Editorial standards, review cycle and corrections

Every page has a named expert who signs it off

No page in PIM Selection is published without sign-off from a named PIMvendors expert. The reviewer is Stephan Spijkers, co-founder of PIMvendors. The reviewer's name appears on each page.

Sign-off means three things. The reviewer has checked each external fact against its source. The reviewer has confirmed or removed each estimate. The reviewer has approved any quote attributed to them. Claims that fail one of these checks are cut.

The methodology describes how vendors are assessed. This page covers how pages are written, sourced and corrected.

Voice and house style

PIM Selection writes for buying committee members, in plain practitioner language. Readers are product data managers, heads of e-commerce, enterprise architects, procurement and compliance owners. Pages put the answer first, then the supporting points, then the evidence.

The house style uses British English, active voice and short sentences. Numbers replace adjectives where a number exists. Comparisons use tables with units in the headers. Promotional language, superlatives without evidence and star ratings are excluded.

Pages state house positions openly as the view of PIMvendors. The main one is that most PIM selections fail before the first demo, because buyers compare software before they have defined their data model.

Sourcing rules

Every external fact needs a source a reader can open. Regulation dates link to official texts or Commission guidance. Vendor facts link to vendor documentation, release notes or written vendor confirmation. Market statistics appear only with a named, checkable source.

Facts from PIMvendors itself are attributed to PIMvendors. Estimates from engagements are labelled in the sentence, for example "PIMvendors estimate". Illustrations are labelled as illustrative examples or composite patterns, and never name a client. Quotes from third parties are used only when the person said them on the record.

AI-assisted drafting

AI helps draft pages, and a human expert is accountable for every published word. Drafting starts from the house positions, the vendor records and the sources an editor supplies. The AI draft then goes through the same checks as any other draft.

The reviewer checks each fact against its source and removes any claim that cannot be traced. Statistics, prices and vendor facts produced by an AI model without a source are deleted. Quotes from Stephan Spijkers are approved by him personally before publication. Lint checks also enforce the style rules before a page reaches review.

Update cadence

Each page type has a fixed review cycle tied to how fast its subject changes. Regulation pages are reviewed monthly. Vendor pages are reviewed quarterly. Pillar pages are reviewed every 6 months.

Each page shows its last review date. Material changes between reviews, such as an acquisition, a pricing model change or a new regulatory deadline, trigger an immediate update. Those changes are recorded in the update log.

Corrections within 2 working days

Confirmed factual errors are corrected within 2 working days of the report. The corrected page carries a dated correction note that states what was wrong and what changed. Silent edits to facts are not allowed.

Typos and formatting fixes do not need a note. Changes to a verdict or a comparison always get a note, with the reason. Vendors follow the same route, as set out in the neutrality policy, and can correct facts but cannot edit opinions.

How to report an error

Send error reports via the contact form on pimvendors.com. Include three things:

• the link to the page
• the sentence or table cell that is wrong
• a source for the correct fact, if you have one

An editor confirms receipt and checks the claim against the source. When the report holds, the 2 working day correction clock starts.