Editorial standards

Every page on this site is written and reviewed by the same people who negotiate ITSM contracts for a living. This page explains who produces our content, how we research and check it, how we source figures, how we disclose AI use, and how we fix mistakes. We hold our journal to the standard we hold a vendor proposal to: specific, sourced, and honest about what we do and do not know.

Who writes this content

Our content is written by the firm's two co-founders, Morten Andersen and Fredrik Filipsson, each with 20 years negotiating ITSM and enterprise software contracts on the buyer side. Every article carries a named byline linking to the author's profile, so you can see exactly who stands behind the guidance. As a firm we have negotiated more than $420M in ITSM contract value across 500-plus engagements since 2019, spanning ServiceNow, BMC Helix, Jira Service Management, HaloITSM, Ivanti, Freshservice and the rest of the major platforms. What you read is informed by real deals, not rephrased vendor spec sheets.

How a page is researched

We start from first-hand experience: what we have actually seen in negotiations, the levers that moved a price, the clauses that protected a buyer between renewals. We ground that in primary sources, the vendor's own price lists, contract language, product documentation and licensing guides, and in benchmark data drawn from our engagements rather than guesswork. Where a number varies by deal size, region or timing, we say so instead of faking precision. Where a deadline matters, such as an end-of-life date, we cite it and date it.

How a page is reviewed before it publishes

No page goes live on the strength of a single draft. Every article is reviewed by a negotiator with direct experience of the platform or theme it covers, checked for three things: is the guidance correct from the buyer's seat, are the figures and dates accurate as of publication, and is anything stated more confidently than the evidence supports. Specialist content stays with a specialist; we do not let a generalist sign off on a platform-specific licensing question. The reviewer is responsible for the accuracy of what ships.

How we handle figures and benchmarks

Prices, list rates and product mechanics change, so we date-stamp time-sensitive material and tie claims to the source we drew them from. Our headline proof points describe outcomes across our engagements and are not a promise of a specific result; savings depend on each buyer's starting position and leverage. We state ranges where the honest answer is a range, and we revise figures when the underlying reality moves rather than leaving a stale number on a ranking page.

How we use AI

We may use AI tools to assist with drafting, structuring and editing, in the same way a writer uses a research assistant. AI never has the final word and is never the source of a factual claim. Every page is reviewed and approved by a buyer-side negotiator who is accountable for its accuracy and its stance before it publishes. The experience, judgement and figures are ours; the tools only help us get them onto the page faster.

Independence and disclosure

We are independent of every ITSM vendor and take no commissions, rebates, or referral fees from any of them, so our coverage is not shaped by anyone's marketing budget. We run no affiliate links and publish no paid placements dressed as editorial; if that ever changed we would label it clearly at the top of the page. The full statement is on our disclaimer, and how we are paid by the buyers who engage us is set out there too.

Corrections policy

We correct errors promptly and visibly. If you find a mistake, an out-of-date figure, or a broken link, tell us through our contact page. When we make a substantive correction we fix the content and update the "Updated" date shown in the page byline so you can see it has been revised. We would rather be told we are wrong and fix it than leave a buyer working from a bad number.

How to read our content

Treat everything here as buyer-side guidance for general information, not legal or financial advice for your specific contract. It is built to make you a sharper negotiator on your own deal; the decisions, and the professional sign-off where it matters, remain yours. The terms of use govern how you may use the material.