Easy RFP · Printable framework
Read the full article
PRINTABLE FRAMEWORK · MAY 2026

4-Tier AI Evaluation Framework for MICE Sourcing Vendors

Use this in any vendor demo. Three calibrated questions per tier. If the vendor cannot answer, the tier is roadmap, not product. Free, no email required.

How to use this

Before the demo, copy the vendor's "AI" claims from their product page. During the demo, walk down the tiers in order and ask the three questions for each tier they claim. Mark Pass / Partial / Fail in the scorecard at the bottom. After the demo you have a one-page audit you can bring to procurement.

TIER 1

Template autofill

The product takes a structured brief and produces formatted text (RFP brief, hotel cover letter, follow-up email). Engine can be templates or LLM. Most vendors that claim AI in 2026 ship this. Commodity differentiation.

Three questions to ask
  1. Show the system drafting an RFP brief from a blank state — what is the underlying engine (templates, LLM, hybrid)?
  2. Where does the model run — EU-resident or US? Which sub-processor (OpenAI, Anthropic, Azure, in-house)?
  3. What happens if a custom field (industry jargon, regional A/V spec) is in the brief — does the model handle it or revert to placeholder?
PASS = live demo with non-templated input PARTIAL = demo only on canned brief FAIL = video demo, no live attempt
TIER 2

Response classification

The product reads hotel replies and extracts, tags, or scores them (rate per room-night, F&B minimum, attrition language, compliance flags). Engine = regex + ML classifiers + LLM extraction. This is where measurable planner time is saved.

Three questions to ask
  1. Upload a non-templated hotel reply (Word doc, not their form) — show which fields extract correctly and which break.
  2. What is the field-level accuracy benchmark on your historical data? Per-field, not aggregate.
  3. When the system gets a field wrong, what happens? Silent default, planner notification, or audit log?
PASS = live extraction on your sample PDF PARTIAL = extraction on vendor sample FAIL = no live extraction shown
TIER 3

Negotiation suggestion

The product proposes the next move — which hotels to BAFO, what counter-offer to make, whether to walk. Requires reasoning across buyer history, hotel flexibility, deal context. The line between Tier 3 and a clever dashboard is thin.

Three questions to ask
  1. Show one case where the system recommended a negotiation action the data alone did not surface — with the audit trail of why.
  2. How does the system handle a hotel it has never seen before — cold-start logic?
  3. Which inputs drive the recommendation, and can the planner see and edit the weights?
PASS = case study with novel recommendation PARTIAL = dashboard with smart text FAIL = marketing claim only, no demo
TIER 4

Agentic sourcing (full cycle, no per-step approval)

The system runs a complete sourcing cycle end-to-end: identifies hotels, sends the brief, negotiates BAFO, presents a signed contract for final approval. No MICE vendor publicly ships this in production as of May 2026. Gartner places autonomous procurement at 5-10 year horizon.

Three questions to ask
  1. Show a complete sourcing cycle the system ran without a human approving each step — with the audit trail.
  2. Name three customers running this in production today, with deal volume.
  3. What is the delegated-authority model — how much spend can the agent commit before human review?
PASS = production audit trail (unlikely in 2026) PARTIAL = beta with constrained authority FAIL = demo video only, no production reference

GDPR & procurement checklist (ask before signing)

Demo scorecard (fill during the meeting)

TierVendor claim?Demo verdictNotes
Tier 1 · Template autofill
Tier 2 · Response classification
Tier 3 · Negotiation suggestion
Tier 4 · Agentic sourcing
GDPR / sub-processor list

Decision rule: if claimed-tier and verdict-tier differ by more than one step, the marketing-to-product gap is high — adjust pricing expectation accordingly.