requirements, compare the options on a common basis, run the feasibility work and quantify ROI and risk.

The point is to select partners and programmes that actually deliver — and to find out which ones will not before you have signed.

Talk to an expert → See the results
Your challenges

What's holding you back right now?

  • Supplier proposals cannot be compared like for like.
  • The business case lacks a realistic view of operating and capital cost.
  • Constraints hidden in processes and IT have not surfaced yet.
  • Risk, safety and maintenance concepts are unclear.
  • There is no independent view of total cost of ownership or return.
When it matters

You'll benefit when you are…

  • Shortlisting automation or WMS vendors
  • Validating a DC redesign or greenfield plan
  • Assessing a make-or-buy decision in logistics
  • Renegotiating large technology contracts
  • Benchmarking 3PL or 4PL performance
Outcomes

What we deliver

Comparable options

A structured RFI/RFP with scoring criteria agreed before the bids arrive.

An evidence-based business case

ROI, risk and scenario analysis that finance can interrogate.

Safety and operational fit

Process, IT, health and safety and maintenance all covered explicitly.

Contract-ready output

Clear specifications and acceptance criteria you can attach to an agreement.

Choose the right partner the first time, with the trade-offs visible.

Talk to an expert →
What makes us different

Augment Cloud experts at your service

  • Supplier-independent evaluation with a total-cost mindset.
  • Deep domain models for distribution and inventory to test claims against.
  • Established playbooks for vendor selection, governance and acceptance.
  • A track record running from feasibility all the way through commissioning.

Comparable, or it is not an evaluation

Most vendor comparisons fail because each proposal answers a slightly different question. We normalise scope, assumptions and cost structure first, so that the scoring reflects genuine differences in capability rather than differences in how optimistically each bid was written.

The same discipline applies to the business case: one baseline, one set of assumptions, and sensitivity analysis showing which of them the decision actually hinges on.

Case studies

Evaluations that changed the decision

WMS selection and rollout for Servisbal

From a halted WMS project to a live system — clear requirements, disciplined vendor selection and hands-on support.

Stable rollout · Clear vendor selection Show full case study →

AutoStore feasibility for Schneider Electric

Feasibility study validated AutoStore for the CEE DC and quantified a capacity uplift up to 300%.

+300% capacity uplift quantified Show full case study →

Carrier cost & network simulation for Elektrowin

Carrier cost model and network simulation — toll impacts validated, negotiation-ready savings scenarios delivered.

+0.6% YoY toll impact on transport cost Show full case study →

Online grocery operations with Knuspr.de

Demand forecasting and fulfilment optimisation for a fast-growing online grocery operation across Germany.

Online grocery · Multi-DC fulfilment Show full case study →
All case studies →

Are those proposals actually comparable?

Usually not. Send us the bids and the requirement, and we will normalise them onto one basis so the comparison means something.

Talk to an expert → Discover VERITICO