Short answer: A stampitaj partoj provizanto performance scorecard should measure the results that affect usable supply: accepted quality, on-time delivery, document accuracy, response and corrective-action closure, approved change control, and commercial follow-through. Define the review period and denominator before scoring. Use the result to assign actions, not to replace engineering judgment or turn one late shipment into an automatic sourcing decision.
A pre-award provizanto audit asks whether a fabriko appears capable. A performance scorecard asks what happened after production started. Keep those questions separate. A provizanto can pass an audit and still miss release dates, send mismatched certificates, repeat the same defect, or make an unapproved process change. It can also have one difficult month for a documented reason and recover through effective action.
Use the provizanto validation framework before award. Use this page with the provizanto risk matrix once real production evidence is available.
Define the scorecard before calculating a score
Start with the part family, provizanto site, review period, currency, delivery term, and source systems. State whether delivery is measured against the original promise, the latest buyer-approved promise, warehouse receipt, or line-side need date. State whether quality is measured by rejected pieces, rejected lots, return events, or buyer disruption. Without those definitions, two teams can calculate different results from the same shipments.
| Area | Evidence to collect | Question for the review |
|---|---|---|
| Kvalito | Receipts, accepted and rejected quantity, defect mode, containment, repeat issues, and buyer-side sorting. | Did conforming parts arrive, and did corrective action prevent recurrence? |
| Delivery | Committed date, approved date changes, actual receipt, quantity shortfall, partial shipments, and premium freight. | Was the required quantity available when the buyer needed it? |
| Documents | Drawing revision, material certificate, inspection report, plating or test report, packing list, and label accuracy. | Could receiving release the lot without chasing corrected records? |
| Response | Acknowledgement, containment timing, action owners, due dates, root cause, verification, and overdue actions. | Did the provizanto control the problem and close supported actions? |
| Change control | Materialo, tooling, processor, inspection, packaging, and location changes plus approval evidence. | Were changes reported and approved at the required point? |
| Commercial execution | Citaĵo revisions, surcharges, tooling actions, credits, invoice accuracy, and open cost commitments. | Did commercial follow-through match the agreed scope? |
Use a buyer-defined weighted score
The worksheet below is a planning aid. Enter a score from 0 to 100 for each area and weights that total 100. The browser calculates a weighted result. Your organization decides the evidence, thresholds, escalation route, and whether a metric is applicable. The values stay in this page and are not submitted or stored.
| Performance area | Score, 0-100 | Weight, % |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted quality | ||
| On-time delivery | ||
| Document accuracy | ||
| Response and closure | ||
| Change control | ||
| Commercial follow-through | Use the commercial weight field below. |
Weight total: % Weighted result: /100
Adjust scores and weights to match your approved provizanto-review method.
Keep a note beside each numeric score. "Delivery 72" is not actionable by itself. "Three partial releases missed the approved warehouse date because plated lots returned late" tells purchasing and engineering what to investigate. The note also prevents a future reviewer from treating a manually adjusted score as raw system data.
Where demand is seasonal or release quantities vary sharply, review both the overall period and the affected weeks. A provizanto may meet annual totals while repeatedly missing launch peaks. Conversely, one exceptional emergency order should not rewrite a stable twelve-month record without a documented reason.
Protect the score from misleading data
Do not mix buyer-caused changes with provizanto misses without explanation. An expedited engineering revision, late forecast, held deviation, or buyer-requested shipment split can change delivery results. Keep an exception log and require approval before changing the baseline. At the same time, do not erase recurring provizanto problems by moving every promise date after it is missed.
Kvalito data also needs context. A single rejected lot can matter more than a large number of low-risk pieces if it stops assembly. Record severity, affected quantity, escape point, repeat status, and disruption. Link repeat problems to the corrective-action evidence guide and lot identity to the traceability guide.
Turn the quarterly review into decisions
For each weak area, record the evidence, owner, action, due date, validation method, and commercial consequence. An action may be additional inspection, a packaging trial, updated capacity evidence, a die-maintenance review, a document-control correction, or a second-source qualification. Use the process-change notification guide when the response changes material, tooling, processing, inspection, or packaging.
One score should not hide a critical failure. A high overall result does not cancel an unapproved material change, missing traceability, unresolved safety concern, or repeated line interruption. Keep hard-stop criteria outside the weighted calculation. For supply risk, compare the action plan with the business continuity guide.
Prepare a provizanto review or resourcing RFQ
Use the kontakto page to share the part family, review period, drawing revision, receipts, rejected quantity, late deliveries, document errors, corrective actions, premium freight, and open tooling or price issues. Remove confidential provizanto names if you only need a neutral manufacturing review.
If performance supports a dual-source or transfer decision, use the RFQ form and include annual demand, release pattern, current tool status, sample and approval needs, target transition timing, and the evidence a new source must improve. The dual-source qualification guide can organize the Sekva step.
Oftaj Demandoj
What should a stampitaj partoj provizanto scorecard measure?
Measure accepted quality, on-time delivery, document accuracy, response and corrective-action closure, approved change control, and commercial follow-through using defined periods and denominators.
Is there one correct provizanto score threshold?
No. The buyer should set weights, thresholds, hard-stop criteria, and escalation rules based on part risk, customer requirements, and supply consequences.
How should late deliveries be counted?
Define the promise date, required quantity, approved date changes, receipt point, partial-shipment rule, and buyer-caused exceptions before calculating delivery performance.
When should a scorecard trigger resourcing?
Consider resourcing when supported actions do not close repeat quality, delivery, change-control, capacity, or commercial risk. The decision should include tooling, approval, inventory, and transition evidence.