Supplier Evaluation Scorecard
SkillDev toolsEvaluate and tier suppliers using a weighted scorecard per SCOR DS Supplier Management practices. Score Quality, Delivery, Cost, Responsiveness, and Sustainability. Classify suppliers as Strategic, Preferred, Approved, or Conditional. Use during vendor reviews or procurement decisions.
Use Supplier Evaluation Scorecard in Claude, ChatGPT or Ahel Desktop
Free. Sign in, add Supplier Evaluation Scorecard and connect your AI. About a minute.
Also: Claude Code · Cursor · Codex
Then ask your AI: use the Supplier Evaluation Scorecard skill
Details
Instructions available. Your AI can read the instructions. Execution depends on the setup they require.
Account requirements not reviewed. Check the skill instructions before use; Ahel provides instructions and does not run this skill.
No other account needed.
Add Ahel to your AI once: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude Code or Codex. Then ask it to use this.
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by hoavdc/codexkit in skills/codexkit-supplier-evaluation/SKILL.md and read by Ahel’s review.
When to Use
- During quarterly or annual supplier performance reviews
- When selecting vendors for new sourcing decisions
- When consolidating or rationalizing the supplier base
- When a supplier's performance triggers a review
Procedure
Step 1 — Define Evaluation Criteria
| Criterion | Weight | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Quality | 30% | Defect rate, inspection pass rate, returns |
| Delivery | 25% | On-time delivery %, lead time variance |
| Cost | 20% | Price competitiveness, total cost of ownership |
| Responsiveness | 15% | Communication speed, issue resolution time |
| Sustainability | 10% | ESG compliance, certifications, carbon footprint |
Adjust weights based on industry and strategic priorities.
Step 2 — Score Each Criterion
| Score | Level | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Excellent | Exceeds expectations consistently |
| 4 | Good | Meets expectations with occasional excellence |
| 3 | Acceptable | Meets minimum standards |
| 2 | Below Average | Frequent issues, requires monitoring |
| 1 | Unacceptable | Consistent failures, action required |
Step 3 — Calculate Weighted Total
Weighted Score = Σ (Score × Weight)
Step 4 — Tier Classification
| Weighted Score | Tier | Relationship Strategy |
|---|---|---|
| 4.5–5.0 | Strategic | Long-term partnership, innovation collaboration |
| 3.5–4.4 | Preferred | Stable relationship, volume commitment |
| 2.5–3.4 | Approved | Transactional, competitive bidding |
| < 2.5 | Conditional | Improvement plan required, phase-out risk |
Step 5 — Action Plan
For Conditional and low-Approved suppliers:
- Issue corrective action request (CAR)
- Define improvement targets with timeline
- Schedule re-evaluation in 90 days
- Identify backup supplier if no improvement
Inputs
| Input | Required | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Supplier name and category | Yes | Text |
| Performance data | Yes | Metrics per criterion |
| Contract/spend data | Recommended | Annual spend, contract terms |
| Previous evaluation | Recommended | Prior scorecard if available |
Output
## Supplier Evaluation — [Supplier Name] — [Period]
### Scorecard
| Criterion | Weight | Score | Weighted |
|-----------|--------|-------|----------|
| Quality | 30% | 4 | 1.20 |
| Delivery | 25% | 3 | 0.75 |
| Cost | 20% | 4 | 0.80 |
| Responsiveness | 15% | 5 | 0.75 |
| Sustainability | 10% | 3 | 0.30 |
| **Total** | **100%** | | **3.80** |
### Tier: PREFERRED (3.80 / 5.0)
### Improvement Areas
1. Delivery: OTD dropped to 88% (target: 95%) — root cause: warehouse capacity
2. Sustainability: No ISO 14001 certification yet — expected Q3
### Action Plan
| Action | Owner | Deadline |
|--------|-------|----------|
| Improve OTD to 95% | Supplier ops team | 90 days |
| Submit ISO 14001 timeline | Supplier quality | 60 days |
| Re-evaluate | Procurement | Q3 |
Definition of Done
- All criteria scored with evidence
- Weighted total calculated
- Tier classification assigned
- Improvement areas identified for scores ≤ 3
- Action plan with owners and deadlines for Conditional/low-Approved
Examples
Prompt
Evaluate our packaging supplier FastPack Ltd for Q1.
Quality: 96% pass rate (4/5), Delivery: 88% OTD (3/5), Cost: competitive (4/5),
Responsiveness: excellent (5/5), Sustainability: no ISO 14001 (3/5).
Generate the scorecard and improvement plan.
Quality Criteria
- Data sources and assumptions are explicitly stated
- Calculations are reproducible from provided inputs
- Visualizations or tables have clear labels, units, and time ranges
- Caveats and confidence levels are documented for estimates
Verification (4C)
| Check | Question |
|---|---|
| Correctness | Are formulas, aggregations, and statistical methods applied correctly? |
| Completeness | Does the analysis cover all requested metrics and time ranges? |
| Context-fit | Are the chosen metrics relevant to the business question being answered? |
| Consequence | If this data were used for a decision today, what blind spots remain? |
Edge Cases
- Missing or incomplete data — Document gaps and their potential impact on conclusions. Provide ranges instead of point estimates.
- Outliers skewing results — Report with and without outliers. Document the decision to include or exclude.
- Changing data definitions mid-period — Split analysis at the change boundary and note the schema difference.
Changelog
- v1.0.0 — Initial release
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 25
- Forks
- 13
- Last commit
- Oct 2026
Advanced
- Item type
- skill
- Key
codexkit-supplier-evaluation- Source
- github.com/hoavdc/codexkit