How do these compare? Give the answer some backbone.
Comparability is a platform for evaluating things rigorously and comparing them fairly. One framework, one scale, every judgment traceable — so a difference in the result means a difference in the thing assessed, not in the form someone filled in.
Comparability
Replaces
| No. | Object | What it holds | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Topic | Themes, questions, rating scales | Defines what good looks like, once, for everyone |
| 02 | Target | The thing under assessment | A coastal corridor, a department, a supplier |
| 03 | Assessment | Score, trend, confidence, commentary | Records the judgment and how sure of it you are |
| 04 | Comparison | Two targets, or one target through time | Helps you understand "is A getting better?" and "Is A better than B or C?" |
Every result is traceable to who assessed what, when, and under which version of the framework.
Not just A versus B — A versus last year
Because assessments accumulate against a versioned framework, one-off evaluations become a longitudinal record. Scores decompose into themes, questions, evidence and commentary, so a headline number can always be opened up and argued with.
Discipline
Everyone answers the same questions on the same scale. Differences in results reflect differences in the thing assessed, not differences in the form.
Transparency
A score is never a black box. Open it to its themes, its questions, the evidence and the assessor's commentary — then take the conversation from there.
Memory
Frameworks are versioned and assessments accumulate, so organisations stop re-learning what they knew. Progress, decline and drift become visible instead of anecdotal.
Workspaces, roles, and the rules of contribution
| Role | Holds responsibility for |
|---|---|
| Administrator | Designing topics — themes, questions, scales — and setting policy |
| Target manager | Defining what gets assessed, and curating proposals |
| Assessor | Doing the evaluating — score, trend, confidence, commentary |
| Reviewer | Checking the work before it stands as a result |
Environmental science
Conservation bodies scoring ecologically significant areas against consistent criteria, season after season.
Public sector
Program and data-governance maturity measured the same way across every department, then tracked.
Consultancies
A repeatable, professional instrument to run client assessments on — not another bespoke spreadsheet.
Communities of practice
Networks comparing municipal performance, wine regions or dog breeds, where many judgments must aggregate coherently.
“The question ‘how do these compare?’ deserves an answer people can trust — and keep trusting as the picture changes.”
Bring your framework, or draft one in an afternoon
Tell us what you assess and we'll set up a workspace with your topic, your targets and your roles. Existing criteria can be lifted in as-is; if you're starting fresh, assisted drafting gets a first framework on the table fast.
Comparability — know the difference.