Capability template for procurement and suppliers

Supplier performance scorecard

Once a quarter, the buyer or operations lead scores each key supplier from the business's own order and receiving exports: on-time delivery, fill rate, defects and returns, price against agreed terms and order confirmations, with the trend, the evidence behind every score and the points to raise. A person decides.

The outcome

Every key supplier gets the same honest report card each quarter, built from what actually arrived at your door. Did the goods come on the date on the order? Did the full quantity come? How much was rejected at receiving or sent back? Was each line priced at what you agreed? Did the supplier confirm your orders promptly? Each answer is a figure with its target beside it and last quarter's figure next to that, so a slide shows up before it becomes a crisis.

Every score shows its working. A late-delivery figure lists the late lines, with their due dates and the days late. A price figure lists each line charged above the agreed price and adds up what that cost. Anyone can check any number against the exports with a calculator.

Spend and dependence sit side by side and are never blended. A small supplier you cannot replace is shown as exactly that, however little you spend with it. The scorecard then writes the points to raise at each supplier review and the questions for whoever decides: a formal warning, a change of tier, a move to another supplier, or finding an alternative where there is none. A move away from a supplier is only ever raised when an alternative is already named. People decide, people talk to suppliers, and nothing is sent or changed by the scorecard.

Who starts the work, and when

The buyer, purchasing lead or operations lead starts it once a quarter, after the quarter's deliveries are received and booked and before the quarterly supplier reviews. The owner, managing director or operations director makes the decisions it lists. The person who owns each supplier relationship raises the points at that supplier's review.

What they supply

  • The key supplier list: each supplier to score, its category, the tier your business gives it, whether it is your only source today, any alternative already named, and who owns the relationship.
  • A purchase-order lines export for the quarter: order number and line, supplier, item, order date, due date, quantity, the price on the order, and the date the supplier confirmed the order.
  • A receiving export: each receipt against its order line, with the date, the quantity that arrived and the quantity rejected at receiving, with the reason.
  • A returns export and your agreed-price list, if you keep them.
  • Last quarter's figures, to show the trend.
  • Your settings: the targets for each measure, how many days late still counts as on time, and the few counts that decide when a question is raised.

No connection to your purchasing or accounting system is needed, and none is asked for.

What comes out

One scorecard, in a fixed order:

  1. The targets and checks: rows read, suppliers in the exports that are not on your key list, and any line the scorecard could not use.
  2. A summary: targets met for each supplier, and which suppliers are your only source.
  3. One block per key supplier, highest spend first: spend, dependence, the five measures each with its target, last quarter's figure and the evidence, and the points to raise at the next review.
  4. Decisions for whoever decides, each with its facts.
  5. What was not supplied or checked, starting with the plain statement that no contract or invoice was read.

The points to raise can go on to a supplier issue notice when a person decides a supplier should be told formally.

An invented example

Illustrative example with invented data. The company, the suppliers, the people, the orders, the dates and the amounts below are all invented. The company is an invented 40-person maker of scented candles that sells online and through gift shops, called Brand R here. Its suppliers are called Supplier A to Supplier F. Its operations lead is scoring the key suppliers for the third quarter of 2026 before the quarterly supplier reviews. First come the inputs the operations lead supplied, in full, then the scorecard the capability returned.

The inputs

1. Settings (typed by the operations lead)

Company: Brand R
Today (exports run): Tuesday 6 October 2026
Quarter scored: Q3 2026, 1 July 2026 to 30 September 2026
Currency: USD
Runner: Operations lead
Decision-maker: Managing director
Targets: on time 95%; fill rate 98%; defects and returns at most 1.0%;
  price within terms 100%; orders confirmed within the window 90%
Grace days: 0
Price tolerance: 0%
Confirmation window: 2 days
Minimum to score: 5 lines; 3 orders for confirmations
Trend step: 2.0 points; 0.5 for defects and returns
Tier review count: 3
Exit count: 3

2. Key supplier list

supplier,category,tier,sole_source,alternative,owner
Supplier A,Glass jars,preferred,no,Supplier E,Operations lead
Supplier B,Soy wax,preferred,no,Supplier F,Operations lead
Supplier C,Wicks,approved,yes,,Production lead

3. Purchase-order lines export (lines due and orders placed in Q3 2026)

po,line,supplier,item,order_date,due_date,qty_ordered,unit_price,confirmed_date
PO-3101,1,Supplier A,JAR-8OZ-AMB,2026-07-01,2026-07-15,2400,0.62,2026-07-02
PO-3101,2,Supplier A,JAR-12OZ-CLR,2026-07-01,2026-07-15,1200,0.81,2026-07-02
PO-3105,1,Supplier B,WAX-SOY-20KG,2026-07-03,2026-07-17,60,58.00,2026-07-03
PO-3105,2,Supplier B,WAX-COCO-20KG,2026-07-03,2026-07-17,20,71.50,2026-07-03
PO-3110,1,Supplier C,WICK-CD10-150,2026-07-06,2026-07-27,10000,0.05,2026-07-07
PO-3110,2,Supplier C,WICK-CD12-180,2026-07-06,2026-07-27,6000,0.06,2026-07-07
PO-3118,1,Supplier A,JAR-8OZ-AMB,2026-07-20,2026-08-03,2400,0.62,2026-07-24
PO-3118,2,Supplier A,JAR-12OZ-CLR,2026-07-20,2026-08-03,1200,0.84,2026-07-24
PO-3129,1,Supplier B,WAX-SOY-20KG,2026-08-03,2026-08-17,60,58.00,2026-08-04
PO-3129,2,Supplier B,WAX-COCO-20KG,2026-08-03,2026-08-17,20,71.50,2026-08-04
PO-3133,1,Supplier D,CARTON-12,2026-07-29,2026-08-12,500,1.10,2026-07-29
PO-3140,1,Supplier A,JAR-8OZ-AMB,2026-08-17,2026-08-31,3000,0.65,2026-08-18
PO-3140,2,Supplier A,JAR-12OZ-CLR,2026-08-17,2026-08-31,1200,0.81,2026-08-18
PO-3147,1,Supplier C,WICK-CD10-150,2026-08-24,2026-09-14,12000,0.05,2026-08-28
PO-3147,2,Supplier C,WICK-CD12-180,2026-08-24,2026-09-14,6000,0.06,2026-08-28
PO-3147,3,Supplier C,WICK-CD10-150,2026-08-24,2026-09-28,8000,0.05,2026-08-28
PO-3152,1,Supplier B,WAX-SOY-20KG,2026-09-01,2026-09-15,80,58.00,2026-09-02
PO-3152,2,Supplier B,WAX-COCO-20KG,2026-09-01,2026-09-15,20,71.50,2026-09-02
PO-3166,1,Supplier A,JAR-8OZ-AMB,2026-09-08,2026-09-22,3000,0.62,
PO-3166,2,Supplier A,JAR-12OZ-CLR,2026-09-08,2026-09-22,1500,0.81,

4. Receiving export

receipt,po,line,received_date,qty_received,qty_rejected,reject_reason
RC-501,PO-3101,1,2026-07-14,2400,0,
RC-502,PO-3101,2,2026-07-14,1200,24,chipped rims
RC-503,PO-3105,1,2026-07-16,60,0,
RC-504,PO-3105,2,2026-07-16,20,1,"box torn, wax contaminated"
RC-505,PO-3110,1,2026-07-24,10000,0,
RC-506,PO-3110,2,2026-07-24,6000,0,
RC-507,PO-3118,1,2026-08-07,2400,0,
RC-508,PO-3118,2,2026-08-07,1200,0,
RC-509,PO-3133,1,2026-08-12,500,0,
RC-510,PO-3129,1,2026-08-17,60,0,
RC-511,PO-3129,2,2026-08-17,20,0,
RC-512,PO-3140,1,2026-08-31,3000,36,cracked
RC-513,PO-3140,2,2026-08-31,1200,0,
RC-514,PO-3147,1,2026-09-14,12000,0,
RC-515,PO-3147,2,2026-09-14,5400,0,
RC-516,PO-3152,1,2026-09-14,78,0,
RC-517,PO-3152,2,2026-09-14,20,1,bag split
RC-518,PO-3166,1,2026-09-22,1800,0,
RC-519,PO-3166,2,2026-09-22,1500,0,
RC-520,PO-3147,3,2026-09-25,6500,0,
RC-521,PO-3166,1,2026-09-29,1200,0,

5. Returns export

return,po,line,return_date,qty_returned,reason
RT-31,PO-3118,1,2026-08-20,48,clear jars sent as amber

6. Agreed-price list

supplier,item,agreed_price,valid_from,valid_to
Supplier A,JAR-8OZ-AMB,0.62,2026-01-01,2026-12-31
Supplier A,JAR-12OZ-CLR,0.81,2026-01-01,2026-12-31
Supplier B,WAX-SOY-20KG,58.00,2026-01-01,2026-12-31
Supplier B,WAX-COCO-20KG,71.50,2026-01-01,2026-12-31
Supplier C,WICK-CD10-150,0.05,2026-01-01,2026-12-31
Supplier C,WICK-CD12-180,0.06,2026-01-01,2026-12-31

7. Last quarter's scorecard figures

supplier,quarter,on_time,fill_rate,defects_returns,price_within_terms,confirmed_in_window
Supplier A,Q2 2026,88.9,99.1,0.4,100.0,100.0
Supplier B,Q2 2026,100.0,100.0,0.0,100.0,100.0
Supplier C,Q2 2026,100.0,99.0,0.0,100.0,not scored

The output

The output is shown here formatted for reading, with bold headings and lists. The assistant returns the same lines, in the same order, as the plain-text format in the template.

SUPPLIER PERFORMANCE SCORECARD: Brand R, Q3 2026 (1 July 2026 to 30 September 2026)

For: Operations lead. Decisions by: Managing director. Prepared Tuesday 6 October 2026 from the settings, the key supplier list (3 rows), the purchase-order lines export (20 rows), the receiving export (21 rows), the returns export (1 row), the agreed-price list (6 rows) and last quarter's figures (3 rows). Compared with: Q2 2026 scorecard.

Targets: on time 95% (grace 0 days); fill rate 98%; defects and returns at most 1.0%; price within terms 100% of lines (tolerance 0%); orders confirmed within 2 days 90%. Scored with at least 5 lines, or 3 orders for confirmations. Level means a change under 2.0 points (0.5 for defects and returns).

CHECKS

  • Rows read: key suppliers 3; order lines 20; receipts 21; returns 1; agreed prices 6; last quarter's figures 3.
  • Lines due in the quarter for key suppliers: 19. Orders placed with key suppliers in the quarter: 9.
  • Not on the key supplier list (not scored): Supplier D (1 line).
  • Receipts or returns not matched to an order line: none.
  • Over-received (counted at the ordered quantity for fill rate): none.
  • Lines with no agreed price (not counted for price): none.

SUMMARY

  • Suppliers scored: 3. Targets met: Supplier B 5 of 5; Supplier A 2 of 5; Supplier C 3 of 4.
  • Sole source: Supplier C (alternative: none named).
  • Decisions for the Managing director: 3.

1. SUPPLIER B: Soy wax. Tier: preferred. Owner: Operations lead.

  • Spend: $15,890.00 on 6 lines, 54.7% of key-supplier spend this quarter.
  • Dependence: Not sole source. Alternative named: Supplier F.
  • On time: 100.0% (6 of 6 lines). Target 95%: meets. Last quarter 100.0%: level. Late: none.
  • Fill rate: 99.2% (258 of 260 units). Target 98%: meets. Last quarter 100.0%: level. Short: PO-3152 line 1, 78 of 80.
  • Defects and returns: 0.8% (2 of 258 units: 2 rejected at receiving, 0 returned). Limit 1.0%: within. Last quarter 0.0%: worse. Rejected or returned: RC-504, PO-3105 line 2, 1 (box torn, wax contaminated); RC-517, PO-3152 line 2, 1 (bag split).
  • Price against agreed terms: 100.0% (6 of 6 lines with an agreed price). Target 100%: meets. Last quarter 100.0%: level. Above agreed: none.
  • Orders confirmed within 2 days: 100.0% (3 of 3 orders). Target 90%: meets. Last quarter 100.0%: level. Late or missing: none.
  • Targets met: 5 of 5 scored.

Points to raise at the next review:

  • Defects and returns 0.8% against a limit of 1.0%, 0.0% last quarter: 2 units rejected or returned, RC-504; RC-517. Ask what changed.

2. SUPPLIER A: Glass jars. Tier: preferred. Owner: Operations lead.

  • Spend: $10,953.00 on 8 lines, 37.7% of key-supplier spend this quarter.
  • Dependence: Not sole source. Alternative named: Supplier E.
  • On time: 62.5% (5 of 8 lines). Target 95%: below. Last quarter 88.9%: worse. Late: PO-3118 line 1, due 3 August, received 7 August (4 days late); PO-3118 line 2, due 3 August, received 7 August (4 days late); PO-3166 line 1, due 22 September, received 29 September (7 days late) in parts: 1,800 on 22 September, 1,200 on 29 September.
  • Fill rate: 100.0% (15,900 of 15,900 units). Target 98%: meets. Last quarter 99.1%: level. Short: none.
  • Defects and returns: 0.7% (108 of 15,900 units: 60 rejected at receiving, 48 returned). Limit 1.0%: within. Last quarter 0.4%: level. Rejected or returned: RC-502, PO-3101 line 2, 24 (chipped rims); RC-512, PO-3140 line 1, 36 (cracked); RT-31, PO-3118 line 1, 48 (clear jars sent as amber).
  • Price against agreed terms: 75.0% (6 of 8 lines with an agreed price). Target 100%: below. Last quarter 100.0%: worse. Above agreed: PO-3118 line 2, JAR-12OZ-CLR, $0.84 against $0.81 x 1,200 = $36.00; PO-3140 line 1, JAR-8OZ-AMB, $0.65 against $0.62 x 3,000 = $90.00. Total above agreed: $126.00.
  • Orders confirmed within 2 days: 50.0% (2 of 4 orders). Target 90%: below. Last quarter 100.0%: worse. Late or missing: PO-3118, placed 20 July, confirmed 24 July (4 days); PO-3166, placed 8 September, not confirmed.
  • Targets met: 2 of 5 scored.

Points to raise at the next review:

  • On time 62.5% against a target of 95%, 88.9% last quarter: 3 late lines, PO-3118 line 1; PO-3118 line 2; PO-3166 line 1. Ask for the cause and what will change.
  • Above the agreed price: $126.00 on 2 lines, PO-3118 line 2; PO-3140 line 1; price against agreed terms 75.0% against a target of 100%, 100.0% last quarter. Ask how it will be corrected.
  • Orders confirmed within 2 days 50.0% against a target of 90%, 100.0% last quarter: 2 orders confirmed late or not at all, PO-3118; PO-3166. Ask for the cause and what will change.

3. SUPPLIER C: Wicks. Tier: approved. Owner: Production lead.

  • Spend: $2,220.00 on 5 lines, 7.6% of key-supplier spend this quarter.
  • Dependence: Sole source. Alternative named: none named.
  • On time: 100.0% (5 of 5 lines). Target 95%: meets. Last quarter 100.0%: level. Late: none.
  • Fill rate: 95.0% (39,900 of 42,000 units). Target 98%: below. Last quarter 99.0%: worse. Short: PO-3147 line 2, 5,400 of 6,000; PO-3147 line 3, 6,500 of 8,000.
  • Defects and returns: 0.0% (0 of 39,900 units: 0 rejected at receiving, 0 returned). Limit 1.0%: within. Last quarter 0.0%: level. Rejected or returned: none.
  • Price against agreed terms: 100.0% (5 of 5 lines with an agreed price). Target 100%: meets. Last quarter 100.0%: level. Above agreed: none.
  • Orders confirmed within 2 days: too few to score (2 orders; minimum 3). Late or missing: PO-3147, placed 24 August, confirmed 28 August (4 days).
  • Targets met: 3 of 4 scored.

Points to raise at the next review:

  • Fill rate 95.0% against a target of 98%, 99.0% last quarter: 2 short lines, PO-3147 line 2; PO-3147 line 3. Ask for the cause and what will change.

DECISIONS FOR THE MANAGING DIRECTOR: 3

  1. Supplier A, warning: on time 62.5% this quarter and 88.9% last quarter, against a target of 95%. Should the Operations lead give Supplier A a formal written warning about on-time delivery? A supplier issue notice can prepare it for approval.
  2. Supplier A, tier: 3 of 5 scored measures below target this quarter (on time 62.5%; price against agreed terms 75.0%; orders confirmed within 2 days 50.0%). Should Supplier A stay preferred?
  3. Supplier C, alternative: sole source for wicks, no alternative named; spend $2,220.00, 7.6% of key-supplier spend; targets met 3 of 4 scored. Should the Production lead be asked to find and qualify an alternative supplier for wicks?

NOT SUPPLIED OR NOT CHECKED

No contract, invoice or quality certificate was read: price is the price on the order, compared with the agreed-price list as supplied. Punctuality is read from the due date each order carries; whether that date matched when the goods were really wanted is not known from these exports. Defects and returns are counted as recorded at receiving and on returns; nothing was inspected.

Every figure traces to the exports supplied for Brand R on 6 October 2026. Nothing has been sent to any supplier, and no supplier's tier or record has been changed.

Where it fits

  • Procurement and suppliers, which chooses suppliers and holds them to what was agreed.
  • Supply chain and inventory, which feels every late or short delivery on the shelf and the production line.
  • Manufacturing, where one late component or a batch of rejects stops a line.
  • Ecommerce and retail, where stock that arrives late or short becomes lost sales and unhappy customers.
  • Consumer brands, where packaging and ingredients come from a few specialist suppliers that are hard to replace.
  • Established businesses, where supplier relationships run on habit and memory and deserve a quarterly look at the facts.
  • Growth and scaling, when order volumes rise and a supplier's slips start to cost real money.

What has to change for your company

Map the column headers of your purchasing system's exports, and check that rejections at receiving are recorded there. Choose your key suppliers and name an owner for each. Set a target for each measure, the days of grace on a due date, the price tolerance and the confirmation window. Decide how many lines a measure needs before it is judged, what change counts as better or worse, and how many missed targets raise a question about a supplier's tier or a move away from it. Use your own tier names. Keep the agreed-price list current. Name who decides and where the finished scorecard is kept. It runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini, from files you supply.

What has been checked

Fully Powered AI wrote this capability template. It was editorially reviewed on 10 November 2026. It was tried on its invented example in Claude on 10 November 2026; the record is published with it. The points that run found open were settled the same day, after an independent review, without a rerun; the record lists them and says where the recorded output differs from the rules as they now stand. It has not yet been tested in a client environment. It has not yet been tested as a packaged version in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini.

Testing in your environment means running it on a past quarter your buyer knows well, with hard cases written in advance: an export whose headers do not match, a delivery that came in parts, a line with nothing received, a line priced above the agreed price, a supplier with too few orders to score, and a sole source with a small spend. The runner checks every figure against the exports before anyone relies on the scorecard. Pilot acceptance-test preparation sets those cases up, and what we test before we call an AI workflow ready describes the record we keep.

The full capability template

Everything above is the outline. The complete capability template is the working version: the roles, the inputs, the procedure, the exceptions and stop conditions, the output format, the reviewer checklist, the acceptance tests, the instructions for an AI assistant and what to customize for your company. It comes with a download and the link to its folder in Fully Powered’s public repository.

View the full template

Free with an account. Sign in by email: no password and no card.

Next step

Bring a real piece of this work to a call. We’ll walk through what it takes to fit this capability to your rules, prove it on your work and put it in the hands of the roles that own it.

Talk with us Discuss adapting this

  • Supplier issue notice

    When a supplier bills for more than was ordered or received, or falls short of an agreed delivery or quality target, the buyer gets a formal notice ready for approval: each problem set against the record, the evidence listed, what the supplier must do and the date to reply by. A person approves and sends it.

  • Vendor renewal review

    Before a supplier's notice date, the operations lead takes one page to the decision: the dates counted from the ones you supply, how much of what you pay for is used, what it has cost and what renewal would cost, how the supplier has performed, and the questions to ask. Nothing is sent or cancelled.

  • Supplier spend analysis

    From one accounts-payable export, the finance or operations lead sees where the money goes: spend cleaned and grouped by category and supplier, the few suppliers that take most of it, the tail, needs bought from several suppliers and consolidation opportunities, each with its figures. A person decides what to act on.