Cybersecurity buying research| Total | Editorial interpretation, after gates | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Below 60 | Material weaknesses or too little evidence | Do not select on this record; clarify fit or seek alternatives |
| 60 to below 75 | Potentially viable with significant unresolved work | Close prioritized gaps and rescore |
| 75 to below 90 | Strong candidate for the stated scope | Resolve material exceptions and negotiate acceptance |
| 90–100 | Very strong evidence against this particular brief | Verify no double counting or generous scoring; maintain oversight |
A proposal with 92 and a failed gate cannot outrank a proposal with 82 that meets all mandatory conditions. Equally, a difference of one or two points is rarely a sound reason to ignore uncertainty. Compare the evidence and material trade-offs rather than presenting decimal precision as scientific certainty.
Working view: explore the first table
Total
Below 60
- Editorial interpretation, after gates
- Material weaknesses or too little evidence
- Action
- Do not select on this record; clarify fit or seek alternatives
Sources cited on this page
No external source is linked directly in this page.
Open the section source register →