Validation Primers
Validation Primers are frameworks that define what proof to require before evaluating any vendor in a specific category. They are not guides to which vendor to choose. They are structured frameworks for determining what constitutes evidence of capability in a given category, so that any organization can apply consistent proof standards to its own vendor assessment process — before it begins collecting vendor information.
Most vendor assessment processes begin with collecting vendor information — demos, sales conversations, marketing materials, and proposal documents. The problem with this sequence is that the criteria for evaluating what vendors say have not been established before the vendor information starts arriving. Vendor presentations are designed to make every vendor look qualified. Without a proof framework established in advance, it is difficult to consistently distinguish documented capability from effective presentation.
Validation Primers reverse this sequence. They document what constitutes proof of capability in a specific category before any vendor is assessed. Organizations using a Validation Primer know, before any vendor conversation begins, what evidence they will require, what proof class that evidence must belong to, and what they will treat as an unverified assertion rather than a documented fact.
What a Validation Primer contains
Category definition and evidence landscape
What the category is, what problems it addresses, and what the public evidence environment looks like — including the signal-to-noise ratio (what proportion of publicly available category information is independently verifiable versus vendor-generated or unverified).
Proof framework for the category
The seven-class proof framework applied to the specific evaluation questions relevant to this category. Which evidence classes apply, what proof weight each carries for category-specific claims, and what would constitute verified proof versus an unverified assertion for the most common capability claims vendors make in this space.
Required evidence by claim type
A structured list of the capability claims most commonly made by vendors in the category, with the evidence class and specific source type required to treat each claim as documented fact. Organized by claim type so that organizations can build an evidence checklist before vendor conversations begin.
Common proof gaps in the category
The categories of vendor claims that are frequently made but rarely supported by independently verifiable public evidence in this market. Organizations should know in advance which claims are typically unverifiable from public sources, so they can seek alternative evidence pathways or treat those claims with appropriate skepticism.
Red flags — claims that warrant heightened scrutiny
Patterns in vendor presentation that, based on the evidence record across the category, correlate with limited independently verifiable substance. Not a list of bad vendors — a list of claim patterns and presentation tactics that warrant more rigorous evidence requirements before acceptance.
For all four proof disciplines, see marketprooflab.com/research-agenda/. For the methodology governing how proof frameworks are designed, see marketprooflab.com/methodology/. Validation Primers do not recommend vendors — they define the evidence standards to apply before any vendor is evaluated.