What POC Scores Don’t Tell You – Interpreting POC Scores Right

In our last blog, we explored how to design treasury POCs for real-world value. Now, with the POC complete after weeks of preparation, testing cycles, and cross-functional input, attention turns to the scores. But scoring is just the beginning. While the numbers offer useful comparisons, they rarely tell the full story.

The most effective treasury technology selections go beyond scores, recognizing them as just one part of a more nuanced evaluation. Drawing on our experience guiding financial institutions through complex system selections, we’ve identified key insights into what POC scores reveal, what they miss, and how to interpret them for real operational fit.

 

1. What Scoring Shows You

POC scoring provides essential quantitative benchmarks that enable objective comparison across vendors. A well-designed scoring framework offers several advantages:

• Standardized evaluation metrics that reduce subjective bias
• Consistent assessment across key functional areas
• Clear performance indicators for stakeholder reporting
• Baseline measurements for minimum acceptable performance

When treasury teams evaluate complex systems spanning front, middle, risk management and back-office accounting functions, these standardized metrics create a common language for comparing disparate solutions. They help identify clear strengths and weaknesses in core functionality and provide a defensible basis for initial filtering of options.

2. What Scoring Misses

Despite their value, POC scores often fail to capture critical factors that determine implementation success:

• Integration complexity with existing systems and data sources
• Vendor responsiveness and adaptability to changing requirements
• Cultural fit between your team and the vendor’s implementation approach
• Hidden costs of customization and configuration
• Long-term scalability beyond initial requirements

These qualitative factors rarely appear in scoring matrices but frequently determine whether a treasury system implementation succeeds or struggles. A vendor scoring moderately well but demonstrating exceptional responsiveness and integration capabilities may ultimately deliver more value than a high-scoring vendor with rigid implementation approaches.

Visual 1: Process-Level ScoringShows granular process-level strengths and weaknesses for deeper insights

 

3. Why Business Area and Cycle Trends Matter

The most revealing insights often emerge not from aggregate scores but from patterns across business areas and testing cycles:

• Score variations across front, middle, and back office reveal functional strengths and potential integration challenges
• Performance trends across multiple test cycles demonstrate adaptability and learning capacity
• Consistent underperformance in specific processes may indicate fundamental architectural limitations
• Improvement patterns show vendor responsiveness to feedback

4. Interpreting Scores Holistically

The most successful treasury system selections combine quantitative scoring with qualitative assessment in a holistic evaluation framework:

• Balance scoring results with implementation team capabilities and cultural fit
• Evaluate how vendors respond to challenges during the POC process
• Consider user experience feedback alongside functional scores
• Assess alignment with your treasury operating model and future roadmap
• Validate findings through cross-functional stakeholder input (Treasury, Risk, IT, Accounting)

This balanced approach treats POC results as valuable data points within a broader decision framework—not as the final verdict. It recognizes that successful implementation depends on factors beyond functionality, including team dynamics, change management capabilities, and organizational readiness.

Visual 2: Cross-Functional Collaboration in POC Evaluation

Validates message that cross-functional input strengthens decision making

 

Conclusion

Treasury teams should view POC scoring as the beginning of evaluation—not the end. By analyzing patterns across business areas and test cycles, validating findings through cross-functional stakeholder input, and balancing quantitative metrics with qualitative assessment, you transform the POC from a simple vendor comparison into a powerful validation tool. This approach builds confidence in your selection decision and lays the groundwork for successful implementation.

At Prodktr, we’re all about improving treasury and risk management operating models for successful investment firms.

Contact us for further suppport.