Check an edited privacy policy for a procurement change

A revised privacy policy may look almost identical to the approved version, while a small edit changes what a supplier can do with customer data. Procurement reviews often need to catch specific changes to retention, subprocessors, data locations, or incident reporting before the document is accepted.

Use Text Compare to locate wording that changed between the two versions. Then review each change against the procurement request and the relevant contract terms. A text comparison can show what changed, but it cannot decide whether the new wording is acceptable.

Compare the two policy versions

1. Open Text Compare. Put the approved policy text in one input and the edited policy text in the other. If the documents are files, copy their text into the comparison inputs.
2. Use the comparison to locate additions, removals, and changed wording. Check the policy title, version date, headings, and section order so you know you are comparing the intended drafts.
3. Review the changes one at a time. For each one, note the section, the old wording, the new wording, and why it matters to the procurement change.
4. Compare those notes with the approved change request, supplier questionnaire, and contract terms. Mark each change as approved, needs clarification, or outside the request.

Before comparing, make sure both copies use the same language and cover the same scope. A policy excerpt compared with a full policy can create a long list of differences that are simply missing sections, not actual revisions. If one version has different page headers or footers, you can remove those from the text you compare, but keep a copy of each original file unchanged.

What the differences mean

A clause has been added or removed

Read the full paragraph around the change, not only the words marked as different. A new exception, definition, or qualification can narrow a promise elsewhere in the policy. For procurement, check whether the edit affects how the supplier handles data, whether it shares data with subprocessors, or how long it keeps information after the service ends.

A number, deadline, or named party changed

Small edits can have a direct operational effect. Look closely at retention periods, notice deadlines, locations, named legal entities, and references to a specific service. Compare these details with the approved request and the agreement. A deadline change from 24 hours to 72 hours, for example, should be treated as a substantive change, not a wording cleanup.

The wording changed but the obligation may be similar

Different phrasing does not always mean a different promise. Read the entire sentence and the definitions it relies on. Terms such as may, will, and where practicable can change how firm an obligation is, even if most of the sentence stays the same. Ask the policy owner or legal reviewer to confirm whether the revised wording has the same effect.

A section moved or the comparison shows many changes

Reordering headings or changing formatting can make a comparison appear larger than the underlying edits. Check the surrounding paragraphs and section titles to see whether the same material has simply moved. If the drafts were exported from different formats, compare clean text copies as well as the original documents before deciding that every difference is substantive.

No differences appear

First confirm that the correct versions were placed in the comparison, and that both text inputs contain the full policy. Check whether an unchanged copy was accidentally used for both sides. A result with no changes only says the text you supplied matches; it does not confirm that the attached procurement document is the approved version.

How to resolve a mismatch

1. Check the version details. Confirm the dates, file names, supplier name, and policy scope. Keep the received file as-is so you can verify it again if there is a question.
2. Match each edit to the approved request. Write down the requested change and the corresponding revised clause. If the edit is not clearly covered, mark it for clarification rather than assuming it was included by mistake or approved implicitly.
3. Check linked obligations. Read related clauses on retention, deletion, security incidents, subprocessors, and international transfers together. An edit in one section may affect a commitment stated elsewhere.
4. Ask the supplier about unclear wording. Request a plain explanation of the change and, where needed, a clean revised copy or a redline that identifies the supplier's edits. Keep the question specific to the clause and the procurement requirement.
5. Escalate material changes. Send changes affecting data handling, risk allocation, reporting duties, or contractual commitments to the responsible legal, privacy, or security reviewer. Do not approve the policy solely because the wording looks clearer.
6. Save the review record. Keep the original, revised version, comparison notes, approvals, and supplier responses together under your organization's document-control process. This makes it easier to confirm what was reviewed later.

What a text comparison cannot decide

Text Compare identifies differences in the text you provide. It cannot confirm that a supplier's practices match the policy, that a clause complies with applicable law, or that an edited phrase preserves the original legal meaning. It may also treat formatting or section movement as differences even when the underlying commitment has not changed.

For a related review, see how to check an edited privacy policy against a supplier contract. If the policy contains confidential information, follow your organization's rules for reviewing documents in a browser. The comparison runs on your device, and the text stays there.