Most teams evaluate AI vendors backwards

The common sequence is: see a demo, get excited, buy seats, then look for a problem the tool fits. It produces shelfware and a leadership team that has learned to be skeptical of the category.

The order that works: quantify the friction in a specific workflow, define what a fixed version measures like, decide whether the change is process or tooling, then — and only then — evaluate vendors against written criteria you set before you saw anyone's demo.

Bring a scorecard with weighted criteria, run the same test data through every finalist, and require a reference from a company your size in your industry with a comparable workflow. Ask that reference what they had to change internally. The answer is more predictive of your outcome than any feature comparison.