Skip to main content
    QHSEtech
    Resource library

    Procurement guide · Updated

    QHSE Software Buying Brief

    Start a software evaluation with a brief that colleagues and vendors can use. Describe the work you need to improve, the people involved and the evidence that would justify a purchase. Then use the same tasks to compare the proposed products.

    Editorial responsibility: Dimitris Mitsios (Founder of The QHSE Standard; product marketing at Tekmon) · Tekmon pays for sponsored placements on this site (disclosure) · How pages are made · LinkedIn

    Scope of this guide: A practical procurement framework for a defined first rollout. Features, implementation time and commercial terms need confirmation for the proposed product and account.

    What you should leave the evaluation with

    A buying brief that connects each priority workflow to a demonstration, a cost and a person responsible for acceptance.

    1. Describe the first rollout

    Choose a recurring workflow, such as an inspection finding followed by a corrective action. Name the reporter, reviewer, action owner and person who verifies completion. Record the sites, languages, devices and approximate volumes involved. Separate this initial scope from later phases so a vendor can quote the same work you intend to test.

    2. Make requirements observable

    Replace a requirement such as “easy mobile reporting” with a task, the user's conditions and an acceptance check. Decide which requirements are essential and which can wait. Offline use, single sign-on, additional languages and AI features belong in the brief when the operating context calls for them; they are not a universal starting package.

    3. Identify record ownership and handoffs

    State where each record starts, which system owns it and who corrects a failed transfer. Ask IT and the relevant data owners to review access, hosting, retention and export needs. An API or connector listing is a starting point for investigation. Ask for the exact objects, fields, permissions and error handling included in the proposed integration.

    4. Plan for the price discovery itself

    Budget time to establish the price of your actual scope. 77 of 209 researched products (37%) have a current public amount on record; 132 (63%) have no current paid amount on record. Pricing observations: 28 Sep – 3 Oct 2026. The Published-price rule counts an amount quoted from a vendor page or another public listing unless the evidence calls it legacy, unverified or not current. A free plan alone does not count as a paid amount. A recorded amount may still lack a stated currency, billing period or complete package scope. An absent amount, an older unverified figure and a free plan without a paid amount are different findings; none proves that a vendor will provide a quote only after a demo. Follow the linked price record for each shortlisted product, then ask about the intended users, sites and applications. Do not read a missing price as a high one or assume a fixed timescale for receiving comparable proposals.

    QHSE Software Pricing Index 2026. Current public amounts on record, their conditions, observation dates and source links. Amounts may come from vendor pages or another public listing; they are not normalised to a common currency or unit. Checked 20 September 2026.

    5. Compare the complete commercial scope

    Give shortlisted vendors the same assumptions about users, sites, modules and interfaces. Request separate figures for licences, setup, migration, configuration, training, support and continuing administration. Clarify usage limits, renewal assumptions and the work needed to export records at exit. Keep unpriced dependencies visible instead of treating them as included. Where a per-seat price is published, establish the minimum seat count and billing term before treating the rate as your entry cost: several vendors set a floor of three, five or twenty-five paid seats on an annual commitment, so a small team's first-year figure is the minimum multiplied by the rate, not the rate itself. Price the reviewing role specifically, since lite and guest seats frequently cannot close an action.

    6. Agree what a pilot must establish

    Use representative users and synthetic or appropriately authorised data. Set a pilot duration that allows the selected workflow to run through its review and closure steps. Record observed results, failed checks and the effort required from your team. Before approving rollout, assign unresolved conditions to an owner and obtain a proposal for the configuration actually demonstrated.

    7. Put the hosting and security questions in writing

    A QHSE record can hold injury details, witness statements and photographs, so the technical review belongs inside the purchase and not after it. The UK National Cyber Security Centre lists 14 cloud security principles, among them protection of data in transit, asset protection and resilience, separation between customers, and audit information and alerting for customers. Turn the principles that matter to you into questions for IT: where records are stored, how one customer's data is kept apart from another's, and which activity logs your administrators can see. Ask for each answer in the proposal itself, because a statement made during a demonstration is not part of the contract.

    NCSC: the cloud security principles. UK government guidance for assessing cloud services. It is not a certification scheme and says nothing about any product listed on this site. Checked 3 October 2026.

    8. Ask what the supplier itself relies on

    A platform usually depends on a hosting provider, a messaging service, perhaps a translation or mapping service and a support subcontractor. The NCSC supply chain guidance sets out 12 principles meant to help an organisation gain and keep control over its supply chain, and observes that vulnerabilities can be inherent or can be introduced at any point in it. For a purchase a short list is enough: which sub-processors touch your records, how you are told when one changes, and what happens to your data if the vendor is acquired or withdraws the service. Put the answers next to the exit and export questions in section 5, since they are one conversation.

    NCSC: supply chain security guidance. UK government guidance on managing supply chain risk in general. It describes no QHSE product and sets no pass mark for a vendor. Checked 3 October 2026.

    9. Load the minimum into the pilot

    A pilot is meant to run on synthetic or authorised data, but people tend to fill it with whatever is closest. Decide before it starts which fields the demonstrated workflow needs and leave out the rest, such as the names of injured workers or medical detail, until the contract and retention terms are settled. The UK Information Commissioner's Office describes data minimisation as holding personal data that is adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary, and says organisations should periodically review what they hold and delete what they do not need. Other jurisdictions have their own rules, so ask your privacy specialist which apply, and write the deletion date for pilot data into the pilot plan.

    ICO: data minimisation. UK data protection guidance. It does not cover other jurisdictions and is not legal advice for a particular pilot. Checked 3 October 2026.

    10. Write each acceptance row before the demonstration

    An acceptance row has five parts: the task, the account and device used, the evidence that would count, the person who judges it and the date by which it must be seen. A worked row reads: a reporter on a shared tablet submits a finding with two photographs; the site supervisor confirms that it appears in her queue with both photographs attached; the evidence is an export of the record; the EHS manager judges it before the second demonstration. Ten rows written this way fit on one page and a vendor can accept or decline each of them. A declined row shows what the quote does not cover. HSE describes managing for health and safety as a loop of plan, do, check and act, and the same loop fits a buying brief: plan the rows, run the demonstration, check the evidence against them, then act by revising the shortlist.

    HSE: Managing for health and safety (HSG65). Guidance on managing health and safety in Great Britain. The acceptance-row format is our proposal, not part of HSG65. Checked 3 October 2026.

    Four tasks for your demo

    Illustrative scenario: a site inspection creates an action for maintenance, followed by independent verification. Give every vendor the same sample records and role definitions.

    For each task, record the observed result, evidence, account configuration and owner of any follow-up. Use “demonstrated”, “partly demonstrated” or “not tested”. On a small screen, scroll the table sideways to read all columns.

    Proposed demo tasks and the evidence to keep
    TaskAsk the vendor to demonstrateEvidence to keep
    Capture a findingA representative reporter creates a record on the intended device and submits the required evidence.Device, role, account tier, steps completed and any help required.
    Assign and verify an actionThe owner responds; the reviewer requests a correction and then records the acceptance decision.Ownership history, correction trail and the distinction between completion and verification.
    Handle a failed handoffIn a test environment, show an unavailable receiving system and how an authorised user identifies and resolves the failed transfer.Failure notice, recovery owner, retry result and duplicate handling.
    Export a complete exampleExport the sample record and demonstrate how its attachments, linked actions and history can be retrieved. Open the export without a licence to the platform.Sample files, relationships preserved, permissions, exclusions, any export charges, and whether an auditor or certification body could read it unaided.

    Before you approve a purchase

    • The first rollout has named workflows, roles, sites and acceptance owners.
    • Essential requirements are distinct from later-phase preferences.
    • Each essential requirement has an observed result or an explicit open question.
    • IT and data owners have reviewed the proposed access, hosting and integration scope.
    • For each shortlisted vendor, a published price was found or its absence was recorded.
    • Any per-seat rate is accompanied by its minimum seat count, billing term and contract currency.
    • The quote covers the demonstrated configuration and identifies continuing internal effort.
    • The evidence export was opened without a platform licence.
    • The pilot decision records accepted limitations, unresolved conditions and the next review.
    Editorial update and methodology

    Updated 20 September 2026: replaced broad feature prescriptions and unsupported outcome claims with scoped buying questions and illustrative demo tasks. Linked sources support the stated context; the proposed tests are editorial guidance, not measured product results. Read our methodology.