agentic-team-templates 0.19.0 → 0.20.0

package/templates/business/supply-chain/.cursor/rules/supplier-evaluation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,298 @@
+# Supplier Evaluation
+
+Guidelines for supplier selection, performance management, and relationship development.
+
+## Core Principle
+
+**Suppliers are partners, not adversaries.** The best supply chains are built on transparent, mutually beneficial relationships with rigorously evaluated suppliers. Measure performance objectively, communicate expectations clearly, and develop strategic suppliers for long-term advantage.
+
+## Supplier Scorecard Framework
+
+### Performance Categories
+
+| Category | Weight | Key Metrics |
+|----------|--------|-------------|
+| Delivery | 30% | On-time delivery, lead time consistency |
+| Quality | 30% | Defect rate, first-pass yield, CAPA responsiveness |
+| Cost | 25% | Price competitiveness, cost reduction initiatives |
+| Service | 15% | Communication, flexibility, innovation |
+
+### Scoring Scale
+
+| Score | Rating | Description |
+|-------|--------|-------------|
+| 9-10 | Excellent | Exceeds expectations consistently |
+| 7-8 | Good | Meets expectations with minor gaps |
+| 5-6 | Acceptable | Meets minimum requirements |
+| 3-4 | Below Standard | Frequent issues requiring intervention |
+| 1-2 | Unacceptable | Failing to meet requirements |
+
+### Scorecard Template
+
+```markdown
+## Supplier Scorecard: [Supplier Name]
+### Period: [Quarter/Year]
+
+### Delivery Performance (30%)
+| Metric | Target | Actual | Score |
+|--------|--------|--------|-------|
+| On-time delivery rate | > 95% | [X%] | [1-10] |
+| Average lead time | [X days] | [Y days] | [1-10] |
+| Lead time variability | < 2 days StdDev | [Y days] | [1-10] |
+| Fill rate | > 98% | [X%] | [1-10] |
+**Category Score: [Weighted Average]**
+
+### Quality Performance (30%)
+| Metric | Target | Actual | Score |
+|--------|--------|--------|-------|
+| Incoming defect rate | < 0.5% | [X%] | [1-10] |
+| First-pass yield | > 98% | [X%] | [1-10] |
+| CAPA response time | < 5 business days | [Y days] | [1-10] |
+| Customer complaints traced to supplier | 0 | [X] | [1-10] |
+**Category Score: [Weighted Average]**
+
+### Cost Performance (25%)
+| Metric | Target | Actual | Score |
+|--------|--------|--------|-------|
+| Price vs market benchmark | Within 5% | [X%] | [1-10] |
+| Year-over-year cost reduction | > 2% | [X%] | [1-10] |
+| Invoice accuracy | > 99% | [X%] | [1-10] |
+| Total cost of ownership trend | Decreasing | [Trend] | [1-10] |
+**Category Score: [Weighted Average]**
+
+### Service Performance (15%)
+| Metric | Target | Actual | Score |
+|--------|--------|--------|-------|
+| Communication responsiveness | < 24 hrs | [X hrs] | [1-10] |
+| Flexibility on rush orders | > 80% acceptance | [X%] | [1-10] |
+| Innovation proposals/year | > 2 | [X] | [1-10] |
+| ESG/sustainability compliance | Compliant | [Status] | [1-10] |
+**Category Score: [Weighted Average]**
+
+### Overall Score: [Weighted Total]
+### Classification: [Strategic | Preferred | Approved | Probation | Exit]
+```
+
+### Classification Actions
+
+| Classification | Score Range | Actions |
+|---------------|------------|---------|
+| Strategic | 8.5-10 | Collaborate on innovation, long-term agreements, joint planning |
+| Preferred | 7.0-8.4 | Increase volume consideration, development programs |
+| Approved | 5.0-6.9 | Standard management, improvement expectations |
+| Probation | 3.0-4.9 | Formal improvement plan, monthly reviews, reduce volume |
+| Exit | < 3.0 | Begin transition to alternative supplier |
+
+## RFQ Process
+
+### Step-by-Step Guide
+
+```text
+1. Requirements Definition (Week 1)
+   ├── Technical specifications
+   ├── Quality requirements
+   ├── Volume projections (min/max)
+   ├── Delivery requirements
+   └── Commercial terms expectations
+
+2. Supplier Identification (Week 2)
+   ├── Existing approved suppliers
+   ├── Industry referrals
+   ├── Trade show contacts
+   └── Minimum 3 suppliers per RFQ
+
+3. RFQ Issuance (Week 3)
+   ├── Send standardized RFQ package
+   ├── Include evaluation criteria and weights
+   ├── Set clear response deadline
+   └── Offer supplier Q&A session
+
+4. Bid Evaluation (Week 4-5)
+   ├── Normalize bids to common basis
+   ├── Score against published criteria
+   ├── Identify clarification needs
+   └── Create comparison matrix
+
+5. Negotiation (Week 5-6)
+   ├── Shortlist top 2-3 suppliers
+   ├── Negotiate on total value, not just price
+   ├── Document agreed terms
+   └── Conduct reference checks
+
+6. Award & Onboarding (Week 7-8)
+   ├── Issue formal award letter
+   ├── Execute contract
+   ├── Onboard in systems
+   └── Conduct first article inspection
+```
+
+### RFQ Evaluation Matrix
+
+```markdown
+| Criteria | Weight | Supplier A | Supplier B | Supplier C |
+|----------|--------|-----------|-----------|-----------|
+| Unit price | 25% | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
+| Quality capability | 25% | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
+| Delivery performance | 20% | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
+| Technical capability | 15% | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
+| Financial stability | 10% | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
+| Sustainability | 5% | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] |
+| **Weighted Total** | **100%** | **[Total]** | **[Total]** | **[Total]** |
+```
+
+## Quality Audit Framework
+
+### Audit Types
+
+| Type | Frequency | Scope | When |
+|------|-----------|-------|------|
+| Pre-qualification | Once | Full facility | Before approval |
+| Routine | Annual | Systems and processes | Ongoing suppliers |
+| For-cause | As needed | Specific issue | After quality event |
+| Process | Bi-annual | Specific production line | Critical components |
+
+### Audit Checklist Categories
+
+```text
+1. Quality Management System
+   ├── Certifications (ISO 9001, IATF 16949, etc.)
+   ├── Document control
+   ├── Corrective action process
+   └── Management review records
+
+2. Production Capability
+   ├── Equipment condition and maintenance
+   ├── Process controls and monitoring
+   ├── Operator training records
+   └── Capacity vs. current load
+
+3. Incoming Material Control
+   ├── Receiving inspection
+   ├── Sub-tier supplier management
+   ├── Material traceability
+   └── Storage conditions
+
+4. Outgoing Quality
+   ├── Final inspection procedures
+   ├── Statistical process control
+   ├── Packaging and labeling
+   └── Shipping controls
+
+5. Continuous Improvement
+   ├── KPI tracking and trending
+   ├── Root cause analysis capability
+   ├── Cost reduction initiatives
+   └── Innovation and technology investment
+```
+
+## Dual-Sourcing Strategy
+
+### When to Dual-Source
+
+| Factor | Single Source OK | Dual Source Required |
+|--------|-----------------|---------------------|
+| Revenue impact of stockout | Low (< $50K/week) | High (> $50K/week) |
+| Number of qualified suppliers | Many (5+) | Few (2-3) |
+| Supplier financial risk | Low | Medium-High |
+| Geographic concentration | Diverse region | Single region/country |
+| Lead time | Short (< 2 weeks) | Long (> 6 weeks) |
+| Custom/proprietary | Off-the-shelf | Highly customized |
+
+### Volume Allocation Models
+
+```text
+Model 1: 70/30 Split
+  Primary:   70% (best cost/quality)
+  Secondary: 30% (geographic diversity)
+
+Model 2: 60/40 Split
+  Primary:   60% (incumbent)
+  Secondary: 40% (challenger to drive competition)
+
+Model 3: Dynamic Allocation
+  Allocate based on rolling scorecard performance
+  Quarterly rebalancing within 60-40 to 80-20 range
+```
+
+## Supplier Development Programs
+
+### Development Tiers
+
+| Tier | Criteria | Investment |
+|------|----------|------------|
+| Strategic | Top 5% by spend, critical components | Joint improvement teams, co-investment |
+| Key | Top 20% by spend | Training programs, quarterly business reviews |
+| Standard | All other approved suppliers | Scorecard feedback, annual review |
+
+### Quarterly Business Review Agenda
+
+```markdown
+## QBR: [Supplier Name] - [Quarter]
+
+### 1. Performance Review (20 min)
+- Scorecard results
+- Trend analysis
+- Open corrective actions
+
+### 2. Commercial Review (10 min)
+- Volume vs forecast
+- Pricing agreements
+- Open invoicing issues
+
+### 3. Strategic Discussion (20 min)
+- Technology roadmap alignment
+- New product pipeline
+- Market trends and risks
+
+### 4. Improvement Actions (10 min)
+- Prior action item status
+- New improvement initiatives
+- Resource commitments
+```
+
+## Common Pitfalls
+
+### 1. Evaluating on Price Alone
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: "Supplier B is $0.50 cheaper per unit, switch immediately"
+Right: "Supplier B is $0.50 cheaper but has 3% defect rate vs 0.2%,
+        and lead time is 2 weeks longer. TCO analysis shows Supplier A is 8% cheaper overall."
+```
+
+### 2. Infrequent Scorecard Reviews
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: Review supplier performance annually
+Right: Score quarterly, review monthly for critical suppliers, share results promptly
+```
+
+### 3. No Consequences for Poor Performance
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: Supplier stays at same volume despite declining quality
+Right: Clear escalation path: warning at 6.0, probation at 4.0, exit plan at 3.0
+```
+
+### 4. Over-Consolidating to One Supplier
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: "Give 100% to Supplier A for maximum volume discount"
+Right: "Maintain qualified secondary source for critical items;
+        the risk premium of single-sourcing exceeds the volume discount"
+```
+
+### 5. Ignoring Sub-Tier Suppliers
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: "Our supplier is in Germany, so no geographic risk"
+Right: "Our supplier is in Germany, but their key raw material comes from
+        a single source in a high-risk region. Map the full supply chain."
+```
+
+### 6. Treating All Suppliers the Same
+
+```markdown
+Wrong: Same review process for $10M strategic supplier and $5K office supply vendor
+Right: Segment suppliers by spend and criticality; invest management time proportionally
+```