How we review claims, Work and comparisons
The rules we follow before a statement, a project story or a comparison appears on OutsourcingVN.
Submit a project About OutsourcingVNReviewed by David Nguyen (CEO) · Updated 25 Sep 2026
Our starting position
OutsourcingVN is operated by Netbase JSC. That ownership matters. Whenever a page discusses delivery providers, outsourcing options or Netbase's own services, we have a commercial interest in your decision. This page explains how we handle that conflict and what evidence stands behind the content, so you can judge how much weight to give it.
We do not claim neutrality, and we do not publish independent rankings. Our buyer guides are written to be useful even if you end up choosing another provider, but they are written by the operator of a delivery business. You should read them that way.
How claims are sourced
A material claim is any statement a buyer might rely on: a founding year, a location, a team size, a delivered project, a security practice, a market or a time frame. Before a material claim is published, it is recorded in our claim register with:
- a stable claim ID and the exact public wording;
- the source, such as an owner-attested company fact, a delivered-project record or a dated public document;
- the date the source was checked, the evidence owner and the reviewer;
- any permission needed, for example from a client;
- its scope, limitations and the date it should be reviewed again.
When two of our own historical materials disagree, we publish the lower or narrower figure. When a figure has no method behind it, we leave it out. We would rather publish fewer numbers than numbers you cannot rely on.
How new evidence was adopted
On 25 September 2026 the register adopted evidence from the attested-fact base Netbase maintains for its own corporate site, so a set of company facts, delivery records and compliance statements now stands behind this site that previously did not.
The test did not change with the source. Each adopted fact became its own register entry, with its own published wording, its own limitations and its own review date, and where an adopted fact disagreed with a figure already published here, the lower or narrower figure stayed. Some older scale figures were left out of the register entirely for that reason.
How Work is presented
Work records describe projects Netbase has delivered. The evidence level answers one question, what the source supports us reporting, and whether the client is named is a separate question with its own answer on each record:
-
Case study
The delivered scope and the measured results recorded for that client, each carrying the period its source states
-
Client story
The delivered scope, and an outcome only where the source records one
-
Portfolio record
The delivered scope, without a measured outcome
Being named does not make a project measured. We do not fill a missing result with an estimate, and we do not borrow a figure from one project to describe another.
How clients are named
Naming rests on one of two bases, and the record says which one applies to it.
-
Client permission
Named- When it applies
- Most named records rest on the client's own permission: that client is on the list of references Netbase maintains of clients who have agreed to be named.
-
Supplier authority
Named- When it applies
- A smaller number are named on Netbase's own authority as the supplier, where the project documents are Netbase's record of its own work, no confidentiality obligation covers the engagement, and Netbase's owner has authorised publication. Those records say on the page that no client consent is on record.
-
Neither basis
Anonymised- When it applies
- A confidentiality obligation covers the work, an attested instruction withholds the name, or the client has declined. The record is anonymised no matter how well known the client is, and a logo we are allowed to display is never read as permission to name the project. Anonymised records remove names, locations and details that would identify the client.
A client who asks not to be named is unnamed: the register keeps the anonymised wording of every such record for that purpose, and the correction address below is the route.
How comparisons are built
Pages that help you compare providers, such as the software outsourcing company framework, follow extra rules:
- they state who the page is for, the criteria used and the date the criteria were last reviewed;
- they do not rank or score named competitors;
- Netbase is labelled as the operator wherever it appears as an option;
- limitations are stated on the page rather than in a footnote.
How company facts are used
Statements about Netbase itself, such as its founding year, head office, team sizes, delivery practices and markets, come from facts attested by Netbase's management and recorded with a fact ID. Figures that appear only in older sales material, or that cannot be reconciled with other records, are not used. Where a fact describes a practice rather than a result, we present it as a practice and do not imply a measured outcome.
How certifications are published
Certifications are handled under a rule of their own. Netbase JSC holds ISO 27001 certification for information security management and holds a SOC 2 Type II attestation; its compliance practices are GDPR alignment for data privacy in Europe, HIPAA-aligned methodologies for healthcare data handling, and CCPA compliance for clients with U.S. customer bases; and Netbase applies the ISO/IEC 42001 AI management system framework to its own AI delivery practice, which is an applied framework and not a certification.
-
Fixed wording
The register fixes the wording each of those may be published in.
-
No certificate details on this site
The register forbids this site from publishing a certificate or report number, an issue or expiry date, an auditor or certification body, or an audit scope. Those are answered directly in a procurement review rather than displayed as a badge.
-
No extension to client systems
The register also forbids extending any of them to a client's own product, hosting or deliverable: they describe how Netbase runs itself, not the security of a system built for a particular buyer.
Review, correction and removal
Pages are reviewed when a source changes, when a claim reaches its review date, or when someone reports a problem.
-
Report the statement
If you believe something on OutsourcingVN is inaccurate or out of date, email [email protected] with the page address and the statement concerned. Please include a source if you have one.
-
A person reviews it
A person reviews every correction request.
-
We correct, narrow or remove
If a claim can no longer be supported, we correct the page, narrow the statement or remove it. We update the page when the evidence supports a change.
Common questions
No. We use software tools, including AI models, to help with research, drafting and consistency checks. They do not approve claims, client permissions, comparisons or publication. A named person at Netbase makes those decisions and is accountable for them.
No. This method does not accredit providers, guarantee project outcomes or replace your own due diligence.
Yes. A claim that passed review can still be withdrawn if its source, permission or scope stops being current.
For the contractual side of using this site, see the website terms; for how we handle personal data, see the privacy notice.
Test your project against this approach
To understand who we are and why the site exists, read about OutsourcingVN. When you are ready to test a real need against this approach, submit a project brief. OutsourcingVN is operated by Netbase JSC and is Netbase's own outsourcing-services platform.