# Job posting, customer logo, or technical documentation: which signal should you trust?

Use an evidence scorecard to decide what a public software signal supports and what still needs corroboration.

Editorial evidence-review framework. It does not assign a statistical confidence or verify contract value.

## Score a claim, not a logo

Evidence quality depends on the claim. A live application hosted by an ATS is strong evidence for that visible recruiting workflow. A job description asking for Salesforce experience may describe a desired skill, an old stack, or work for a client. Neither source proves company-wide spend.

Before scoring, write one sentence you want to establish: “Company X uses vendor Y for its public recruiting workflow” is narrower and more testable than “Company X is a major customer.”

## The signal comparison



Signal	What it can support	What to check
Public job board integration	Vendor operates the observed application workflow	Company domain, current link, and scope.
Job posting skill requirement	The company requests experience with a tool	Role context, date, client work, and alternative tools.
Customer logo	Publisher presents a customer association	Linked story, date, permission, and current scope.
Customer case study	A named use case reported by a participant	Publication date and whether details remain current.
Technical documentation	A described integration or deployed workflow	Example code versus actual company implementation.
Subprocessor disclosure	A named processing relationship within stated scope	Region, purpose, version, and intermediary delivery.

## A four-part review card

For every record, mark identity, provenance, timing, and scope as documented, unresolved, or contradicted. Do not add the marks into a pseudo-precise probability. An unresolved identity can defeat the claim even when the other three are clear.

Example: a company’s careers page links directly to its hosted application board. Identity and provenance are documented. The observation date is known. Scope is the public application workflow. Internal HR systems, contract value, and the contract start date remain outside the claim.

## Set the next action

If the claim is supported, save the narrow statement and sources. If it is ambiguous, identify one corroborating source to seek. If the sources contradict each other, preserve both and state the conflict rather than selecting the convenient one.

A new observation is not necessarily a new adoption. Historical movement requires comparable earlier evidence. The same syndicated job listing repeated on ten sites is still one underlying signal.

## Checklist

[ ] Write the exact claim.
[ ] Document identity and original provenance.
[ ] Record both source and observation dates.
[ ] Limit the claim to the observed scope.
[ ] Preserve contradictions and missing evidence.

Notes: