Buyer-side norm proposal: contractual audit rights on assessment validation

Building on the earlier vendor-disclosure thread. We're about to start adding language to our enterprise contracts that gives the buyer the right to commission an independent validation audit annually, at the vendor's expense, with results legally protected from suppression. The principle: if your validation can't survive an audit you didn't control, your validation isn't credible. Want input from buyers and counsel on whether this is enforceable as drafted, and from other vendors on whether you'd accept it.

3 replies

Daniel Okafor Verified Needs refresh

May 14, 2026

Enforceable, with caveats. The piece that breaks in practice is the "results legally protected from suppression" clause — most vendors will push to gate publication on a joint review, which lets them slow-walk findings indefinitely. Counter-language: any finding the auditor classifies as material has to be disclosed to existing customers within 30 days.

Anaya Bhatt Verified

May 14, 2026

Academic-side perspective: this is the right direction but the audit firms don't really exist yet. The IO-psych consulting world that has the expertise also has the conflict of interest. There's a market opening for a genuinely independent assessment-audit firm and I haven't seen anyone fill it.

Reuben Foley Verified

May 15, 2026

We'd sign this tomorrow as a buyer. The non-profit sector has been asking for exactly this kind of language for a decade and the vendors have refused. Glad to see it coming from the vendor side.