Procurement · Comparison worksheet
How to Compare Elevator Quotations: Scope, Exclusions and a Buyer’s Comparison Worksheet
To compare elevator quotations, first put every proposal against the same technical requirements and division of work. Then record what each supplier includes, excludes, offers separately or leaves unspecified. Compare prices only after identifying technical differences and the costs that still need confirmation.
Included, excluded, optional or unspecified.
One agreed requirement and drawing baseline.
Traceable answers and named owners.
In this guide
The useful result is a comparison record that lets your team explain a buying decision. It should show where each answer came from, which questions remain open and who must resolve them. A low total with unresolved installation scope is not yet a complete project budget.
This guide is for buyers who already have written proposals for complete elevators. Use the worksheet below with your project engineer and the parties responsible for local installation. It organizes the decision; it does not establish technical compliance or interpret your contract.
Freeze the reference that every quotation must answer
Create a comparison cover sheet before entering prices. Identify the project, destination, elevator units, current requirement schedule and drawing revision. Record the quotation reference, revision, date and validity for each supplier.
Your reference should identify the configuration that matters to the project: intended use, load requirement, car and entrance dimensions, served floors, travel, power supply, finishes and required functions. Include the applicable project requirements and the documents needed to demonstrate compliance. Use your approved technical information; do not fill an unknown dimension with a convenient assumption.
Where the project is still developing, label the comparison as preliminary and list its unresolved inputs. For example, a quotation based on an earlier shaft drawing may need technical review before its price can be compared with an offer based on the current drawing. A similar product description does not settle that difference.
JAFITA’s elevator and escalator range provides a starting point for the equipment category. Your comparison, however, should follow the specific configuration and documents submitted for your project.
Keep scope, technical fit and responsibility in separate fields
A single tick cannot tell you whether something is supplied, technically suitable and assigned to the correct party. Record those questions separately. This is particularly useful when procurement, engineering and the installation contractor review the same proposals.
Use these scope labels consistently:
| Scope label | When to use it | What to record next |
|---|---|---|
| Included | The quotation explicitly places the item within its quoted scope | Source reference and any stated conditions |
| Excluded | The quotation explicitly leaves the item outside its scope | Who will provide it and whether its cost is known |
| Optional | The item is offered separately or depends on a selected option | Exact option reference, selection decision and additional price if stated |
| Unspecified | The available documents do not settle the item | A clarification question and an owner |
In a different field, record technical review as matches the agreed baseline, deviation identified or not yet confirmed. Procurement can collect the documents, but the responsible technical party should decide whether a deviation is acceptable.
Keep the responsibility field equally specific. “By others” is an unresolved handoff until the project identifies the relevant party and that party confirms its scope. It is not a useful substitute for a named installation contractor, buyer responsibility or agreed supplier service.
Build the worksheet around the work your project actually needs
Use a separate set of supplier columns for each proposal. The following rows are prompts for checking the actual agreement; they do not assign a universal responsibility to JAFITA or any other supplier.
| Comparison area | Questions to settle |
|---|---|
| Equipment configuration | Which requirement and drawing revisions does the proposal follow? Are options and deviations identified? |
| Car, entrances and finishes | Are the specified dimensions, arrangements and finishes covered by the same reference documents? |
| Controls and interfaces | Which functions and external interfaces are included, and what information must another party provide? |
| Documents | Which drawings, instructions and project-specific evidence will be supplied, in which revision and language? |
| Packing and transport | What is the stated delivery scope and named destination or handover point? Which transport services are priced? |
| Site work | Who covers unloading, storage, access arrangements, building work and installation resources where required? |
| Installation and commissioning | Is the offer for equipment supply, remote coordination, site attendance or a defined installation service? |
| Inspection and handover | Who coordinates local inspection, submissions and the agreed handover records? |
| Warranty and later support | What written terms, conditions, exclusions and support scope apply to this proposal? |
| Schedule and payment | Which events start each period, what buyer inputs are needed, and which payment terms apply? |
JAFITA states that installation, commissioning, local inspection and regulatory approval responsibilities should be defined before equipment supply. Its Installation Commissioning page also makes the support scope dependent on the actual project and agreement. Use that same level of specificity when comparing proposals.
Copy this record for each material requirement. Add supplier columns as needed.
| Requirement / baseline reference | Supplier A: scope label and source | Supplier B: scope label and source | Technical review | Open question / responsible party |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enter the requirement and revision | Enter the label and quotation page or clause | Enter the label and quotation page or clause | Record the technical conclusion or pending review | State what must be confirmed and by whom |
Keep a separate commercial record alongside it:
| Item | Quoted amount and currency | What the amount covers | Confirmed additional cost | Cost still unresolved | Evidence / revision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enter the item | Copy the written amount | Define the priced boundary | Enter only a supported amount | Describe the unknown; leave it unpriced | Link the supporting document |
The source reference matters as much as the label. If a reviewer cannot locate the statement behind “included,” the row needs another look.
Work through differences before choosing a total
Consider this hypothetical comparison. It illustrates how to use the worksheet; it is not a customer quotation or a JAFITA service offer.
| Item | Proposal A | Proposal B | What the buyer should do |
|---|---|---|---|
| Drawing basis | Refers to drawing R1 | Refers to drawing R2 | Ask the technical owner which revision is the comparison baseline and obtain confirmation of each proposal against it |
| Commissioning support | Remote support stated | Site attendance stated; duration and covered activities unspecified | Request the exact activities, attendance basis and responsibilities before treating the services as equivalent |
| Installation labor | Explicitly excluded | Not mentioned | Record A as excluded and B as unspecified; establish who provides the required labor and obtain its scope |
The remote-support and site-attendance offers may both be useful. They answer different project needs unless their scope is clarified. The worksheet should expose that choice rather than quietly treating the descriptions as interchangeable.
If an acceptable technical alternative is offered, keep it in a separate option comparison. Record its changed configuration, price basis, operational implications and required approvals. Do not replace the agreed baseline with the alternative without showing the change.
Keep unknown costs visible
An unspecified item has an unknown cost, not a zero cost. Likewise, an excluded item may still be required by the project even though it does not appear in the supplier’s total.
Keep the original quoted amounts intact. Add confirmed outside-scope amounts in separate rows, with their source and currency. If your team converts currencies for an internal comparison, state the chosen conversion basis and date, and retain the original amounts. Do not present an internal conversion as a revised supplier quotation.
Where required costs remain unresolved, label the result confirmed costs to date and attach the open-items list. Calling that figure the final installed cost would hide the remaining decisions.
Also check whether the quotations use comparable quantities, selected options and schedule assumptions. A price tied to a different quantity or an unconfirmed approval date should carry that condition into the review.
Send questions that can be closed in writing
Avoid sending a supplier a general request to “confirm everything is included.” Refer to a specific requirement, the relevant proposal text and the answer you need.
For the commissioning example, a useful clarification might read:
The proposal states site commissioning attendance. Please identify the activities included, the basis and duration of attendance, required site readiness, the local party responsible for the work, and any separately priced items. Please reference the quotation revision to which your answer applies.
Record the response against the original row. Where it changes scope, ask for the resulting commercial and technical documents to be aligned. Save the accepted revision alongside any earlier document that remains relevant to the decision record.
| Clarification reference | Requirement and source | Question | Owner | Agreed response date | Response / revised document | Review outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assign a reference | Identify the exact item | Ask for the missing decision | Name the responsible party | Record the agreed date | Link the response and revision | Closed, open or referred for technical review |
Know when the comparison is ready for a decision
The comparison is ready for the responsible decision-makers when the material requirements have traceable answers, technical deviations have a recorded disposition, required work has an agreed owner, and remaining cost or schedule uncertainties are explicitly accepted or resolved.
An unanswered material question should remain visible. A supplier’s acknowledgement is not the same as confirmation of scope, and a procurement worksheet is not technical approval.
References and method notes
The sources below support the stated context and limits. The worksheets and hypothetical examples are editorial tools.
- ICC — Trade terms and buyer/seller responsibilities — ICC explains the allocation of costs, risks and obligations between trading parties. Use this context when identifying the agreed delivery term; the worksheet does not interpret a contract.
- International Trade Administration — Common export documents — The pro forma invoice guidance describes the goods, quantities and price information used in an export quotation. The comparison categories and example in this article are an editorial method, not an ICC or government form.