Global HCM Vendor Selection: Full RFP, or a Fast, Evidence-Bounded Screening First?
Current product policyLast updated August 25, 2026
Minerva judgment
Recommend launching a fast, evidence-based screening with clear deadlines and stop conditions first, establishing a global common-baseline requirement and comparison criteria before deciding whether a full RFP is needed; this path is reversible, lower cost, and allows early cut-off of losses when evidence is insufficient
Decision owner in the teaching simulationGlobal Chief HR Officer, in an independent training simulation
Human-controlled next action
The decision-maker assigns an owner to complete the fast evidence screening within the set deadline, clearly listing comparison criteria and stop/reversal conditions before reporting back for final sign-off
What would reverse the recommendation
If the fast screening cannot converge on credible global common-baseline and regional-difference comparison criteria within the set deadline (i.e., U1 remains unresolved), or if critical regulatory/integration constraints are found to have been overlooked (the risks indicated by F2, C1 materialize), the fast screening should be terminated and a full RFP launched instead
10 · Mercer
Watch the actual operation film
Global HCM Vendor Selection: Full RFP, or a Fast, Evidence-Bounded Screening First?
The Decision Room interface, case analysis, narration, captions and transcript are in English. The linked official source remains in its original language.
Evidence and endorsement boundary：Independent teaching simulation. The named consulting firm supplied the public source only; it did not use, review, endorse, sponsor, certify or commission Minerva Advisor. This evidence does not claim customer results, ROI or a permanent service-level guarantee.
Inspect the evidence, then test your own decision context.