Vendor-neutral · evidence-led · explainable
Which planning platform fits your situation?
Answer 21 questions about your planning process, your systems and your ambition. You get a shortlist of three platforms, the reasoning behind every score and a phased roadmap.
How the scoring works
Every platform is judged on the same fifteen criteria. Your answers change how heavily each criterion weighs, not the underlying scores. The same answers always produce the same result.
- Questions
- 21
- Rounds
- 6
- Ranked platforms
- 14
What you get
- Where your organisation stands today on process and technology maturity, and what is a credible next step within 12 to 18 months.
- Three platforms that fit your situation, each with its trade-offs, an indicative three-year cost band and a typical implementation time.
- An architecture direction and a phased roadmap for process and technology.
- The full reasoning: which criteria weighed heaviest for you, why, and which proof points still need validating.
This scan places your organisation on two axes: how you plan today, and what your platform can do.
Why does this scan ask about your process, not just your tools?
Because the platform that fits you is the one your organisation can actually run. A tool that outruns the way you plan today ends up unused, and a way of planning that outruns your tool ends up as manual work. This scan places you on both axes and weighs the recommendation accordingly.
Process maturity (P) is how your organisation plans today: who owns the plan, which drivers it rests on, and what it delivers. Technology maturity (T) is what your platform can do, from spreadsheets to AI-native systems. The two need to move together. A driver-based ambition on a spreadsheet burns out your best people. An AI-native platform on a reactive process becomes shelfware. The diagonal is healthy: away from it, either the platform is ahead of the process or the process is ahead of the platform.
What this is not
This scan points you in a direction. It is not a decision, and it is not a complete advice. It weighs a fixed set of criteria against a vendor snapshot with a fixed reference date, so it does not know your contracts, your data quality, your internal politics or what a vendor will quote you next quarter. Check the scores against current vendor claims, and use the outcome to structure your due diligence and your proof of concept rather than to replace them.
This browser tab
Saved answers found
Continue with the answers stored in this tab, or clear them and start again.
Start the scan
Twenty-one questions in six rounds. Choose what fits your organisation best. You can go back and change an answer at any point before you finish.
Saved only in this browser tab. Use Reset answers to remove the session copy.
Your evidence-led outcome
A shortlist you can challenge.
Process × technology
Maturity path
Client fit
Primary archetype
Recommendation
Top three and trade-offs
The matrix score and client-fit adjustment remain visible as separate steps.
Design choice
Recommended architecture
Separate roles
Solution layers
Adjacent services and technology stay outside the platform ranking.
Phased change
Process and technology roadmap
Explainability
Confidence and decision trace
See what moved the result and which proof points still need validation.
This result is a transparent decision hypothesis, not a substitute for vendor due diligence, reference checks or a representative PoC.