Quote:
Originally Posted by bernievn
The intensive effort involved in Supplier Performance Measurement is a major hurdle for some procurement professionals. As a result they sometimes give up on the leading practice purely because they do not have the resourses / time to do this.
It seems that quite a few companies are now instructing suppliers to measure themselves and then report back to the buying company on this.
Is this a workable solution? What if the supplier is dishonest about their performance?
|
Suppliers needs to be evaluated regularly, e.g. bi-quarterly or whatever period suites your organisational requirements. This enables procurement to foster better supplier relationships and gian best prices, turn around times and most importantly not compromising quality.
The purpose of having a supplier performance measurement is:
To ensure that the goods and services as required by an organisation in fulfilment of its stated objectives are procured in the optimal quantities and qualitative, at the optimal time, in the most economical terms from
reputable service providers suppliers; Therefore an organisation's procurement system must be consistently fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost effective;
All of the above should be driven by a well-structured Procurement Policy.
Hence I disagree completely with organisations that say their suppliers must evaluate themselves. If they say this because of time constraints and capacity, then they must
plan timeously and
capacitate their procurement divisions and hence they will see the benefits. (adding to the bottom line)