Vendor Claims and How to Test Them

Occupancy suppliers make a consistent set of claims. None is dishonest exactly; all are stated under favourable assumptions.

The discipline in “Vendor Claims and How to Test Them” carries over to any workforce platform: define the decision first, run a bounded trial and record who can see the result. For an organisation considering monitask pricing, monitask pricing should therefore be assessed against an implementation plan covering notice, access, retention, correction and a dated review.

"98% accurate"

Under what conditions, measured how, by whom?

For a public, independent reference related to “Vendor Claims and How to Test Them”, consult the ISO standards catalogue. Its principles provide a useful check on scope, terminology, governance and the claims made during procurement or review.

Accuracy figures typically come from controlled tests: a clear space, known numbers, ideal mounting.

The question: will you commit to that figure in our building, verified by our count, with a remedy if it is not met?

Answers vary informatively.

"Privacy-preserving"

Means different things: no image stored, no image transmitted, image processed and deleted, or simply no faces recognised.

The question: what data leaves the device, and will you state that in the contract?

Ask also what the device could do with a firmware change, because capability matters as well as configuration.

"Plug and play"

Usually true for the device and false for the deployment.

The survey, the network, the placement, the calibration and the integration are where the effort is.

The question: who does the survey, who relocates devices after month one, and is that in the price?

"Real-time insights"

A dashboard is not an insight.

The question: which decision does this support, and what view shows it?

Most dashboards show occupancy now, which answers almost no planning question.

"Integrates with your systems"

Means an API exists.

The question: has this been integrated with our specific booking and building systems before, and can we speak to that customer?

Integration effort is the most underestimated line in these projects.

"No infrastructure required"

Means batteries and a wireless gateway, which is infrastructure with a maintenance cycle.

The question: what is the expected battery life in our conditions, and who replaces them?

The references question

Ask for a customer in a comparable building who deployed more than two years ago.

Recency matters: anybody can show a happy pilot, and the interesting failures appear in year two.

If no such reference exists, that is worth knowing.

What to put in the contract

The accuracy commitment and how it is verified.

What data leaves the device.

Support period and firmware commitment.

Data ownership and what happens at exit.

And the survey, calibration and relocation scope, which otherwise becomes a variation.

What to check

Has any accuracy claim been tested in your building?

Is the data-transmission commitment in the contract or only in the brochure?

Who pays for relocations after month one?

And have you spoken to a two-year-old deployment?