# Proof of value for procurement software > Run a bounded evaluation of procurement software with agreed inputs, success criteria and a clear stop decision. A practical procedure with a worked scenario, category-specific checks and an editable worksheet. Source: https://saas-marketing.net/industries/procurement/proof-of-value/ Topic: B2B SaaS Marketing Type: field-guide Published: 2026-09-17 Last updated: 2026-09-17 Publisher: SaaS Marketing (saas-marketing.net) License: CC BY 4.0. Quote or republish with attribution and a link to https://saas-marketing.net/industries/procurement/proof-of-value/ ## Short answer A proof of value should answer a specific question about whether a company with distributed purchasing authority can approve purchases with supplier and budget context under realistic constraints. It should not be an open-ended period of free implementation. ## Key takeaways - Choose one decision the evaluation can resolve. - Set prerequisites and an owner for each one. - Translate the workflow into acceptance evidence. - The pilot should pause if a shorter cycle can result from skipped reviews rather than better workflow cannot be handled within the agreed test conditions. --- This field guide uses a company with distributed purchasing authority as its working context. The buying conversation involves the head of procurement, while the department requester needs to approve purchases with supplier and budget context. Adapt the scope when those roles, dependencies or operating conditions differ. ## Choose one decision the evaluation can resolve A proof of value should answer a specific question about whether a company with distributed purchasing authority can approve purchases with supplier and budget context under realistic constraints. It should not be an open-ended period of free implementation. Write the question, the participants, the allowed data and the decision date before connecting systems. The head of procurement should agree that the selected question matters enough to influence the purchase. ## Set prerequisites and an owner for each one List the required access to ERP, identity directory and contract repository, the sample records, user availability and any approval needed to run the exercise. Missing prerequisites should pause the clock rather than quietly shrinking the evaluation. A salesperson should not compensate by performing every user task and then describing the account as activated. Assign a customer owner and a vendor owner so blocked work has a clear route for resolution. ## Translate the workflow into acceptance evidence Use submit a purchase request and complete the required approval path as the first observable checkpoint and a low-risk request and a higher-risk purchase taking appropriate paths as the evidence exercise. Describe what will be inspected, by whom and against which baseline. Prefer an artifact or a reproducible action over an opinion such as "the team liked it." Some requirements may be binary, while others require a measured range or a qualitative review. Keep these different types of evidence visible instead of combining them into one unexplained score. ## Include an exception and a realistic support boundary The objection "Approval rules will slow routine work" should influence the test design. Include a relevant exception rather than testing only the easiest path. Record how much vendor assistance the exercise required, because that effort affects the feasibility of rollout. A trial completed by a specialist on behalf of the customer is evidence of specialist capability, not independent customer adoption. Decide whether the required support belongs in the commercial offer. ## Use a baseline and avoid invented savings If the evaluation measures time or error reduction, define comparable work before and after the change. Record task complexity, participant experience and interruptions. Do not annualize one unusually favorable observation without explaining the assumptions. A sample exercise can reveal a promising mechanism while remaining too small to establish a reliable business-wide effect. Show the arithmetic, the uncertainty and the additional evidence needed for an investment decision. ## End with one of three explicit outcomes Proceed when the agreed evidence is present and the unresolved risks are acceptable. Extend only when a named missing test could change the decision and there is a bounded plan to complete it. Stop when the workflow is unsuitable or the implementation burden is unacceptable. The longer-term adoption condition remains whether requests follow agreed approval rules and preserve supplier records. Preserve the evaluation record so onboarding does not start from a sales summary that omits the difficult parts. ## Category-specific review A purchasing request changes as the supplier, amount, category and risk become clearer. A single approval path may not fit every purchase. Ask how an ordinary low-risk request differs from a new vendor requiring additional review, and which information the requester must supply. Demonstrate two requests with different review needs and inspect the reason for each routing decision. Confirm that exceptions have an owner. A shorter cycle is useful only when the required review was completed rather than silently bypassed. ## Worked situation A sample evaluation asks five authorized users to complete the agreed workflow. Four can perform it with the planned support; one is blocked by access to ERP, identity directory and contract repository. Report four completions, the blocked dependency and the support provided. Do not remove the blocked user to report a perfect pass rate. The decision is whether that dependency can be resolved within the intended rollout, not whether the dashboard can display an attractive percentage. The acceptance record should preserve both submit a purchase request and complete the required approval path and the exception. ## Working worksheet | Working item | Category-specific starting point | Question to resolve | | --- | --- | --- | | Decision | approve purchases with supplier and budget context | Which purchase question can this test resolve? | | Prerequisite | ERP, identity directory and contract repository | Who grants access and by when? | | First checkpoint | submit a purchase request and complete the required approval path | What artifact demonstrates completion? | | Exception test | Approval rules will slow routine work | What failure case must be exercised? | | Adoption boundary | requests follow agreed approval rules and preserve supplier records | What remains to verify after the pilot? | Add your evidence, owner and next action to each row. Read the [worksheet instructions](/resources/#using-worksheets) before completing the file. ## Run the review with the people who do the work Bring the department requester into the review of a low-risk request and a higher-risk purchase taking appropriate paths. Ask them to identify the input they would actually have, the exception they expect to encounter and the person who receives the output. Then ask the head of procurement which unresolved issue could change the decision. Keep the two answers separate until the team understands whether the obstacle is workflow fit, implementation readiness or commercial priority. Record any dependency on ERP, identity directory and contract repository beside the affected worksheet row. A dependency should have an owner and an observable completion condition. If it changes the scope of the offer, revise the public description before the next campaign. This prevents a useful planning exercise from turning into a promise the delivery team cannot meet. ## When to change the plan The pilot should pause if a shorter cycle can result from skipped reviews rather than better workflow cannot be handled within the agreed test conditions. If new evidence changes the audience, required workflow or acceptance conditions, update the brief and explain why. Compare later results against the version of the plan that was actually used. ## Continue with the next decision Use the [customer onboarding guide](/industries/procurement/onboarding/) when that is the next unresolved task, or return to the [procurement software marketing overview](/industries/procurement/) to choose a different route. The [b2b saas marketing hub](/b2b-saas-marketing/) provides the broader method. ## Reference and scope The [primary category reference](https://www.zip.co/) is a starting point for checking product terminology and current capabilities. This page provides an original planning framework. It does not imply a vendor endorsement, firsthand product test, original market survey or guaranteed commercial result. ## Frequently asked questions ### Where should proof of value for procurement software start? Run a bounded evaluation of procurement software with agreed inputs, success criteria and a clear stop decision. Confirm the customer situation and the evidence needed for the next decision before selecting a channel, format or tool. ### What category-specific concern should the team investigate? The concern "Approval rules will slow routine work" needs an observable test or a clear limitation. Also account for the dependency on ERP, identity directory and contract repository; do not assume it is already resolved. ### What does the worksheet include? It contains the working items and category-specific starting points shown on this page. Add your own evidence, owner, status and next review decision. The examples are constructed, not reported results or industry benchmarks. ### How does this connect to customer value? The customer needs to approve purchases with supplier and budget context. A meaningful first checkpoint is to submit a purchase request and complete the required approval path; the ongoing condition is that requests follow agreed approval rules and preserve supplier records. Choose the stage appropriate to this piece of work rather than combining all three into one metric.