Evaluating intranet providers to replace SharePoint requires looking beyond the interface. A modern intranet is the digital backbone of the company: it connects people, processes, data and systems. When the decision is made only by IT, there is a risk of choosing a beautiful but hard-to-maintain platform. When it is made only by the business side, security and integration are underestimated. The right evaluation combines technical, economic and user experience criteria.
An effective SharePoint replacement is not a file migration project; it is a transformation in how people access knowledge and perform their work. Companies want an intranet that unifies news, documents, processes and data. This requires planning information governance, identity management and integration with the company's operational systems. Without those foundations, any investment will remain isolated and lose value over time.
The first criterion when evaluating a provider is real experience in corporate environments, not just demos. Ask about projects where they have integrated an intranet with active directories, CRM platforms or ERPs such as SAP, Odoo or Microsoft Dynamics. A good provider understands that business logic does not live only in the front end; it lives in APIs, permissions and approval flows. Therefore, documentation and references must demonstrate the ability to operate in complex environments.
The second criterion is architecture. An intranet must be built on a modular and scalable foundation. Many organizations choose custom software applications to avoid vendor lock-in and to adapt every module to their processes. It is also important to assess whether the provider masters AWS/Azure cloud, because infrastructure will determine latency, availability and operating cost. A well-managed cloud makes it possible to deploy development, production and disaster recovery environments with agility.
The third criterion is the integration of AI and automation. The difference between a traditional intranet and a modern one is the ability to anticipate the user: suggest documents, summarize long email threads, automate repetitive tasks and facilitate approval flows. This is where AI agents come into play, acting as assistants capable of executing processes on company systems. A provider with experience in AI solutions and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) will be able to build semantic search engines that understand natural language questions, which is essential when information volume is high.
In addition to AI, process automation must be connected to the intranet. A spreadsheet cannot govern an approval flow; the intranet must be integrated with orchestration tools such as n8n or Power Automate so that tasks are executed based on events. The provider must explain how it avoids silos and how it connects the intranet with the rest of the ecosystem, including BI data sources. In this regard, experience with Business Intelligence and Power BI is valuable: activity and performance indicators must reach executive dashboards automatically and reliably.
The fourth criterion is cybersecurity. An intranet concentrates confidential information, so security cannot be an accessory. The provider must present a threat model, a role-based access scheme, event logging and an incident response plan. In addition, if AI is connected to on-premises data, mechanisms such as VPN and private endpoints are required. Compliance policies, such as GDPR, must be integrated into the design, not added at the end. A provider that talks about cybersecurity with specifics, not just generic terms, inspires more confidence.
The fifth criterion is the working methodology. Intranet projects fail when they are delivered all at once without validation. A good provider starts with a discovery phase of current processes, identifies baseline indicators and defines bottlenecks. Then it proposes a phased delivery, with a minimum viable product in a few weeks. This delivers early results and allows scope to adjust. It is also worth asking how they manage requirement changes and what communication tools they use during development.
The sixth criterion is support and operations. An intranet does not end when it is published; it must be maintained, evolved and kept available. Ask the provider about service-level agreements, response times and the knowledge transfer model. Companies want to be autonomous in managing content and, in some cases, in configuring AI options. A well-designed administration portal reduces dependence on the technical team and allows business people to adjust their processes without writing code.
The seventh criterion is total cost. Comparing budgets only by initial investment can lead to mistakes. You need to include integration, maintenance, training, infrastructure and upgrade costs. A serious provider delivers a business case with clear indicators and an estimated payback period. If impact cannot be measured, it is hard to justify the investment to the CFO. In intranet projects, return usually comes from reduced time searching for information, faster employee onboarding and the elimination of manual tasks.
Finally, references and a proof of concept are non-negotiable. A good provider must offer contacts from clients with similar projects and be willing to run a pilot with real data. During the pilot, observe whether the team listens, whether it asks questions about the business or simply shows a demo. The best sign of success is the ability to adapt the solution to the context, not the beauty of the presentation.
To organize the evaluation, bring together business, IT and security profiles. Define success criteria, risks and priorities together. A common mistake is asking providers for an endless list of features; the key question is which problem is solved and how it is measured. Setting KPIs before starting allows you to compare options objectively and avoid losing focus during negotiation.
Q2BSTUDIO approaches this type of project with a combination of software engineering, AI and business consulting. Instead of selling a license, it designs a roadmap that begins with workflow mapping, continues with a fast MVP and ends with a solution integrated into the client's technology landscape. Its approach includes secure APIs, private AI models, process automation and dashboards for management visibility. It also incorporates cybersecurity from the start, with audits and good deployment practices in the cloud.
Q2BSTUDIO understands that the goal is not to replace SharePoint with another tool, but to create an intranet that brings measurable value to the organization. That is why it works with client teams to define impact indicators before writing code. Results typically appear as faster processes, fewer operational errors, better access to knowledge and greater adoption of AI in everyday work routines. This practical view turns technology into a business lever, not an expense without return.
In summary, evaluating intranet providers to replace SharePoint is a multidisciplinary exercise. You must analyze experience, architecture, AI, security, methodology, support and total cost. A good decision improves operational efficiency and prepares the company to use artificial intelligence safely. Invest time in the evaluation phase, ask difficult questions and demand tangible proof. That way, the new intranet will be much more than an internal website: it will be the organization's digital workplace.
