Proposal · RFP v2.1

22. Evaluation criteria

Chrysal Website 2027 · Extended draft · 19 October 2026

All RFP chapters

RFP-hoofdstuk 22

Alignment with the assessment criteria

Strategy, UX, technology, findability, collaboration and value for money are linked to concrete evidence.

Approach Deliverables Added value

Our response & approach

Linking assessment to evidence

We align the substantiation with the six criteria from the RFP. The weights below are the published weights; the RFP states that final scoring may still be confirmed. This table does not award points to ourselves, but makes clear where the evaluator can find concrete answers and evidence.

Criterion	Weight	Substantiation and verifiable evidence in this proposal
Strategic understanding & 2035 alignment	20%	Chapters 1–5, 15 and 21: integrated solutions, six journeys and expansion into new domains.
UX, content architecture & premium brand experience	20%	Chapters 4–6: content relationships, independently accessible domains, brand translation and usability tests.
Technical solution, CMS & editor autonomy	20%	Chapters 8–10 and 13–14: platform choice, localisation, permissions, components and independent editorial tasks.
SEO/GEO, migration & measurement approach	15%	Chapters 7, 11 and 12: baseline measurement, prompt panel, measurement plan, migration and two weeks of monitoring.
Relevant experience, team & collaboration	10%	Chapters 18 and 20: two substantiated cases, roles, budgeted effort and decision-making; name confirmation still needed.
Commercial proposal, SLA & value for money	15%	Chapters 16–17 and 24: two launch scenarios, future options, annual costs and transparent conditions.

Demonstrating functionality on a recognisable challenge

We propose demonstrating how it works in a selection session focused on one recognisable Chrysal challenge. This will make clear whether the approach truly simplifies complexity. Chrysal can then assess the content route, editorial operation and technical extensibility at the same time.

Concrete deliverables

Assessment matrix with original weights
An overview of the original criteria and weightings, linked to the relevant detailed sections in the proposal.
Evidence for each criterion
References to deliverables, approach and available references that support the assessment, without giving ourselves unsubstantiated scores.
Outstanding verifications before the final offer
A list of claims and agreements that still require substantiation or confirmation before the proposal becomes final.

Added value of Afdeling Online

The same approach can be assessed from the perspectives of brand, user, management and investment, without awarding ourselves unfounded scores.

We link ambition to a demonstrable approach and deliverables. This allows Chrysal to assess the strategic, practical and financial coherence without relying on general agency claims.

Source: supplied draft proposal dated 19 October 2026. Amounts, team staffing and service agreements require internal confirmation before sending.

Chapter 21 Chapter 23

Save this page as PDF

The print version is formatted as a document, without buttons or navigation. Choose “Save as PDF” in the print dialog.