Write the exact statement
Record the claim as it would appear in a product description, label or buyer presentation. Identify the sales context and intended market. Broad words about quality, sustainability or performance are difficult to assess without exact wording and a clear scope.
Attach the material identity
Link the statement to the actual item, composition, finish and relevant batch or programme. A general company capability is not a product result. A claim for one approved reference should not automatically cover a substituted material or every colour in a collection.
Identify the evidence required
Ask which specification, test report, certification or transaction record could support the statement. State the question each document must answer. Keep supplier statements, document-backed facts and buyer assumptions separate so unsupported language remains visible before publication.
Check what the evidence covers
Review dates, holder, material description, method and applicable scope. An authentic document may still be irrelevant to the claim. Unmeasured properties cannot be inferred from the appearance of a swatch. Request a current applicable source where the existing evidence leaves a gap.
Ask the responsible team to review
Have the buyer's appropriate technical, marketing or compliance reviewer assess the wording for its intended use. This procurement sheet does not approve every market's product-description requirements. Record the actual reviewer, version and scope rather than describing the output as certified claim approval.
Revisit changes and repeats
A changed blend, finish, item or batch can affect evidence applicability. Carry the claim register into change control and repeat-order discussions. Mark superseded wording as history. Do not retain a claim merely because its original material passed a different review.
Your claim approval register
Illustration: a candidate's appearance is approved but a recycled-content statement is awaiting documentation. The buyer keeps those decisions separate. Use the register below to show exactly what is supported, what wording is pending and which owner must resolve the evidence gap.
Proposed statement and publishing context: [text] Material/item/version/colour or batch: [IDs] Evidence required and purpose: [list] Available source, date and scope: [references] Supported facts: [entries] Unsupported or unanswered elements: [entries] Reviewer, wording version and decision scope: [record] Changes requiring recheck: [list] Next question and owner: [entry]