Seven checks for commercial teams choosing loyalty software

The costliest mistake is approving a platform from its monthly licence alone. Setup, migration, integrations, support and transaction charges can overturn the business case; a £400 monthly licence paired with £9,000 in setup is not a cheap commitment by default. Compare the total obligation before choosing a supplier, not just its recurring fee.

Mistake: treating the licence as the full price

A low recurring fee can look attractive while leaving important costs outside the comparison. Setup, migration, integration work, support tiers and transaction charges all affect what the scheme will require, so relying on a headline price can produce a misleading view of the commitment.

Fix this by recording the expected charges together and comparing whole-scheme costs across the same period. Include charges beyond licensing, rather than treating them as later operational details. Check whether setup or continuing fees change the case for proceeding before selecting a provider.

Mistake: letting a supplier demo set the requirements

When demonstrations happen before the team agrees what matters, a persuasive presentation can influence the requirements and skew later scoring. The resulting preference may reflect the demo rather than the scheme's needs. Defining criteria first gives the commercial team a consistent basis for reviewing different offers.

Write down the required features before supplier calls, then follow a clear selection process. Criteria might include points, tiers, a reward catalogue, referral tracking and point-of-sale or ecommerce connections. LoyaltyLion, Yotpo, Smile.io, Antavo, Eagle Eye and Comarch are examples for a product comparison, not a ranking or guarantee of fit.

Mistake: leaving connections and data return unclear

Unclear integration claims can leave the team unsure whether the platform connects to its required ecommerce, point-of-sale or CRM systems. If the contract also leaves data return unresolved, the organisation may not know how member and transaction information can be recovered when the relationship ends.

Ask the supplier to describe required connections and the form in which data can be returned. Put member-data terms in writing, including export arrangements, and consider exit alongside implementation rather than only at renewal. Treat an answer that leaves ownership or recovery uncertain as an unresolved risk for your organisation.

Mistake: accepting promises without supporting evidence

A general assurance does not establish that a supplier can meet a requirement. Without documentation, named references or a sample data-flow diagram, the team cannot distinguish a substantiated capability from an untested claim. Treating an unsupported statement as confirmed can also weaken the record behind the eventual decision.

Request comparable material from every supplier and record what each item demonstrates. Mark claims without evidence as unproven, then revisit them rather than quietly treating them as satisfied. Use evidence-based comparisons to keep the assessment consistent and retain a record of the material considered.

Mistake: changing the scoring standard mid-review

If the panel has not agreed how requirements will be weighted, members can apply different standards and personal preferences may appear to be analysis. Scores become harder to compare when the rules shift during evaluation. Agreeing the treatment in advance makes the reasoning behind each result easier to follow.

Set the weights before scoring begins, keep them visible and record disagreements as they arise. The written reason for a score matters alongside the result: it shows whether the panel applied its agreed approach or relied on a preference that had not been set out beforehand.

Mistake: postponing consent and privacy questions

Loyalty schemes collect behavioural data, so leaving consent, retention and processor arrangements until after selection risks carrying unresolved questions into launch. The review should consider the UK GDPR storage limitation principle, processor requirements and whether email or text marketing complies with PECR, as well as the applicable UK loyalty rules.

Ask how the provider supports consent withdrawal, subject access requests and deletion when the contract ends. Check whether your organisation needs to pay the ICO data protection fee against the ICO's register of fee payers, and include a data protection review in supplier assessment rather than treating it as post-selection work.

Mistake: approving member terms without review

Supplier paperwork is not the only set of terms that matters. Reward promises can create obligations to members, and consumer-facing wording needs scrutiny as well as the commercial contract. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 provisions on unfair terms are relevant to that review; its explanatory notes provide background.

Review the Competition and Markets Authority's guidance on unfair contract terms, particularly where a supplier proposes exclusivity or limits data portability. Have your own solicitor review the final wording rather than relying on a provider's template. Resolving those points before signing helps prevent unclear obligations being carried into the scheme's launch.