Business Strategy&Lms Tech
Upscend Team
-January 29, 2026
9 min read
This article provides a project-style 90-day playbook to evaluate AR platforms for corporate training. It covers discovery, pilot scoping, technical PoCs, scripted tests, and a weighted scoring matrix, plus RFP/RFQ prompts and a checklist to run a measurable pilot and make an evidence-based decision at day 90.
To evaluate AR platforms effectively in a compressed timeframe, you need a structured playbook that balances strategy, technical proof points, and measurable outcomes. In our experience, teams that follow a disciplined 90-day plan avoid common traps—vendor overpromising, device fragmentation, and unclear ROI—and make an evidence-based decision. This article provides a project-management style playbook, a 90 day AR platform evaluation checklist for enterprises, sample RFP/RFQ questions, and a scoring matrix you can apply immediately.
Week 1–2: Discovery — Define objectives, success metrics, stakeholders, and baseline training KPIs. Agree on use cases (onboarding, safety, maintenance) and target learner profiles.
Week 3–4: Pilot scoping — Select 2–3 prioritized workflows and draft a concise pilot scope that fits the 90-day window. Identify required content types (3D models, animations, step overlays) and data privacy constraints.
This timeline forces rapid iteration: run fast, collect data, and make a go/no-go decision at day 90 with evidence.
When you evaluate AR platforms, judge vendors on a consistent set of dimensions. We've found that evaluation succeeds when teams create a weighted checklist and stick to it.
Use the table below to map required capabilities to pass/fail thresholds for an objective enterprise AR evaluation.
| Capability | Minimum Requirement | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Encryption & SSO | At-rest + in-transit encryption, SAML/SSO | Protects intellectual property and user data |
| Authoring tools | Web-based editor, template library | Reduces content creation time and TCO |
| Analytics | xAPI/CSV export, dashboard | Enables measurable learning outcomes |
Design a narrow, measurable pilot that proves the top risks: does the content run reliably on target devices, can data and analytics flow into existing systems, and can instructors author or update content within acceptable timelines?
Sample RFP questions to include:
When you evaluate AR platforms in the PoC stage, insist on a scripted test plan that your engineers and trainers run together. Capture logs, latency, and edge-case failures to avoid surprises during wider roll-out.
Run the pilot with a controlled cohort and a clear measurement plan. We recommend a 30/60/90-day breakdown within the pilot window: initial deployments, mid-pilot adjustments, and final assessment.
A practical example: for a maintenance workflow pilot, measure mean time to repair (MTTR) before and after AR guidance, track number of instructor interventions, and tie changes back to business KPIs. The turning point for most teams isn’t just creating more content — it’s removing friction. Tools like Upscend help by making analytics and personalization part of the core process, letting teams iterate on content and user paths faster while preserving governance.
Measure behavior change as well as system health. A healthy platform shows low technical failure rates and measurable gains in task success.
Provide learners with a quick feedback loop and daily check-ins during the pilot. Capture qualitative notes from instructors and users—these often reveal integration pain points not visible in logs.
Use a weighted scoring matrix to make the final decision objective. We recommend 7–9 criteria with assigned weights reflecting your priorities (security, TCO, learning impact, integration). Below is a compact template you can adapt.
| Criterion | Weight (1-10) | Vendor A (1-5) | Vendor B (1-5) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Security & Compliance | 10 | 4 | 5 | Vendor B has SOC2 report |
| Authoring & Content Pipeline | 8 | 3 | 4 | Check migration tools |
| Analytics & Reporting | 7 | 5 | 3 | Export formats differ |
How to calculate: multiply vendor score by weight, sum across rows, and normalize. A clear difference >10% is a strong signal; within 5% requires qualitative review and reference checks.
Several recurring problems slow enterprise AR adoption. Anticipate them and include mitigation steps in the PoC plan.
Additional tactical tips:
When teams ask how to compare vendors quickly, apply a two-step filter: a pass/fail technical bar (security, APIs, basic playback) followed by the weighted scoring above. That approach prevents lengthy evaluations of vendors who fail critical enterprise requirements.
To summarize, a 90-day framework to evaluate AR platforms combines disciplined timeline management, focused PoC work, and an objective scoring model. Start by defining use cases in weeks 1–2, scope and shortlist in weeks 3–4, run technical PoCs in weeks 5–8, and execute a controlled pilot with measurement in weeks 9–12.
Checklist for immediate use:
Final decision guidance: prefer vendors that meet the technical bar and demonstrate measurable learning impact during the pilot. If your team needs a compact starter kit, export the RFP questions and scoring matrix from this playbook into your project tracker and run a single 90-day sprint. The next step is to assemble the pilot team, lock scope to two core workflows, and issue a short RFQ to three vendors for sandbox access—start day 1 and keep the loops tight.
Call to action: Download this checklist and scoring template into your project plan and schedule the first 14 days of discovery to begin the 90-day evaluation.
