Information System (MM-IS)

MM Vendor Evaluation
Uses
The Vendor Evaluation component supports you in optimizing your procurement processes in the
case of both materials and services.
Integration
In the SAP System, Vendor Evaluation is completely integrated into the Purchasing
component !ithin aterials anagement. This means that information such as delivery dates,
prices, and "uantities can be ta#en from purchase orders.
Vendor Evaluation also uses data from the $uality anagement component, such as the results
of incoming inspections or "uality audits.
Vendor Evaluation accesses basic aterials anagement data, Inventory anagement data
%such as goods receipts&, and data from the 'ogistics Information System %'IS&. The 'IS data is
stored in the information structure S()*.
Customizing
+efore you can !or# !ith the Vendor Evaluation component, the system settings must be
maintained.
Scope of Functions
rocurement of Materials
The Vendor Evaluation component helps you select sources of supply and facilitates the continual
monitoring of e,isting supply relationships. It provides you !ith accurate information on prices,
and terms of payment and delivery. +y evaluating vendors, you can improve your enterprise-s
competitiveness.
.n the basis of detailed information, and in collaboration !ith the relevant vendors, you can
"uic#ly identify and resolve any procurement problems that may crop up from time to time.
rocurement of Services
/ou can chec# the reliability of the vendors from !hom you procure services on a plant by plant
basis. /ou can determine !hether the vendors perform the services !ithin the specified
timeframes and appraise the "uality of the !or# carried out.
Scores and Criteria
The standard SAP System offers you a scoring range from ) to )(( points, !hich is used to
measure the performance of your vendors on the basis of five main criteria.
/ou can determine and compare the performance of your vendors by reference to their overall
scores.
The main criteria available in the standard system are0
Price
$uality
1elivery
2eneral service3support
These four main criteria serve as a basis for evaluating vendors from !hom you procure
materials.
E,ternal service provision
This main criterion serves as a basis for evaluating those vendors you employ as e,ternal
service providers.
/ou can also define other or further main criteria, as re"uired.
/ou can assign different !eights to the individual criteria. The vendor4s overall score is computed
ta#ing into account the !eighted scores a!arded for each of the main criteria.
The Vendor Evaluation System ensures that evaluation of vendors is ob5ective, since all vendors
are assessed according to uniform criteria and the scores are computed automatically.
In this !ay, sub5ective impressions and 5udgments can be largely eliminated.
To create a detailed evaluation, each main criterion can be divided into several subcriteria.
The standard system provides you !ith certain subcriteria !hich suffice as a basis for evaluation.
/ou can also define your o!n additional subcriteria.
The scores for the subcriteria are calculated in different !ays.
Scoring Met!ods
Scoring met!od "escription
6ully automatically Scores are calculated by the system on the basis of e,isting data.
Semi7automatically /ou enter individual scores for important materials, or for the "uality
and timeliness of a service performed, yourself. The system then
calculates the higher7level score from these.
anually /ou enter a blan#et score for a subcriterion per vendor.
/ou can decide yourself !hich of these methods to use.
#nalyses
The results of vendor evaluation are displayed in the form of analyses. 6or e,ample, you can
generate ran#ing lists of the best vendors according to their overall scores or ran#ing lists for
specific materials.
8hanges to evaluations are recorded in logs, and you have the option of printing out evaluation
sheets.

See also$
Purchasing
MM External Services Management
%& 'rganiz& (evels of an Enterprise in t!e S#
System
Use
This section describes the organization of a typical enterprise in the SAP system. It also
demonstrates ho! Purchasing is integrated into this structure.
In the SAP System, the organization of an enterprise comprises the follo!ing levels0

Client
The highest, or corporate group level of the organizational structure.
E,ample0 2roup of companies.
Company code
This level represents an independent accounting unit !ithin a client.
E,ample0 A subsidiary company, member of a corporate group.
lant
A business location !ithin a company code.
E,ample0 anufacturing plant, regional office, branch.
urc!asing organization
an organizational unit responsible for procuring materials and services for one or more plants and
for negotiating general conditions of purchase !ith the vendor. E,ternally, the purchasing
organization is legally responsible for all purchase transactions. It is therefore al!ays assigned to
a company code.
urc!asing group
The purchasing organization is further subdivided into purchasing groups %groups of buyers&,
!hich are responsible for day7to7day buying activities.
'rganizational (evel for Vendor Evaluation
The organizational level for Vendor Evaluation is the purchasing organization0
Each purchasing organization evaluates the vendors that have been assigned to it.
The system does not support a comparison of Vendor Evaluations at the higher company code
level.
6or further information, please refer to the Purchasing documentation.
)& Master "ata
Use
Vendor Evaluation uses the follo!ing master data0
Vendor master record
aterial master record
Purchasing info record
Vendor Master *ecord
The vendor master database contains information on an enterprise-s vendors. This information is
stored in individual vendor master records. As !ell as the name and address of the vendor, a
vendor master record contains the follo!ing information0
Vendor-s currency
Terms of payment
8ontact persons %sales personnel&
Since, as a rule, vendors are simultaneously creditors of the enterprise, a vendor master record
also contains accounting data %for e,ample, a control account&.
Vendor master records are therefore maintained by both Accounting and Purchasing.
Material Master "ata+ase
The material master database contains descriptions of materials that an enterprise procures,
produces, and stores. The material master record is an enterprise4s central source of information
on a specific material. The individual material master records contain data such as the order unit,
responsible purchasing group, and over3underdelivery tolerances.
1etailed information on this topic is available in the documentation '. anaging aterial aster
1ata7 aterial aster.
The Vendor Evaluation system supports you in optimizing your procurement processes in the
case of both materials and services.
urc!asing Info *ecord
Purchasing info records %also referred to simply as info records& are used as a source of
information for Purchasing. A purchasing info record represents a specific vendor7material
relationship.
It enables buyers to "uic#ly determine0
9hich materials have been previously offered or supplied by a certain vendor
9hich vendors have offered or supplied a certain material
Content of t!e Info *ecord$
An info record includes0
8urrent prices and pricing conditions
:umber of the last purchase order
Tolerance limits for overdeliveries and underdeliveries
The vendor4s planned delivery time for the material
An info record also contains "uotation and ordering data.
6or further information, please refer to the Purchasing. documentation.

See also$
Purchasing 7 Vendor aster 1ata
Purchasing 7 aterial aster 1ata
,& Introduction to Vendor Evaluation
The follo!ing sections introduce you to the concept of vendor evaluation. They discuss the
function of the individual elements that you must be familiar !ith in order to evaluate a vendor,
and give you an overvie! of the process of computing scores.
6or more detailed information on the internal computations the system performs once you have
invo#ed the vendor evaluation function, please refer to the section ;o! the System 8omputes
Scores.
;o! you proceed in order to perform a vendor evaluation is described in the section Evaluating
Vendors
,&%& Elements of Vendor Evaluation
The follo!ing graphic sho!s the scores at various levels of Vendor Evaluation0
The most important elements of vendor evaluation are0
,&%&%& 'verall Score
"efinition
The overall score represents the general evaluation of a vendor. It is a combination of the scores
the vendor has achieved for all the main criteria.
/ou can compare different vendors on the basis of their overall scores !ithout generating a
detailed analysis of their evaluations.
Vendor 'verall score out of %--
Smith <=
+ro!n <*
>ones ?@
Thompson =A
9ilson B(

At a glance, you can see that out of the five vendors, Smith received the best
overall score, and 9ilson the !orst. Smith and +ro!n scored almost the same
points.
6or a more detailed analysis, you can compare Smith and +ro!n at the main
criteria level.
,&%&)& Main Criterion
"efinition
The main criteria form the basis for assessing the performance of a vendor. The system
calculates the vendor-s overall score from the scores achieved for the main criteria.
Use
/ou can evaluate vendors according to several main criteria that you consider important. The
scores for the main criteria are a more accurate representation of the performance of a vendor
than the overall score.
+y comparing scores at main criteria level, you can determine that vendor >ones achieved a
lo!er overall score than vendor Smith, but vendor >ones scored better in the main criterion
CPriceC. If the price of the material !ere the decisive factor for ordering purposes, you !ould
select vendor >ones %see the e,ample in .verall Score&.
Structure
/ou can determine the type and number of main criteria yourself. The system supports a
ma,imum of @@ main criteria. /ou can specify the number of main criteria for each purchasing
organization and decide !hich main criteria are to be covered by the overall score.
The follo!ing five main criteria are available in the standard system0
Price
$uality
1elivery
2en. service3support
These four main criteria serve as a basis for evaluating vendors from !hom you procure
materials.
,&%&,& Su+criterion
"efinition
Subcriteria are the smallest units for !hich scores are a!arded in Vendor Evaluation.
The system calculates a score for the relevant higher7level main criterion based on the scores a
vendor receives for the various subcriteria.
Structure
There are three types of subcriterion0
anual
/ou enter the score into the system yourself before carrying out an evaluation.
Semi7automatic
/ou enter scores for "uality and timeliness of delivery or performance at info record level
%for a material& or in the service entry sheet %for an e,ternally performed service&.
6ully automatic
/ou do not enter any data yourself. The system calculates the scores for automatic subcriteria on
the basis of data from other areas of the enterprise outside the Vendor Evaluation system %for
e,ample, 2oods Deceiving or $uality anagement&. The individual scoring methods fulfill
different purposes and involve different #inds of maintenance. 6or more information on this topic,
please refer to the section 1etermining Scores.
.ecessary Su+criteria
The automatic subcriteria provided in the standard system suffice for the evaluation of a vendor
from !hom you procure materials. That is to say, you do not necessarily have to maintain scores
for manual or semi7automatic subcriteria in order to perform evaluations.
The system allo!s for a ma,imum of t!enty subcriteria for each main criterion. In the standard
SAP System there are t!o automatic subcriteria for the main criterion CPriceC, three for the main
criterion C$ualityC, and four for the main criterion C1eliveryC. This means that you can determine
up to )<, )A, and )? additional subcriteria respectively for each of these main criteria.
There are no automatic subcriteria for the main criteria C2eneral Service3SupportC and CE,ternal
Service ProvisionC. ;o!ever, three semi7automatic subcriteria are included in the standard SAP
System for C2eneral Service3SupportC and t!o for CE,ternal Service ProvisionC. This means that
you can define up to )A and )< additional manual or semi7automatic subcriteria respectively for
these t!o main criteria.
9hen defining manual subcriteria, please note that you !ill retain a better overvie! if you #eep
the number of criteria lo!. +y doing this, you !ill also minimize your maintenance effort.
/rief "escription of t!e #utomatic Su+criteria
This section briefly describes the individual automatic subcriteria.
Price
Price level
Price history
$uality
2oods receipt
$uality audit
8omplaints3re5ection level
1elivery
.n7time delivery performance
$uantity reliability
8ompliance !ith shipping instructions
8onfirmation date
rice (evel
This subcriterion compares relationship of a vendor-s price to the mar#et price. If the vendor-s
price is lo!er than the mar#et price, he3she receives a good scoreE if it is higher than the mar#et
price he3she is assigned a poor score.
.n the basis of the subcriterion CPrice 'evelC you can compare a vendor-s price to the current
mar#et price at a certain point in time.
rice 0istory
This subcriterion compares the development of the vendor-s price !ith the mar#et price.
.n the basis of the subcriterion CPrice ;istoryC, you can determine !hether the vendor-s price has
increased or decreased over a certain period in comparison !ith changes in the mar#et price over
the same period.
1oods *eceipt
This subcriterion is used to evaluate the "uality of the material that the vendor delivers. $uality
inspection ta#es place at the time of goods receipt.
2uality #udit
This subcriterion is used to evaluate the "uality assurance system used by a company in
manufacturing products.
Complaints3*e4ection (evel
This subcriterion is used to evaluate !hether the materials delivered by the vendor are regularly
found to be faulty subse"uent to incoming inspection %for e,ample, on the shop7floor& leading to
additional e,pense and loss of time %due to loss of production, re!or#ing etc.&.
The score %$ #ey "uality figure& is calculated in $ $uality anagement and the data passed
on to Vendor Evaluation. This #ey "uality figure is converted for use in the Vendor Evaluation
scoring system.
'n-5ime "elivery erformance
This subcriterion is used to determine ho! precisely a vendor has adhered to the specified
delivery dates.
2uantity *elia+ility
This subcriterion is used to determine !hether a vendor has delivered the "uantity specified in
the purchase order.
C.n7Time 1elivery PerformanceC and C$uantity DeliabilityC al!ays have to be
seen in con5unction. /ou can specify for each material %in the material master
record& or for all materials %in the system settings& the minimum "uantity of the
ordered materials that must be delivered in order for a goods receipt to be
included in the evaluation. This enables you to avoid a situation in !hich a
punctual goods receipt involving only a small "uantity of ordered materials is
included in the evaluation !ith a good score for C.n7Time 1elivery PerformanceC.
If this minimum "uantity is not delivered, the vendor is not a!arded a score.
;o!ever, in this case the vendor receives a bad score for C$uantity DeliabilityC.
Compliance 6it! S!ipping Instructions
This subcriterion is used to determine ho! precisely a vendor complies !ith your instructions for
the shipping or pac#ing of a material.
Confirmation "ate
This subcriterion is used to determine !hether a vendor adheres to a previously confirmed
delivery date %that is, !hether the goods are actually received on the date previously confirmed
by the vendor&.
,&%&7& Scoring *ange
"efinition
To compare the performance of one vendor !ith another, it is necessary to establish a range %or
scale& of possible scores.
/ou can define your o!n scoring range from the !orst7 to the best7possible achievable score.
The e,amples in this documentation are based on a scoring range of ) to )(( points. This scale
provides you !ith a good overvie! and also permits "uite a finely differentiated rating of individual
vendors.
The scoring range is defined !hen the system is configured.
,&%&8& 6eig!ting of Scores
"efinition
The scores a vendor is a!arded for main criteria can be !eighted differently to reflect differences
in the significance of the criteria.
Structure
6eig!ting Factor
+y using !eighting factors, you can increase or reduce the importance of certain criteria !hen a
score is calculated at the ne,t highest level.
Suppose a vendor receives <( points for the criterion CPriceC and <( points for
the criterion CServiceC. Since the price of the material is more important to you
than the service the vendor provides, you assign the criterion CPriceC a !eighting
factor of * and the criterion CServiceC a factor of ). The <( points for Price are
then !orth three times more than the <( points for Service !hen the overall
score is calculated.
6eig!ting 9eys
A !eighting #ey is an identifier under !hich the !eighting factors for a number of main criteria can
be grouped together and saved.
If you #no! that you !ill !ant to carry out an evaluation repeatedly !ith certain main criteria and
certain !eighting factors, you can save this combination under a !eighting #ey.
9hen you carry out the ne,t vendor evaluation, 5ust enter the relevant !eighting #ey instead of
entering a !eighting factor for each individual criterion. The system then automatically sets all the
!eighting factors.
There are t!o possible types of !eighting #ey in the standard system0
Fey ()
Fey (G
Fey () permits the e"ual !eighting of all criteria.
Fey (G enables you to evaluate vendors supplying small parts, for e,ample.
The !eighting factors under this #ey are distributed as follo!s0
Price =
$uality *
1elivery G
2en. service3support )
E,ternal service provision G
,&)& "etermining Scores
The follo!ing sections give an overvie! of the sources of the data used in Vendor Evaluation and
e,plain ho! the system uses this data to calculate scores for main and subcriteria in order to
arrive at an overall score for a vend
,&)&%& "etermining t!e 'verall Score
Use
The system calculates the overall score for a vendor from the scores for the individual main
criteria, ta#ing into account the !eighting factors you assigned to each main criterion.
,&)&)& "etermining Scores for Main Criteria
Use
The system calculates a vendor-s score for a main criterion from the scores for the subcriteria into
!hich the latter has been subdivided.
If you do not define any subcriteria for a main criterion, the system cannot calculate a score. In
this case, you must manually enter a score for the main criterion.
/ou can !eight subcriteria in the same !ay as main criteria, e,cept that subcriteria do not have a
!eighting #ey.
There are no automatic main criteria. 6or e,ample, if you !ant to have a main
criterion called C.n7Time 1eliveryC for !hich the score is calculated
automatically, you must define the automatic subcriterion C.n7Time 1eliveryC as
the only subcriterion for the main criterion. The score calculated for this
subcriterion then corresponds to that for the main criterion.
,&)&,& "etermining t!e Scores for Su+criteria
Use
The scores for subcriteria can be determined manually, semi7automatically, or fully automatically.
This note concerns the semi7automatic subcriteria0
Evaluations of materials are recorded at info record level. There is no field in the
info record in !hich evaluations are stored.
9hen info records are referred to, the evaluation records at info record level are
meant.
Evaluations of services are entered in the service entry sheet.
The follo!ing graphic provides an overvie! of the three methods %!ith regard to the semi7
automatic subcriteria, the representation is restricted to the info record level&0
Information is available on the follo!ing topics0
anual Scoring
Semi7Automatic Scoring
6ully Automatic Scoring
Manual Scoring
Use
9ith this method, you enter the vendor-s score for a subcriterion in the Vendor Evaluation system
yourself before carrying out an evaluation. The system includes this score in the computation of
the score for the higher7level main criterion.
The follo!ing graphic outlines the manual scoring method0
If you enter a manual score for a vendor from !hom you procure materials, the score is a blan#et
score for the vendor, applicable to all the materials supplied by the latter.
This method is recommended for evaluations in !hich you are not especially interested in
particular materials. It does not need much maintenance, since you are not re"uired to enter
individual scores over longer periods of time.
+efore each ne! evaluation, you should chec# %and, if necessary, change& the scores for manual
subcriteria.
Semi-#utomatic Scoring
Use
The semi7automatic scoring method is applied in evaluation at info record level and in evaluation
at the level of the service entry sheet. Instead of a!arding a vendor a single blan#et score for all
his materials or services, you maintain0
A number of scores %at info record level& for each material you consider to be particularly
important.
Scores for the "uality and timeliness of each e,ternal service performed for you. These
scores are updated at the time of service acceptance.
The follo!ing graphic outlines the semi7automatic scoring method. %It is limited to the info record
level.&

This method allo!s the score for a subcriterion to be calculated from a broader base of data.
Scores obtained in this !ay are more meaningful and ob5ective.
#ctivities
9hen you carry out a vendor evaluation after a certain period of time, the follo!ing occurs0
In determining the scores, the system ta#es all the scores you previously entered at info
record level into account and computes the average.
Hpon service acceptance, the scores you entered in the service entry sheet are
incorporated %after smoothing& in the e,isting scores for the current month. The system
no! determines the scores for the current month for each plant and computes the
average. See also $uality of Service Provision, Timeliness of Service Provision %ain
8riterion CE,ternal Service ProvisionC&.
aterial7specific evaluations also afford the advantage that you can run analyses comparing the
various vendors of a certain material.
6or more on this topic, see also the section Deports and Analyses in Vendor Evaluation.
Fully #utomatic Scoring
Use
In contrast to the manual and semi7automatic methods, !ith this method you do not enter any
data or scores yourself. This method is not used for evaluating e,ternal services.
The follo!ing graphic outlines the fully automatic scoring method0


The system calculates the scores for automatic subcriteria on the basis of data from other areas
of the enterprise %for e,ample, 2oods Deceiving or $uality anagement&. This data is entered in
Vendor Evaluation !hen the statistics files are automatically updated.
Each automatic subcriterion is based on one calculation approach.
6or e,ample, the system chec#s all purchase orders and goods receipts, then it calculates a
vendor-s score for the subcriterion C.n7Time 1elivery PerformanceC on the basis of the average
variance bet!een actual and planned delivery dates.
The follo!ing table lists the automatic subcriteria for the main criteria CPriceC, C$ualityC, and
C1eliveryC in the standard system0
Main Criterion Su+criteria
rice
Price level
Price history
2uality
2oods receipt
$uality audit
8omplaints3re5ection level
"elivery
.n7time delivery performance
$uantity reliability
8ompliance !ith shipping instructions
8onfirmation date
6or the main criterion C2eneral Service3SupportC, the semi7automatic subcriteria
CDeliabilityC, CInnovationC, and C8ustomer %After7Sales& ServiceC are available. 6or
the main criterion CE,ternal Service ProvisionC the semi7automatic criteria
C$uality of ServiceC and CTimeliness of ServiceC can be used.
,&)&7& C!anging Scores Manually
Use
In certain cases, you may !ish to change scores.
6or e,ample, suppose a vendor has missed delivery dates because of a lengthy stri#e. This
results in the vendor achieving a very poor score for the automatic subcriterion C.n7Time 1elivery
PerformanceC. If you do not !ant this e,ceptional situation to ma#e a significant difference to the
vendor-s score, you can over!rite the score !ith a better one.
rere:uisite
+efore you can change a score for a subcriterion, the field must be ready to accept input and you
must be authorized to ma#e changes.
Authorizations and field attributes are maintained in 8ustomizing.
7& Evaluating Vendors
7&%& Evaluating Vendors$ Steps
The follo!ing graphic sho!s the steps you must carry out to evaluate a vendor0
7&)& rere:uisites for Vendor Evaluation
Use
The evaluation of vendors is sub5ect to certain preconditions.
rere:uisites
/ou can start the vendor evaluation process if the follo!ing "uestions have been clarified0
;ave you maintained the system settingsI
1o you have the re"uired authorizationsI
9hich vendor do you !ant to evaluateI %vendor #ey&
9hich purchasing organization is to evaluate the vendorI
%Purchasing organization #ey.&
Is this the first time the vendor has been evaluatedI
If not, !hen !as the last evaluationI
7&,& Evaluation Using Fully #utomatic
Su+criteria
Use
The follo!ing sections e,plain ho! to evaluate a vendor purely on the basis of automatic
subcriteria. 6or this type of evaluation, you are only re"uired to carry out the most basic steps.
#ctivities
Scoring ethods for Subcriteria
Dunning a Vendor Evaluation
8alculating the Score for an Individual ain 8riterion
Scoring Met!ods for Su+criteria
Use
"etermining t!e Scoring Met!od for Su+criteria
/ou can determine !hich scoring method has been assigned to a subcriterion on the screen
sho!ing the subcriteria for a main criterion.
The #eys for the different scoring methods can be found in the M column of the Evaluation of
subcriteria area. The follo!ing table sho!s ho! they are assigned.
Scoring Met!od 9ey
anually -J-
Semi7automatically ), 8, and 1
6ully automatically G 7 @, A, and +

Scoring Met!ods for #utomatic Su+criteria
Scores for automatic subcriteria can be calculated as follo!s0
Su+criterion Scoring met!od
Price level B
Price history =

2oods receipt inspection lot A
$uality audit @
8omplaints3re5ection level <

.n7time delivery performance *
$uantity reliability G
8ompliance !ith shipping instructions ?
8onfirmation date +
*unning a Vendor Evaluation
1. 6rom the system menu, choose Logistics -> Materials management -> Purchasing and
then Master data -> Vendor evaluation
Maintain. The initial screen appears.
2. Enter the #eys for the purchasing organization and vendor and then press E:TED. An
overvie! of the main criteria for this purchasing organization is displayed.
If the SAP 8lassification System is active, you can enter a vendor class instead of a
vendor. /ou then obtain a list from !hich you can select a vendor from the class for
evaluation. Hse the Possible entries facility or the matchcode ;<&
6or information on the classification system, refer to the documentation 8A 8lassification
System %8A78'& 7 8haracteristics and 8A 8lassification System %8A78'& 7 The
8lassification System.
3. aintain the mandatory7entry field Weighting e!.
If you do not #no! the !eighting #ey, use the Possible entries facility.
". 6rom the menu bar, choose Edit #uto. re-evaluation
The system first calculates the scores for the automatic subcriteria, then the scores for
the main criteria, and finally the overall score for the vendor.
$. Save the evaluation.
The overvie! screen also contains the follo!ing0
o The %eletion indicator field.
6or more information, please refer to the section %eleting a Vendor Evaluation.
o The data under the group heading Evaluation of Main &riteria.
6or more on this topic, please refer to the section Entering or &hanging a Vendor
Evaluation Manuall!.
(og of Computation of Scores for #utomatic Su+criteria
The log provides a brea#do!n of the vendor-s score for a subcriterion. It displays the automatic
subcriteria scores for all the info records included in the current calculation.
After you have carried out an evaluation !ith regard to the automatic subcriteria for some or all of
the main criteria, you can display the log.
To do so, choose 'oto #ll logs from the menu bar. %.r 'oto %etailed log if you !ant to see
5ust one specific log.&
If you have not started a ne! evaluation, no log is generated.
See also$
8alculating the Score for an Individual ain 8riterion
aintaining Scores for Semi7Automatic Subcriteria
Evaluating !ith anual Subcriteria
Storing Te,ts for ain 8riteria
1eleting a Vendor Evaluation
Entering or 8hanging a Vendor Evaluation anually
Calculating Score for Individual Main Criterion
If you !ant the system to compute a score for an individual main criterion rather than an overall
score based on all the main criteria, use the #utomatic (e) Evaluation*Main &riteria function.
rocedure
1. .n the overvie! screen, double clic# on the main criterion for !hich the score is to be
calculated or select the main criterion and choose Main criterion
%etails.
2. 8hoose Edit
#uto.ne) eval.*main crit., to calculate the score for this main criterion.
/ou can display the log for the calculation of the scores !ith regard to the automatic subcriteria
for this main criterion by choosing 'oto %etailed log.
7&7& Evaluation Using Semi-#utomatic
Su+criteria
Use
The follo!ing sections e,plain ho! to evaluate a vendor purely on the basis of semi7automatic
subcriteria.
rere:uisites
If you !ant to calculate scores for main criteria on the basis of automatic subcriteria and semi7
automatic subcriteria, you must first maintain scores for the semi7automatic criteria over a period
of time.
#ctivities
aintaining Scores for Semi7Automatic Subcriteria
De7Evaluations for All Semi7Automatic and Automatic 8riteria
Evaluating Vendors in the +ac#ground
Maintaining Scores for Semi-#utomatic
Su+criteria
/ou can enter scores for semi7automatic subcriteria per material and vendor at info record level or
!hen entering a service. The ne,t time you carry out a vendor evaluation, the system !ill ta#e
account of automatic and semi7automatic criteria in determining the scores.
Maintaining Scores at Info *ecord (evel
/ou can maintain scores for a material7vendor combination in t!o !ays0 in Vendor Evaluation, or
!hen maintaining a purchasing info record. To access Vendor Evaluation from an info record,
choose E+tras Vendor evaluation.
To enter scores for semi7automatic subcriteria via the Vendor Evaluation menu, proceed as
follo!s0
). 6rom the overvie! screen for main criteria choose 'oto Evaluation ,er info record to
access the info record level.
A bo, appears in !hich you enter the number of the material for !hich you !ish to enter
the scores.
If a non7stoc# material !ithout a material number is involved, you can enter the info
record.
G. Enter the material number or info record and press E:TED. The screen for the first main
criterion appears.
*. Enter scores for your subcriteria.
B. +ranch to the screen for the ne,t main criterion and maintain the scores.
=. Depeat this procedure for the other main criteria. Save your evaluation.
Maintaining Scores at t!e 5ime of Service Entry
To enter the scores for an e,ternally performed service, proceed as follo!s0
). 6rom the system menu, choose Logistics Materials management -ervice entr!
sheet.
The -ervice entr! screen appears.
G. 8hoose -ervice entr! sheet Maintain.
The initial screen for entering services or !or# performed appears.
*. Enter the purchase order number and any other relevant parameters, and press Enter .
The maintenance screen for service entry sheets appears.
B. Position the cursor on an item and create an entry sheet %via the menu path Edit
&reate..
Hnder the group heading Vendor evaluation/ enter the scores for the "uality and
timeliness of service provision.
=. Save the entry sheet.
These scores only become available to Vendor Evaluation after the relevant
services have been accepted.
*e-Evalns& for #ll Fully = Semi-#utomatic
Criteria
In the Maintain Vendor Evaluation function, the scores for the subcriteria, subdivided according to
main criteria, are displayed on different screens.
In contrast, the #utomatic 0e-Evaluation function enables you to re7evaluate a vendor4s scores
5ust for the semi7automatic and automatic subcriteria and thus find out ho! a vendor-s scores for
semi7automatic and automatic subcriteria have changed since the last evaluation. The manually
maintained scores from the last evaluation are included unchanged in the calculation so that the
results remain comparable.
If the manually maintained scores !ere not included in the calculation, the result !ould be very
different. It !ould not be possible to compare the ne! result !ith the old one.
To give you a better overvie!, the scores for the semi7automatic and automatic subcriteria are
displayed toget!er in a list.
A comparison of the old and ne! scores is also displayed. If you !ish, you can replace the old
scores by the ne! ones.
rocedure
). 6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data
Vendor evaluation List dis,la!s #utomatic re-evaluation.
G. Enter the #eys for the vendor and purchasing organization.
*. Perform the function in order to obtain a comparison of the old and ne! scores.
B. If you !ant to replace the old scores by the ne! ones, press Save. The old scores !ill
then be over!ritten.
Via 'oto 1ndividual log or #ll logs/ you can branch to the display of the logs.
1enerating a (ist of Vendors to +e Evaluated
/ou can also use this function to generate a !or# list of vendors to be evaluated.
Enter a date in the (ot evaluated since field and leave the Vendor field empty. 9hen you press
E+ecute, the system generates a list of all the vendors that have not been evaluated since this
date.
The list may include both vendors !ith obsolete evaluations and vendors !ho have never yet
been evaluated.
6rom this list you can branch into the screens for maintaining evaluations and adopt or over!rite
the ne!ly computed scores.
7&8& Evaluating Vendors in t!e /ac<ground
/ou can evaluate your vendors on a regular basis by means of bac#ground processing. The
Evaluation in the 2acground function can be found in the Purchasing menu.
rere:uisites
If you !ant to start a bac#ground processing re"uest for vendor evaluation, you need a variant %to
limit the number of vendors to be evaluated, for e,ample&.
Maintaining and "isplaying Variants
9hen you invo#e the Evaluation in the 2acground function/ you can display e,isting variants in
editing mode of the step list, and create ne! variants or change e,isting ones.
To do so, choose Edit -te,s and then
'oto
Variant %to display&, or
'oto
Variant maintenance %to create&
rocedure
1. 8hoose Master data
Vendor evaluation. 3ollo)-on functions Evaluation in the bacground.
2. .n the initial screen, enter a 5ob name and the name of the variant. Specify !hen the
bac#ground evaluation should ta#e place and ho! often it should be repeated.
3. Save the bac#ground processing re"uest.
/ou re"uire certain authorizations in order to carry out evaluations in the
bac#ground and define ne! variants. If you have any "ueries in this connection,
please consult your system administrator.
If you re"uire more detailed information about !or#ing !ith bac#ground
processing re"uests, please refer to the documentation 2etting Started !ith D3*.
Su+se:uent Maintenance of /ac<ground Evaluations
In bac#ground processing, you usually evaluate vendors belonging to the same group %that is,
vendors !ho have the same !eighting #ey&. ;o!ever, it is possible that you have selected an
interval that contains different groups of vendors. 6or this reason, you have not entered a
!eighting #ey.
To ensure that the scores are calculated correctly, you must therefore subse"uently maintain the
!eighting #ey for such evaluation records at certain intervals of time.
The evaluation records in "uestion can be determined using the analysis report Vendors Without
Weighting 4e!s.
This function can be found in the purchasing menu under Master data Vendor Evaluation
3ollo)-on functions Vendors )ithout )eighting e!
6rom this report you can branch directly into the screens for maintaining evaluations.
7&>& Evaluating ?it! Manual Su+criteria
rere:uisites
+efore you can evaluate vendors on the basis of manual subcriteria, you must maintain the
scores for these subcriteria.
rocedure
). +ranch from the overvie! screen to the screen for the first main criterion.
G. Enter scores for the manual subcriteria.
*. +ranch to the ne,t subcriterion and enter scores for manual subcriteria here.
B. Depeat this procedure for all your other main criteria.
If you then carry out the ne,t vendor evaluation via Edit #utomatic re-evaluation, the system
calculates the scores on the basis of the automatic, semi7automatic, and manual subcriteria.
7&@& Maintaining a Vendor Evaluation
Use
This follo!ing sections e,plains ho! to display, change, and delete a vendor evaluation, ho! to
display change documents, and ho! to generate a vendor evaluation sheet.
#ctivities
1isplaying a Vendor Evaluation
Entering or 8hanging a Vendor Evaluation anually
Storing Te,ts for ain 8riteria
1eleting a Vendor Evaluation
1isplaying and Printing a 8hange 1ocument
2enerating and Printing an Evaluation Sheet
7&@&%& "isplaying a Vendor Evaluation
1. 6rom the system menu, choose Logistics -> Materials management -> Purchasing and
then Master data -> Vendor Evaluation.
%is,la!. The initial Vendor Evaluation screen appears.
2. Enter a purchasing organization and the vendor !hose evaluation you !ant to display.
3. Press E:TED.The overvie! screen appears.
The follo!ing data is displayed on the overvie! screen0
Field 3 1roup !eading Contents
;eader data Purchasing organization, vendor
Evaluation data 9eighting #ey
.verall score
1eletion indicator
:ame of person responsible
1ate of last evaluation
Evaluation of main criteria Scores for main criteria and the !eighting factors
applied to the scores for the individual main
criteria in arriving at the overall score

To vie! the brea#do!n of the score for a certain main criterion into the scores for the relevant
individual subcriteria, double7clic# on the desired main criterion.
To display the brea#do!ns of the scores for several main criteria one after the other, select the
desired main criteria and choose Main criterion 3irst main criterion. The screen for the
subcriteria for the first main criterion is displayed. To display the subcriteria for all other selected
main criteria one by one, choose Main criterion (e+t main criterion.
7&@&)& Entering or C!anging a Vendor Evaluation
Manually
A re7evaluation of a vendor usually results in a change in the vendor4s scores.
There are also cases !hen you !ill !ant to manually correct individual scores calculated by the
system.
In certain cases you might !ant to enter scores manually before carrying out an evaluation.
rere:uisites
/ou must obtain certain authorizations and the score fields must be ready to accept input before
you can enter scores directly or over!rite scores calculated by the system. Authorizations and
field attributes are determined in 8ustomizing.
Suppose your main materials vendor had delivery problems during the last si,
months.
Since you could not procure the material from another vendor on a short term
basis, you said that the vendor could deliver ordered materials in seven !ee#s
instead of the usual three.
The vendor !as able to #eep to these ne! delivery dates e,actly. ;e thus
receives @* out of )(( points for the automatic subcriterion C.n7Time 1elivery
PerformanceC and a very good score for the main criterion C1eliveryC.
;o!ever, you do not !ant the vendor in effect to be re!arded by a good score
for considerably e,ceeding the original delivery period. So you over!rite the
score for the main criterion C1eliveryC !ith a lo!er score.
7&@&,& Storing 5eAts for Main Criteria
In the Vendor Evaluation system there is a Clong te,tC field for storing additional information on
each individual main criterion. To obtain the long te,t field, choose 'oto 5e+ts for main
criterion on the initial screen. If you !ant to enter more than one line of te,t or !ish to format the
te,t, choose 'oto Long te+t.
7&@&7& "eleting a Vendor Evaluation
1. 6rom the system menu, choose Logistics -> Materials management -> Purchasing and
then Master data -> Vendor evaluation
Maintain. The initial screen appears.
2. Enter the #eys for the purchasing organization and the vendor !hose evaluation you
!ant to delete.
3. Press E:TED.The overvie! screen appears.
". Set the indicator in the %eletion indicator field.
9hen you ne,t run the reorganization program, the evaluation record for this vendor !ill
be deleted.
7&@&8& "isplaying and rinting a C!ange
"ocument
The system creates change documents for each evaluation. /ou have the follo!ing options to
display these documents0
.n the initial screen for Purchasing, choose Master data Vendor evaluation
&hanges. a#e the desired changes and then choose Program E+ecute.
.n the initial screen for Purchasing, choose Master data Vendor evaluation
Maintain or %is,la! and then 'oto &hanges. A bo, !ill then appear, in !hich you can
enter the date as of !hich you !ish to display change documents. Press E:TED
A list appears, giving you the follo!ing information0
Person responsible
Desponsible purchasing organization
1ate and time of change
8omparison of old and ne! values
/ou can print the list by choosing List Print.
7&@&>& 1enerating and rinting an Evaluation
S!eet
/ou can generate and print the results of a vendor evaluation carried out by the system in the
form of an evaluation sheet.
An evaluation sheet header contains the name of the person !ho generated the sheet, the
creation date, and the name of the vendor.
The overall evaluation and scores for the individual main criteria appear belo!. The scores for the
subcriteria belonging to each main criterion are listed under %etailed evaluation.
rocedure
1. 6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data
Vendor evaluation 3ollo)-on functions Print evaluation sheet.
2. Enter the #eys for the vendor and the purchasing organization, and the name of a printer.
3. 8hoose Program
E+ecute to display the evaluation sheet, or E+ecute and ,rint to print it.
If you !ant to print an evaluation sheet !hile maintaining or displaying a vendor
evaluation, choose Vendor evaluation Print evaluation sheet.
7&B& 1rap!ical "isplay of Vendor Evaluations
Use
This section provides you !ith the most important information on the use of the SAP graphics
functionality.
/ou can display vendor evaluations !ith the SAP hierarchy or presentation graphics. This !ill
give you a better overvie! of your main and subcriteria. The graphical display provides you !ith a
clear overvie! of your main and subcriteria and allo!s you to easily and "uic#ly determine ho!
vendors have scored.
6rom the overvie! screen in Vendor Evaluation, choose 'oto 'ra,hics. A graphical overvie!
is displayed.
The graphic display is divided into t!o areas0
"isplay area
The display area contains the evaluation. If you have many main criteria and many
subcriteria, the !hole graphic may not fit on the screen. In this case, you can use the
navigation area for orientation purposes.
.avigation area
The navigation area represents the complete graphic in reduced size. It serves the
purpose of orientation in voluminous graphics !ith many details.
#ctivities
.avigation Function
/ou can move and change the size of the graphic in the display and navigation areas0
In the "isplay area you can move the graphic !ith the aid of the horizontal and vertical
scroll bars. This allo!s you to display parts of the screen that go beyond the page
margins.
/ou can also change the size of the graphic.
In the .avigation areaC you can shift, enlarge or reduce the size of a section of the !hole
graphic. To do so, clic# on the right corner of the selected area and drag it !ith the
mouse.
1rag the corner up or do!n to change the size of the section being vie!ed.
If you !ant to enlarge the navigation area, ma#e a choice from the menu Vie) (avigation. To
return to the standard setting, select Vie) 6ser.
"isplaying Criteria ?it! t!e S# resentation 1rap!ics
After you have performed the function #utomatic ne) evaluation, you can proceed directly from
the evaluation display to the graphic mode.
Position the cursor on the desired main7 or subcriterion and choose 'oto 'ra,hics. The
graphical representation of the lo!er7level scores of !hich the overall score for this criterion is
composed is then displayed.
It is possible to display graphics for the follo!ing subcriteria0
2oods receipt
$uality audit
.n7time delivery performance
$uantity reliability
8ompliance !ith shipping instructions
Adherence to confirmation date
$uality of e,ternal service provision
Timeliness of e,ternal service provision
8& 0o? t!e System Computes Scores
8&%& Calculating 'verall Score3Scores for Main
Criteria
Use
This section describes ho! the Vendor Evaluation system calculates a vendor-s overall score and
the scores for the main criteria.
#ctivities
Calculating t!e 'verall Score
The system derives the overall score from the scores for the various main criteria, ta#ing the
!eighting factors assigned by Purchasing in the system settings for each main criterion into
account.
The follo!ing e,ample e,plains this process0
EAample
The table belo! sho!s the scores for a vendor and their !eighting factors0
Main criterion Score 6eig!ting factor
Price A( B(
$uality <= G=
1elivery =( )(
2eneral service3support =( =

Converting 6eig!ting Factors into ercentages
To ma#e the !eighting factors clearer to the user, the system converts them into percentages.
). The system adds the factors together and e"uates the total !ith )(( K0
B( L G= L )( L = M B- e"uals )(( K
G. To e,press the individual !eighting factors as percentages of )((K, the system first
divides )((K by the sum of the !eighting factors0
)(( 3 <( M %&)8 K
*. Then the system multiplies the !eighting factors the buyer assigned to the main criteria
by this figure0

B( , ).G= M =(.(( K
G= , ).G= M *).G= K
)( , ).G= M )G.=( K
= , ).G= M ?.G= K

B. The follo!ing table sho!s the results as a percentage of the overall score0
Main criterion Score ercentage of overall score
Price A( =(.(( K
$uality <= *).G= K
1elivery =( )G.=( K
2eneral service3support =( ?.G= K

;o!ever, internally, the system uses the !eighting factors to compute the overall score.
). The scores for the main criteria are multiplied by their !eighting factors.
A( , B( M G<(( points
<= , G= M G)G= points
=( , )( M =(( points
=( , = M G=( points
G. Total points M =?A=.
*. This total is divided by the sum of the !eighting factors0
=?A= 3 <( M A(.@B points
The vendor is a!arded an overall score of A) points.
Calculating t!e Score for a Main Criterion
The scores for the individual main criteria are determined in the same !ay as the overall score0
The system calculates the scores for all the subcriteria for a main criterion according to the
!eighting factors you assigned to them.
%See C8alculating the .verall ScoreC, above&.
8&)& Smoot!ing of Individual Scores
Use
A score for a ne! goods receipt or the scores for a ne! service !ill change the e,isting scores for
the current month.
The ne! individual score does not have the same significance as the previous composite score,
because the latter !as calculated from a number of individual scores. 6or this reason, the ne!
individual score is given a lo!er !eighting %that is to say, it is smoothed&.
In carrying out this process, the system applies the relevant smoothing factors that you have
defined for each individual score in 8ustomizing.
The follo!ing graphic sho!s ho! an individual score is smoothed, ta#ing a ne! goods receipt as
an e,ample0
If you have defined a smoothing factor of (.), the individual score for a ne!
goods receipt counts as a tenth of the score for the subcriterion. The previous
score counts as nine tenths of the ne! score for the subcriterion. The formula is
as follo!s0
Previous score , %) 7 (.)& L :e! score , (.)
6or e,ample, the previous score !as <( points, the ne! individual score is G(.
The formula is then0
<( , (.@ L G( , (.) M AB
The ne! score for the subcriterion based on this material is AB points.
The ne!ly valid scores are updated in the statistics. If you have previously
carried out a vendor evaluation, ho!ever, the scores are not automatically
updated there. The ne! scores are not ta#en into account for evaluation
purposes until you subse"uently re7evaluate the relevant vendor.
8&,& Calculating Scores for #utomatic Su+criteria$
'vervie?
Use
This section e,plains ho! the Vendor Evaluation system calculates the scores for automatic
subcriteria.
6or each automatic subcriterion in the SAP Standard System there is a specific pre7defined
scoring method.
These methods cannot be changed by the user.
This section outlines the methods for the follo!ing subcriteria0
Su+criterion Main criterion
Price level
Price history
Price

2oods receipt
$uality audit
8omplaints3re5ection level
$uality

.n7time delivery performance
$uantity reliability
8ompliance !ith shipping instructions
Adherence to confirmation date
1elivery

rere:uisites
This section provides you !ith additional information on ho! the system calculates scores.
arameters in Customizing
9hen the system calculates the scores for automatic subcriteria, it uses the control parameters
defined in 8ustomizing. 8hec# that all the parameters are correctly maintained.
Validity eriod of "ata
9hen calculating scores, the system only includes data !hose dates lie !ithin the validity period
defined in 8ustomizing %for e,ample, a period of )=( days e,tending from the current date bac#
into the past&.
Updating and Calculating
6rom the time of the last evaluation, the system continues to record scores for the automatic
subcriteria for the main criterion C$ualityC %2oods Deceipt, $uality Audit and 8omplaints3De5ection
'evel& and the main criterion C1eliveryC %.n7Time 1elivery Performance, $uantity Deliability,
8ompliance !ith Shipping Instructions, and Adherence to 8onfirmation 1ate&.
The score for the main criterion C$ualityC is updated !hen inspection lot results are entered in the
SAP $uality anagement module. $uality is chec#ed either at the time of goods receipt
%subcriterion C2oods DeceiptC&, during the "uality audit at the vendor4s site %subcriterion C$uality
AuditC&, or during production !hen a "uality notification is entered %subcriterion
C8omplaints3De5ection 'evelC&.
The score for the main criterion C1eliveryC is updated !hen goods are received against purchase
orders. A ne! individual score is calculated after each goods receipt. This is then included in the
previous score !ith the application of a smoothing factor.
Hpdating is only carried out at statistical level. That is to say, the scores of the
last evaluation are not automatically updated. If you display the last evaluation,
this !ill still sho! the ColdC scores. /ou !ill not see the current scores until you
carry out a re7evaluation.
Each time you run a ne! evaluation, the system calculates the average score for all the materials
you have procured from the vendor.
The result of the calculation is the vendor-s score for the relevant subcriterion.
#ctivities
The follo!ing graphic outlines the procedure the system goes through in calculating the scores
for automatic subcriteria.
8&,&%& rice (evel (Main Criterion DriceD)
Use
This section describes ho! scores are calculated by the system for the automatic subcriterion
Price Level.
#ctivities
To determine a vendor-s price level, the system compares the vendor-s effective price !ith the
mar#et price for the material.
). The system first chec#s !hether the buyer has maintained a mar#et price for the material
or the material group.
G. If not, the system calculates the mar#et price !hich is e"ual to the average of the
effective prices for all vendors supplying this material. Prices from purchase orders and
prices for subcontracting are dealt !ith separately.
*. The system then applies the effective price for the vendor from the conditions.
B. The vendor-s effective price is then compared !ith the mar#et price and the percentage
variance determined.
=. The system then assigns a score to the variance in accordance !ith the settings made in
8ustomizing.
?. This score is valid for the material, that is, at info record level. Since the score the vendor
receives for a subcriterion is based not on an individual material, but on the total of all the
materials he supplies, the follo!ing steps are necessary0
A. The system repeats the comparison bet!een effective price and mar#et price for each of
the vendor-s materials.
<. The system calculates an average from the sum of the scores determined. This average
represents the vendor-s score for the subcriterion Price Level.
Special Case$ 'nly 'ne Vendor
In the follo!ing t!o situations, you have only one vendor !ho provides you !ith a specific
material %so you therefore have only one price&0
Single Sourcing
In this case, you have freely decided that you !ant to procure a material from one
particular vendor only %because the latter provides e,cellent "uality, for e,ample&.
Sole Sourcing
In this case, you are forced to obtain the material from a certain vendor, because the
latter has a monopoly of the mar#et %that is to say, you have no other choice&.
So that you can determine !hether sole or single sourcing puts you at a disadvantage or !hether
the vendor deserves a particularly good score for above7average performance, maintain the
-ingle*sole vendor indicator in 8ustomizing.
If you set this indicator, the vendor-s effective price is regarded as the mar#et price !hen the
system calculates the score for the criterion Price Level. 8onse"uently, the mar#et price and the
effective price are identical. +ecause there is a variance of zero percent, the vendor receives a
good score
If you do not set the indicator, the single3sole7sourcing situation is not ta#en into account. The
system does not determine a score for the price level based on this material
+efore you can calculate the price level, the mar#et price has to be maintained in
the system.
To do this, choose Master data &onditions Prices Maret ,rice from the
Purchasing menu.
8&,&)& rice 0istory (Main Criterion DriceD)
Use
The follo!ing section e,plains ho! the system calculates the score for the automatic subcriterion
CPrice ;istoryC.
#ctivities
To determine ho! a vendor-s price for a material has changed over the last fe! years, the
material-s price history is compared !ith the mar#et price history.
). The system first chec#s !hether the buyer has maintained the current mar#et price and
last year-s mar#et price for the material.
If not, the system uses the price for the material group to !hich the material belongs.
If this price is not maintained either, the system uses the effective prices from the
previous year and the current year. Prices from standard purchase orders for materials
and prices from subcontract orders are dealt !ith separately.
G. The system then calculates the percentage variance bet!een the old and ne! mar#et
prices.
*. The vendor-s effective price is re7calculated !ith this percentage variance. The result
represents the effective price the vendor should be as#ing if his price had changed over
time in the same !ay as the mar#et price.
B. This calculated effective price is then compared !ith the actual effective price, and a
percentage variance is determined.
=. The system then a!ards the vendor the score you have maintained in 8ustomizing for
this percentage variance.
?. The system repeats this process for all the materials you procure from the vendor. Each
time you start an evaluation, the system calculates the average score for all the
materials. The result is the vendor-s score for the subcriterion CPrice ;istoryC.
8&,&,& 1oods *eceipt (Main Criterion D2ualityD)
Use
This section describes ho! scores are calculated by the system for the automatic subcriterion
C$uality InspectionC.
#ctivities
The score is calculated as follo!s0
). If a material is sub5ect to incoming inspection, part of the delivered material is chec#ed by
the "uality assurance department !hen goods are received against a purchase order.
G. An inspection lot is created. After the inspection or testing, the person responsible in
$uality anagement then enters a result and ma#es a decision as to !hether the
material can be used.
*. All the incoming inspection lots are stored in a file !ith their scores.
B. 9hen you run an automatic re7evaluation for a vendor, the system selects all the
incoming inspection lots for the vendor that lie !ithin the validity period and calculates the
average of the scores.
The result is the vendor-s score for the "uality of goods received.
8&,&7& 2uality #udit (Main Criterion D2ualityD)
Use
This section describes ho! scores are calculated by the system for the automatic subcriterion
C$uality AuditC.
#ctivities
The score is calculated as follo!s0
). A "uality audit has ta#en place in one of your vendor-s plants. This means that either your
o!n company has carried out a chec# to determine ho! the vendor ensures that his
products are of a high "uality, or the vendor has carried out the audit himself.
G. An audit lot is created by $uality anagement. 9hen the audit has been completed, the
person responsible determines a score for this audit lot.
*. All the audit lots are stored in a file !ith their scores.
B. 9hen you run an automatic re7evaluation of a vendor, the system selects all the audit lots
for the vendor !ithin the validity period.
=. The parameter 7ualit! audit is read from 8ustomizing.
?. If the indicator is set, the system calculates the average score for all the "uality audits in
the validity period. The result is the vendor-s score for the "uality audit.
If the indicator is not set, only the most recent audit lot is included. This then represents
the vendor-s score for the subcriterion.
The Evaln. 7M s!stem field on the screen for the main criterion C$ualityC sho!s
you the score that !as a!arded to the $uality anagement system %e.g. IS.
@((* !ith certificate& used by the vendor. It is only displayed if the Prev. 7M
s!stem field is filled in the vendor master record. The score is a!arded by the
$ system and is for information purposes only.
1isplay the vendor master record to see !hich "uality system the vendor uses.
/ou can use the content of the field for your o!n program and have this score
included in the vendor4s "uality score.
8&,&8& Complaints3*e4ection (evel (Main Criterion
D2ualityD)
Use
This section e,plains ho! the system calculates the score for the automatic subcriterion
&om,laints*0e8ection Level.
#ctivities
The score for the subcriterion &om,laints*0e8ection Level is computed by the SAP component
7M 7ualit! Management and passed on to the MM Vendor Evaluation component.
If the scale for the #ey "uality data in the $ system does correspond to the scoring range in
Vendor Evaluation, the Vendor Evaluation system converts the $ data for use in the Vendor
Evaluation scoring system.
The score is calculated as follo!s0
). .n the shop7floor, material A supplied by vendor A8E is being processed in the course
of production.
G. If the material is .F %that is to say, no "uality notifications have been entered for material
A during the entire validity period&, the vendor is a!arded the highest score for the
material %)(( points&.
*. If the material is found to be defective, a "uality notification %such as a re5ection note or
nonconformance complaint sent to the vendor& is entered.
B. 1uring the vendor evaluation process, the system chec#s !hether the costs associated
!ith the faulty delivery e,ceed the ma,imum percentage of business volume defined in
the 8ustomizing system.
In the above e,ample, your business volume !ith %value of purchases from& A8E
amounts to one million dollars annually. The costs associated !ith defective deliveries
may not e,ceed (.) percent of business volume, i.e. N)((,(((. The costs associated !ith
a "uality notification are estimated at N=((.
=. If the costs that your company incurs as a result of the faulty materials are lo!er than the
defined proportion of business volume, the system calculates a score bet!een ) and @@
points.
To do this, the system multiplies your annual business volume !ith the vendor
%N),(((,(((& by the parameter 2usiness volume share %(.)&.
The number of accumulated "uality notifications %)( in all& multiplied by the cost of each
notification %N =((& is subtracted from this.
The result is divided by the annual business volume multiplied by the proportion of
business volume.
The result of this is a factor !hich, multiplied by a hundred, gives a percentage.
This percentage indicates the "uality provided by the vendor in relation to the particular
material. The value @=K in the above e,ample means that complaints or re5ections
involving the vendor A8E only resulted in =K of the ma,imum costs allo!ed, i.e. the
"uality is very good.
.ote on Scoring *ange and Conversion 2M - MM$
Since the minimum points score that can be obtained is not ( %( means Cnot evaluatedC&
but ), only @@ points are available in the range ) to )((.
This is !hy the system !or#s out ho! many points out of @@ the value @=K corresponds
to.
The result is @B points.
Since the bottom of the scoring range has been moved up by one point %) point is the
!orst score not (&, the system adds on ) point.
A8E therefore achieves a score of @= points for the subcriterion 8omplaints3De5ection
'evel for material A.
?. If the cost of defective or non7conforming deliveries e,ceeds the share of business
volume defined in 8ustomizing %in this case N)((,(((&, the vendor is a!arded the lo!est
score %) point&.
8&,&>& 'n-5ime "elivery erf& (Main Criterion
D"eliveryD)
Use
This section describes ho! the system calculates the score for the automatic subcriterion C.n7
Time 1elivery PerformanceC.
rere:uisites
The system uses the statistics7relevant delivery date in the purchase order and the goods receipt
date to calculate date variances.
/ou use the statistics7relevant delivery date, for e,ample, if you #no! that the vendor !ill not
deliver the material as scheduled on September )= but on September *(. Enter the delivery date
as September *(, but enter the statistics7relevant delivery date as September )=.
In calculating the score for on7time delivery performance, the system !ill then not use the actual
delivery date, but the statistics7relevant delivery date. This has a negative effect on the score for
this goods receipt.
;o!ever, materials planning and control uses the realistic delivery date %September *(& !hich the
vendor !ill actually adhere to.
The system considers only goods receipts against purchase orders and scheduling agreements
into stores and the release of 2D bloc#ed stoc# into stores. In the standard system, these are the
movement types )() and )(=.
Minimum "elivery ercentage
If you do not !ant a vendor to receive a very good score if he delivered the goods on time, but did
not deliver the re"uired "uantity, you can maintain a minimum delivery percentage in
8ustomizing.
Assume you set the Min. del. ,erc. parameter to ?(K and the vendor delivers the goods on time,
but only ==K of the ordered "uantity. Although the goods receipt is punctual, it is not included in
the calculation of the vendor4s score for on7time delivery performance. So that the non7scoring of
the on7time delivery performance criterion in this case does not bring an unfair advantage in
comparison !ith a poor score, the vendor is a!arded a lo! score for "uantity reliability. .n7time
delivery performance is thus al!ays to be seen in con5unction !ith "uantity reliability.
Standardizing "elivery "ate Variance
To rate delivery date variances in days, maintain the -td.del.time var. parameter.
If you assign a lo!er standard value, this means that relatively lo! date variances produce high
percentage variances. If you set a higher standard value, this results in a relatively lo!
percentage variance0

The -td.del.time var. parameter has the value G(. The goods receipt too# place
on :ov. GAE the statistical delivery date !as :ov. )=. There is thus a difference of
)G days.
The system calculates the percentage variance as follo!s0
)G 3 G( , )(( M ?(
If the -td.del.time var. parameter had the value ?(, the variance !ould be G(K
%)G 3 ?( , )(( M G(&.
If you do not maintain this parameter, the system calculates the delivery time variance via the firm
zone in the case of scheduling agreements, and via the order date and the statistics7relevant
delivery date in the case of purchase orders.
Minimum "elivery ercentage and Standardizing t!e "ate Variance from t!e Material
Master *ecord
If you do not !ish the same values to be applied for all materials %Minimum deliver! ,ercentage
and -tandardi9ing value for deliver! time variance parameters&, you can set the Minimum
deliver! :uantit!*standardi9ing value for deliver! time variance from material indicator in
8ustomizing. In such case, the values from the relevant material master record %purchasing value
#ey& are used.
#ctivities

). At the time of a goods receipt against a purchase order, the system chec#s !hether the
delivery !as on time or late0
2D date 7 delivery date M date variance
G. If the delivery !as on time, the system chec#s !hether a minimum delivery "uantity is to
be ta#en into account.
It chec#s the Minimum deliver! :uantit!*standardi9ing value for deliver! time variance
from material indicator.
O If the indicator !as +een selected, it chec#s !hether a value has been maintained in
the material master record.
If a value e,ists, it is used. If no value e,ists, the value from the Minimum deliver!
,ercentage field is used. If there no such value in this case either, goods receipts of
fractions of the order "uantity are included in the calculation of the score.
O If the indicator !as not +een selected, the value from the Minimum deliver!
,ercentage field is used. If no value e,ists, goods receipts of fractions of the order
"uantity are included in the calculation of the score.
If the minimum delivery "uantity is not reached, the system does not determine a score
for the goods receipt.
If the minimum delivery "uantity is reached and the delivery date adhered to, the variance
is zero and the system a!ards the highest points score for the relevant goods receipt.
*. If the delivery is not on time, the system calculates the date variance in days and
converts it into a percentage variance.
In the process, the system searches for the standardizing value as follo!s0
It chec#s the Minimum deliver! :uantit!*standardi9ing value for deliver! time variance
from material indicator.
O If the indicator !as +een selected, it chec#s !hether a value has been maintained in
the material master record.
If a value e,ists, it is used. If not, the value from the -tandardi9ing value for deliver! time
variance field is used. If there is no such value in this case either, one of the follo!ing
values is used0
O in the case of goods receipts against scheduling agreement releases0 the firm zone
O in the case of goods receipts against purchase orders0 the difference bet!een the
statistical delivery date and the order date
O If the indicator !as not +een selected, the value from the -tandardi9ing value for
deliver! time variance field is used. If there is no such value, one of the follo!ing values
is used
O in the case of goods receipts against scheduling agreement releases0 the firm zone
O in the case of goods receipts against purchase orders0 the difference bet!een the
statistical delivery date and the order date
B. The system then a!ards the score you defined in 8ustomizing for this percentage
variance.
=. The ne! score is then included in the vendor-s previous score for the subcriterion. To
calculate the ne! score for the subcriterion from the already e,isting composite score
and this ne! individual score, the system applies the smoothing factor %ate variance
defined in 8ustomizing.
?. 9hen you run a ne! evaluation, the system calculates the average of the individual
scores for all materials. The result is the vendor-s score for C.n7Time 1elivery
PerformanceC.
If a goods receipt covers several schedule lines, Vendor Evaluation
performs this calculation for eac! schedule line.
This results in more than one score for the single goods receipt. Each of these
scores is multiplied by the "uantity delivered against the relevant schedule line
and is thus !eighted by "uantity.
The sum of the !eighted points scores is divided by the total goods receipt
"uantity. The result is the score for this one goods receipt.
The score for the goods receipt is smoothed and included in the e,isting score
for on7time delivery performance for the vendor.
*eversals of 1oods *eceipts
See 8ancellation of Score in 8ase of Deversal.
8&,&@& #d!erence to Conf& "ate (Main Criter&
D"eliveryD)
Use
This section describes ho! the system calculates the score for the automatic subcriterion
CAdherence to confirmation dateC.
rere:uisites
/ou can define the type of confirmation to !hich this subcriterion relates, e.g. transport
confirmation, loading confirmation, or shipping notification.
Minimum "elivery ercentage
If you do not !ant a vendor to receive a very good score if he delivered the goods on time, but did
not deliver the re"uired "uantity, you can maintain a minimum delivery percentage in
8ustomizing.
Assume you set the Min. del. ,erc. parameter to ?(K and the vendor delivers the goods on time,
but only ==K of the ordered "uantity. Although the goods receipt is punctual, it is not included in
the calculation of the vendor4s score for on7time delivery performance.
Standardizing "elivery "ate Variance
To rate delivery date variances in days, maintain the -td.del.time var. parameter.
If you assign a lo!er standard value, this means that relatively lo! date variances produce high
percentage variances. If you set a higher standard value, this results in a relatively lo!
percentage variance0

The -td.del.time var. parameter has the value G(. The goods receipt too# place
on :ov. GAE the statistical delivery date !as :ov. )=. There is thus a difference of
)G days.
The system calculates the percentage variance as follo!s0
)G 3 G( , )(( M ?(
If the -td.del.time var. parameter had the value ?(, the variance !ould be G(K
%)G 3 ?( , )(( M G(&.
If you do not maintain this parameter, the system calculates the delivery time variance via the firm
zone in the case of scheduling agreements, and via the order date and the statistics7relevant
delivery date in the case of purchase orders.
The system considers only goods receipts against purchase orders and scheduling agreements
into stores and the release of 2D bloc#ed stoc# into stores. In the standard system, these are the
movement types )() and )(=.
#ctivities
This section describes ho! the system calculates the e,tent to !hich a vendor adheres to a
delivery date he has previously confirmed %in this case, using an Inbound 1elivery on the basis of
a shipping notification as an e,ample&.
Scores are calculated in the same !ay as in the case of on7time delivery performance.


). 9hen a goods receipt is posted for an order item, the system chec#s !hether open inbound
deliveries e,ist for the order item, i.e. inbound deliveries for !hich no goods receipts have yet
been recorded.
If open inbound deliveries e,ist, the system chec#s !hether the date previously notified
by the vendor has been adhered to or !hether the goods receipt date differs from the
date thus confirmed0
2D date 7 date confirmed by vendor in shipping notification M date variance
G. If the delivery !as on time, the system chec#s !hether a minimum delivery "uantity has been
defined in 8ustomizing.
a. If you have not set a minimum delivery "uantity, goods receipts representing partial
deliveries !ill also be included in the calculation of the score.
b. If the minimum delivery "uantity is not reached, the system does not determine a score
for the goods receipt.
c. If the minimum delivery "uantity is reached and the delivery is on time, the variance is
zero. This means that the system a!ards the ma,imum score for the goods receipt.
*. If the delivery date is not in accordance !ith the notified one, the system calculates the date
variance in days and converts it into a percentage variance.
B. The system then a!ards the score you defined in 8ustomizing for this percentage variance.
=. The ne! score is then merged !ith the vendor-s previous score for the subcriterion. To
calculate the ne! score for the subcriterion from the already e,isting composite score and this
ne! individual score, the system applies the smoothing factor ;n-time deliver!
,erformance*5imeliness of service ,rovision <defined in 8ustomizing for Vendor Evaluation under
Purchasing organi9ation data for Vendor Evaluation..
?. 9hen you run a ne! evaluation, the system calculates the average of the individual scores for
all materials. The result is the vendor4s score for adherence to the confirmation date.
If a goods receipt covers several schedule lines, Vendor Evaluation
performs this calculation for eac! schedule line.
This results in more than one score for the single goods receipt. Each of these
scores is multiplied by the "uantity delivered against the relevant schedule line
and is thus !eighted by "uantity.
The sum of the !eighted points scores is divided by the total goods receipt
"uantity. The result is the score for this one goods receipt.
The score for the goods receipt is smoothed and merged !ith the e,isting score
for adherence to the confirmation date for the vendor.
*eversals of 1oods *eceipts
See 8ancellation of Score in 8ase of 2D Deversal.
8&,&B& 2uantity *elia+ility (Main Criterion
D"eliveryD)
Use
This section describes ho! the system calculates the score for the automatic subcriterion
C$uantity DeliabilityC.
rere:uisites
A vendor-s score is updated in the statistics file !hen a purchase order is closed. A purchase
order is considered to be closed !hen one of the follo!ing has occurred0
Although the full order "uantity has not been delivered, the buyer signifies that delivery of
an order item has been completed by setting the %eliver! com,leted indicator
If )(( pieces of a material are ordered but only @( pieces are delivered, and the buyer
changes the order "uantity to @(
The buyer deletes an order item by setting the deletion indicator
The goods receipt "uantity is e"ual to or larger than the order "uantity
The system considers only goods receipts against purchase orders and scheduling agreements
into stores and the release of 2D bloc#ed stoc# into stores. In the standard system, these are the
movement types )() and )(=.
#ctivities
). 9hen goods are received against a purchase order, the system chec#s !hether the
"uantity received is the same as the "uantity ordered. If this is not so, the system !or#s
out the difference and converts it into a percentage variance using the follo!ing formula0
The formula is as follo!s0
2D "uantity 7 order "uantity 3 order "uantity , )((
G. The system assigns a score for this percentage variance as defined in 8ustomizing.
*. The ne! score is then merged !ith the vendor-s previous score for the subcriterion. To
calculate the ne! score for the subcriterion from the already e,isting composite score
and this ne! individual score, the system applies the smoothing factor 7uantit! variance
defined in 8ustomizing.
B. 9hen you run a ne! evaluation, the system calculates the average of the individual
scores for all materials. The result is the vendor-s score for "uality reliability.
*eversals of 1oods *eceipts
See Cancellation of Score in Case of GR Reversal.
8&,&E& S!ipping Instructions (Main Criterion
D"eliveryD)
Use
In Purchasing, you can specify shipping or pac#ing instructions for each order item. The vendor
must follo! these instructions to obtain a good score for the subcriterion C8ompliance !ith
Shipping InstructionsC.
The system considers only goods receipts against purchase orders and scheduling agreements
into stores and the release of 2D bloc#ed stoc# into stores. In the standard system, these are the
movement types )() and )(=.
#ctivities
). 9hen goods are received against a purchase order, the system chec#s !hether the
purchasing department has specified any shipping instructions.
G. If so, the receiving cler# must enter a score for the vendor-s compliance !ith the shipping
instructions before posting the goods receipt.
Feys !ith corresponding scores are maintained for shipping instructions in 8ustomizing.
/ou !ant the vendor to deliver material A in pac#s of si,. /our system is configured in
such a !ay that this pac#aging unit corresponds to the #ey () M )(( points.
If the vendor delivers the goods in pac#s of )(, !hich is less practical for your purposes,
you a!ard the vendor @( points only.
If the goods are delivered loose %i.e. not pre7pac#ed&, this involves more !or# for your
!arehouse employees. In this case, the vendor is assigned #ey (@ %*( points&.
*. The ne! individual score is then merged !ith the vendor-s previous score for the
subcriterion. To calculate the ne! score for the subcriterion from the already e,isting
composite score and this ne! individual score the system applies the smoothing factor
&om,liance )ith shi,,ing instructions defined in 8ustomizing.
B. 9hen you run a ne! evaluation, the system calculates the average from the individual
scores for all the materials.
The result is the vendor4s score for the subcriterion C8ompliance !ith Shipping
InstructionsC.
*eversals of 1oods *eceipts
See 8ancellation of Score in 8ase of 2D Deversal.
8&,&%-& Cancellation of Score in Case of 1*
*eversal
Use
The system ta#es reversals of goods receipts %2Ds& into consideration in calculating the scores
for the criteria C.n7Time 1elivery PerformanceC, CAdherence to 8onfirmation 1ateC, C1elivery
DeliabilityC, and C8ompliance !ith Shipping InstructionsC. The reversals relate to one purchase
order item.
The system considers only reversals affecting goods receipts against purchase
orders and scheduling agreements into stores and the release of 2D bloc#ed
stoc# into stores. In the standard system, these are the movement types )(G and
)(?.
This function is intended to cater for input errors that are immediately corrected
by the receiving cler#, since the system only considers the last goods receipt that
caused the score to be updated.
Scores for D'n-5ime "elivery erformanceD and D#d!erence to
Confirmation "ateD
The last score recorded for a goods receipt is cancelled if0
The 2D !as unpunctual %2D date differs from statistical delivery date& and a reversal
document is then posted.
The 2D !as punctual %2D date same as statistical delivery date&, the 2D "uantity less
the reversal "uantity is belo! the minimum delivery percentage, and a reversal document
is then posted.
If several reversal documents are posted in succession against a P. item, or a reversal is posted
for an earlier goods receipt, only the score that !as recorded for the last goods receipt is
cancelled.
6our goods receipts are posted against a P. item, each of !hich resulted in the
cumulative score being updated0
1oods receipt Score
G( pcs. ?(
B( pcs. <(
)( pcs. *(
)= pcs. B(

After the posting of the four goods receipts, the follo!ing cases are conceivable0
All four goods receipts are reversed
The last receipt of )= pcs. is reversed
The first receipt of G( pcs. is reversed
In all three cases, only the score recorded for the last goods receipt is cancelled %i.e. B(&.
If a reversal too# place after the first receipt of G( pcs. and another one after the
second receipt of B( pcs., the system !ould cancel the score of ?( after the first
reversal and the score <( after the second reversal.
The points outlined in the e,ample also apply to the cancellation of scores for
"uantity reliability and compliance !ith shipping instructions.
Score for 2uality *elia+ility
The score recorded for the last goods receipt is cancelled if a goods receipt is reversed. If the
reversal "uantity is less than or e"ual to the last 2D "uantity, the system chec#s !hether the 2D
"uantity is greater than or e"ual to the "uantity ordered. If so, a ne! score is recorded.
.nly the last7recorded score is cancelled, even if the reversal "uantity e,ceeds
the last 2D "uantity.
.ote re S!ipping Instructions
The score recorded for the last goods receipt is cancelled if a goods receipt is reversed.
#ctivities
The system calculates the ne! overall score %.S& as follo!s0
Old OS - score from last GR X smoothing factor
----------------------------------------------- = New OS
1 - smoothing factor
Special Case
If only one goods receipt !as posted in a certain period and 5ust one unsmoothed score !as
recorded for this receipt, the score is cancelled in accordance !ith the above formula in the event
that this receipt is reversed.
This means that if a score of A( !as recorded after the goods receipt, the overall score is still A(
follo!ing the reversal.
In the case of a smoothing factor of (,G the ne! overall score is calculated as follo!s0
70 - 70 * 0,2
------------- = 70
1 - 0,2
8&7& Calculating Scores for Semi-#utomatic
Su+criteria
The follo!ing sections give information on the calculation of scores for the semi7automatic criteria
provided by the standard SAP System for the main criteria C2eneral service3supportC and
CE,ternal service provisionC.
Innovation, Deliability, 8ustomer Service %ain 8riterion C2eneral Service3SupportC&
$uality of Service, Timeliness of Service %ain 8riterion CE,ternal Service ProvisionC&

Innov&C *elia+&C Serv& (MC D1en& Serv&3SupportD)
Use
In contrast to the automatic subcriteria, the individual scores at info record level do not come into
being at another point in the system !ithout any action on your part. Instead, you enter scores for
important materials supplied by certain vendors yourself at info record level.
9hen you run a ne! vendor evaluation, the system calculates the average of these individual
scores at info record level.
The result is the vendor4s score for the subcriterion.
6or general information on the determination of scores for the semi7automatic subcriteria, please
refer to Introduction to Vendor Evaluation.
6or detailed information on carrying out a vendor evaluation on the basis of semi7automatic
criteria, please refer to Evaluating Vendors.
2ual&35imeliness of Serv& (MC DEAt& Serv& rov&D)
Use
This section describes the calculation of the scores for the semi7automatic subcriteria available in
the standard SAP System for the main criterion CE,ternal Service ProvisionC. The follo!ing
applies to the subcriteria CTimeliness of E,ternal Service ProvisionC and C$uality of E,ternal
Service ProvisionC.
rere:uisites
6or the system to be able to perform the necessary calculations, you must enter scores for the
t!o subcriteria at the time of service entry. These scores are updated at the time of service
acceptance and are then available to Vendor Evaluation for analysis purposes.
#ctivities



). If ne! scores for the criteria CTimeliness of E,ternal Service ProvisionC and C$uality of
E,ternal Service ProvisionC are updated after service acceptance, these are merged 7
after smoothing 7 !ith the e,isting scores for the current month. In the process, the
system applies the smoothing factor -ervice, !hich is defined in 8ustomizing.
G. 9hen a vendor evaluation is run, the system determines the scores for the current month
for CTimeliness of Service ProvisionC and C$uality of Service ProvisionC for each plant in
!hich the service provider performs services, and then calculates the average. The result
is the vendor4s scores for the subcriteria C$uality of Service ProvisionC and CTimeliness of
Service ProvisionC.
>& *eports and #nalyses in Vendor Evaluation
Use
This section e,plains the benefits to be gained from the reports and analyses in the SAP system
and describes ho! to run them.
urpose of *eports and #nalyses in Vendor Evaluation
Deports and analyses in Vendor Evaluation enable you to compare the overall evaluations and
scores for individual main criteria attained by your vendors in different !ays.
They also enable you to determine !hich vendors have never been evaluated and !hich vendors
are due to be re7evaluated.
Purchasing e,ecutives can obtain information such as the follo!ing0
9hich vendors have the best overall scoreI
9hich of the best vendors received a particularly good or bad score for the main criterion
CPriceCI
9hich vendors received a good overall score, but a belo!7average score for the main
criterion C$ualityCI
9hich vendors received a poor overall score but a very good score !hen you only
consider one particular materialI
9hich service providers perform services for you on time and !ith high "ualityI
*unning *eports and #nalyses
To run a report or an analysis, proceed as follo!s0
6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data Vendor evaluation List dis,la!s. Then
select one of the follo!ing reports0
Dan#ing list of vendor evaluations
Evaluation per material3material group
This analysis is only of interest in connection !ith vendors from !hom you procure
materials.
All vendors !ithout an evaluation
All your vendors !ho have not been evaluated since a certain date
Comparing Evaluations
This analysis is only of interest in connection !ith vendors from !hom you procure materials. +y
choosing Master data Vendor evaluation Evaluation com,arison you run a report that
compares a vendor4s general evaluation !ith his evaluation in respect of one particular material.
Standard #nalysis
+y choosing Master data Vendor evaluation -tandard anal!sis/ you can run an analysis
that provides you !ith both the cumulative score per period and the score for 5ust one period
%among other things&. The standard analysis is integrated !ith the 'ogistics Information System
%'IS& and features the usual 'IS functionality.
>&%& 0o? to 1enerate *eports and #nalyses
Steps
The follo!ing graphic displays the steps you must follo! to generate a report or an analysis0
rinting *eports and #nalyses
After you have generated a report or an analysis, you can print it.
Alternatively, you can combine the start and print commands by choosing Program E+ecute =
,rint instead of Program E+ecute.
rere:uisites
9hen you define the scope of the report or analysis, you must decide !hich information you
re"uire and enter the corresponding intervals.
6or e,ample, you should not select all the vendors for a particular material for all purchasing
organizations in one report. Instead, generate a separate report for each individual purchasing
organization.
Scope-of-(ist arameters
The content and the !ay the information is set out in your reports and analyses is determined by
your choice of scope7of7list parameters.
The standard SAP System contains the follo!ing scope7of7list parameters0
Standard
Version )
arameters 'utput
Standard
Dan#ing list of vendors arranged in descending order in accordance !ith the
overall scores they have achieved. The scores for the main criteria are sho!n
belo! in the order0
Price
$uality
1elivery
2eneral service3support
E,ternal service provision
Version ) Dan#ing list of vendors arranged in descending order according to the scores
they have achieved for the main criterion 1elivery. The overall score is sho!n at
the end.
+efore you began !or#ing !ith Vendor Evaluation, you or your system administrator may have
entered further parameters in 8ustomizing for the generation of various reports or analyses.
If you re"uire other output formats in the course of your !or#, you can define further parameters.
Selecting Intervals
As !ell as entering individual values on the initial screen, you can also specify intervals. There is
a second column to the right of the first column in !hich you can enter a second vendor or a
second purchasing organization, for e,ample.
Selecting Several Intervals
If you !ant to select several intervals, position the cursor on the desired field and choose Edit
-election o,tions from the menu bar. A screen allo!ing you to specify intervals %for e,ample,
Cgreater than or e"ual toC the entered value& !ill appear. /ou can also choose !hether the system
is to select all the specified data %include& or all data eAcept that specified %e,clude&.
>&)& #nalyzing Vendor Evaluation "ata
Use
The follo!ing sections describe ho! to generate various reports and analyses in Vendor
Evaluation.
The follo!ing reports and analyses are available0
8omparison of evaluations
This analysis is only of interest in connection !ith vendors from !hom you procure
materials, but not services.
Dan#ing list of vendors
Evaluation per material3group of materials
This analysis is only of interest in connection !ith vendors from !hom you procure
materials, but not services.
Vendors !ithout an evaluation
Vendors not evaluated since a certain date
Standard analysis
#ctivities
8omparison of Evaluations
8reating a Dan#ing 'ist of Vendors
8arrying .ut an Evaluation per aterial3aterial 2roup
1isplaying Vendors 9ithout an Evaluation
1isplaying Vendors :ot Evaluated Since a 8ertain 1ate
1isplaying Vendors 9ithout a 9eighting Fey
Dunning a Standard Analysis
>&)&%& Comparison of Evaluations
This report differs from others in that it provides a detailed picture of one specific vendor, !ithout
any other vendors being involved.
In this report the overall score calculated from deliveries of all the vendor-s materials is compared
to the overall score the vendor !ould receive if only one specific material formed the basis of the
evaluation.
9ith this report, you can determine ho! a vendor performs !ith regard to one of your most
important materials.
6or e,ample, the report !ill tell you that a vendor !ith a poor or average general evaluation
actually has a much better score in relation to material P or Q than vendors !ith good general
evaluations.
This information ensures that you do not overloo# interesting sourcing options you may other!ise
not consider !hen procuring the materials in "uestion.
/ou cannot save this report, but you can regenerate it as re"uired.
rocedure
6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data
Vendor evaluation &om,are evaluations. The initial screen for the analysis
appears.
Enter the #eys for the vendor and purchasing organization.
In the &om,arison level area, fill out one of the follo!ing fields0
aterial
Info record
aterial group
If you have entered a material group, you can specify !hether the system is to
search for materials !ith a master record only %)&, materials !ithout a master
record only %G&, or both %no entry& !ithin the material group.
8hoose Program E+ecute to start the report. The report compares a
vendor-s general evaluation !ith an evaluation for a specific material.
8hoose 'oto Evaluation of vendor to branch to the general evaluation display.
"isplaying (ogs
8hoose 'oto #ll logs to display all available logs. These sho! the scores calculated by the
system for the automatic and semi7automatic subcriteria belonging to all main criteria.
If you only !ish to display the logs for subcriteria of a particular main criterion, select the desired
main criterion and choose 'oto %etailed information.
If you only !ish to see the log for one particular subcriterion, select the desired subcriterion and
choose 'oto 1ndividual log.
These options allo! you to #eep trac# of a large number of evaluation records !ithout the
analysis becoming too confusing since you are able to vie! in detail only those main criteria
!hich you consider to be of particular relevance.
>&)&)& Creating a *an<ing (ist of Vendors
This report generates a list of vendors in descending order according to overall score. /ou can
see !hich vendors received the best scores in the group, !hich have average scores, and !hich
have belo!7average scores.
As !ell as the overall score, the scores for the individual main criteria are displayed. The system
also calculates the average values for individual scores. /ou can then determine by ho! many
points a vendor deviates from the average value.
rocedure
1. 6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data
Vendor evaluation List dis,la!s 0aning lists to invo#e the initial screen for the
report.
2. Enter the #ey for the purchasing organization and specify an interval of vendors.
/ou can generate a ran#ing list for a vendor class instead of for an interval of vendors. To
do so, enter the #ey for the purchasing organization and the desired vendor class.
6or more information on classification, please refer to the documentation 8A The
8lassification System.
Enter a scope7of7list parameter and run the report. The system then generates a ran#ing
list.
/ou can sort the list differently. 6or e,ample, if you !ant the main criterion C1eliveryC in the first
column, position the cursor on its column description and choose Edit 0e-sort b! main crit.
Deturn to the original column arrangement by choosing Edit ;riginal list.
/ou can branch to the vendor evaluation. To do so, position the cursor on the desired vendor and
choose Environment %is,la! evaluation.
8hoose Environment %is,la! vendor to display the vendor master record.
>&)&,& Carrying 'ut an Evaluation per Material3Mat&
1roup
This report also generates a ran#ing list of vendors in descending order according to overall
scores.
Hnli#e the previous ran#ing list of vendors, it is based on a certain material or material group.
This allo!s you to determine !hich vendors received a good, average, or poor score for a
particularly important material.
rocedure
1. 6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data
Vendor evaluation List dis,la!s Evaluations ,er material*material grou, to
invo#e the initial screen for the report.
2. Enter the #ey for the purchasing organization.
3. Specify the material or material group for !hich the ran#ing list is to be generated.
If you have entered a material group, you can specify !hether the system is to search for
materials !ith a master record only %)&, materials !ithout a master record only %G&, or
both %no entry& !ithin the material group.
". 8hoose a scope7of7list parameter.
$. 8hoose Program E+ecute to run the report. The system generates an initial ran#ing list
of all the vendors !ho supply the desired material %among other materials&. The list also
contains information on the average values. 6rom this, you can easily determine ho!
much an individual vendor deviates from the average.
To obtain the ran#ing list relating e,clusively to the desired material, choose 'oto 0ef.
to material*material grou,. 6rom the initial list, the system generates a ran#ing list
specifically for this material.
6rom the report, you can branch to the vendor master record display. To do so, position the cursor
on the desired vendor and choose Environment %is,la! vendor.
To branch to the vendor evaluation, position the cursor on the desired vendor, and choose
Environment %is,la! evaluation.
>&)&7& "isplaying Vendors 6it!out an Evaluation
This report offers you the follo!ing options0
/ou can list all vendors !ho have not yet been evaluated.
/ou can list the vendors !ho have not yet been evaluated !ith respect to certain criteria.
This !ill also provide you !ith an overvie! of those vendors !ho have no overall
evaluation covering all main criteria, but only individual evaluations for certain main
criteria.
rocedure
1. 6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data
Vendor evaluation List dis,la!s Vendors )ithout evaluation. The initial screen is
displayed.
2. Enter the #eys for the purchasing organization and vendor.
If you !ish to limit the scope of the report according to main criteria, select the field 2!
main criteria.
3. 8hoose Program E+ecute.
". If you have set the indicator 2! main criteria, a screen allo!ing you to select the desired
main criteria appears. If, for e,ample, you select CPriceC and C1eliveryC, you !ill generate
a report listing all vendors that have not been evaluated !ith respect to these t!o criteria.
Then choose Main criterion &ontinue. /ou !ill obtain a list of the vendors that have not
yet been evaluated !ith respect to the chosen main criteria.
If you have not set the indicator, you !ill obtain a list of not7yet7evaluated vendors.
6rom the report, you can branch to the vendor master record display. To do so, position the cursor
on the desired vendor and choose Environment %is,la! vendor.
/ou can no! branch immediately to Vendor Evaluation in order to maintain evaluations for this
vendor. To do so, position the cursor on the desired vendor and choose Edit Evaluate vendor .
>&)&8& "isplaying Vendors .ot Eval& Since a
Certain "ate
This report lists all the vendors !ho have not been evaluated since a certain date.
rocedure
1. 6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data
Vendor evaluation List dis,la!s Vendors not evaluated since. The initial screen
is displayed.
2. Enter the interval of vendors and the #ey for the purchasing organization. Enter a date in
the (ot evaluated since field.
3. 8hoose Program
E+ecute to run the report. The system generates a list of all the vendors that have not
been evaluated since this date. The date of their last evaluation is displayed.
6rom the report, you can branch to the vendor master record display. To do so, position the cursor
on the desired vendor and choose Environment %is,la! vendor.
/ou can branch direct to Vendor Evaluation by positioning the cursor on the desired vendor and
choosing Edit Evaluate vendor.
>&)&>& "isplaying Vendors 6it!out a 6eig!ting
9ey
This report lists all the vendors !hose !eighting #ey has not been maintained %because their
evaluations for automatic and semi7automatic subcriteria !ere generated in the bac#ground, for
e,ample&.
Since the !eighting #ey is re"uired by the system to compute the scores correctly, you must
maintain it subse"uently.
/ou can use this report to list the relevant evaluation records and then branch direct to vendor
evaluation maintenance.
rocedure
6rom the Purchasing menu, choose Master data Vendor evaluation 3ollo)-on functions
Vendors )ithout )eighting e!
>&)&@& *unning a Standard #nalysis
/ou can perform standard analyses !ith #ey figures %scores& from Vendor Evaluation. The
-tandard anal!sis function is integrated in the Logistics 1nformation -!stem <L1-., but it can also
be invo#ed from the Purchasing menu.
Defer to the documentation '. 'ogistics Information System to familiarize yourself !ith the
'ogistics Information System. /ou !ill find information on the functions in the section Standard
Analyses and information on #ey figures in the section ;o! Fey 6igures are 8alculated0
Purchasing Information System.
Hsing the standard analysis, you can generate various vie!s of Vendor Evaluation data and
generate a graphical display of each vie!. In contrast to the other analyses and reports in Vendor
Evaluation, the standard analysis provides you !ith0
The cumulative scores from all periods, and
The score for 5ust one period
Standard #nalysis and (IS
The data determined in Vendor Evaluation is !ritten to a special statistics file %information
structure S()*& !ithin the 'IS and from there utilized for analysis purposes. The data %or #ey
figures& are the scores for the follo!ing criteria0
$uantity reliability
.n7time delivery performance
Adherence to confirmation date
Inbound delivery %currently not updated&
8ompliance !ith shipping instructions
$uality audit %currently not updated&
$uality of e,ternal service provision
Timeliness of e,ternal service provision
/ou !ish to monitor !hether vendor A8E delivers material A on time and in the
right "uantity. /ou !ant to see his scores for the months >anuary, 6ebruary, and
arch 7 both the scores for each month and the cumulative score.
rocedure
1. Starting from the system menu, choose Logistics
Materials management Purchasing/ master data Vendor evaluation -tandard
anal!sis.
/ou can also invo#e the function via Logistics Logistics &ontrolling Purchasing
information s!stem, -tandard anal!ses Vendor evaluation.
2. Enter the desired parameters.
3. 8hoose Vendor evaluation anal!sis E+ecute.
/ou !ill obtain a list of results !ith characteristic values %e.g. all vendors for a purchasing
organization !ith their scores&.
". /ou can process the list according to a variety of criteria0
a. Position the cursor on a characteristic value %e.g. a vendor& and choose, for
e,ample, Vie) %rill do)n b!.
b. Select the desired type of vie! %e.g. Material& and confirm.
A list of characteristic values !ill appear %for e,ample, all materials for a vendor
plus their scores&.
c. 8arry out steps a& and b& for the other types of vie! too, if desired %for e,ample,
Month&.
d. 6or a better overvie! generate the vie! via 'oto 'ra,hic.
>&,& Furt!er #nalysis 'ptions (U*C0ISC Evaln&
S!eet)
/ou can obtain further information that is useful in the appraisal of the vendors !ho supply you
!ith materials from the vendor evaluation sheet and by ma#ing use of the standard analyses
!ithin the Purchasing Information System %PHD8;IS&.
In the PHD8;IS, you !ill also find the standard analysis for vendor evaluation.
This is not described here, but in the section Dunning a Standard Analysis .
9hen you run standard analyses for a vendor, a material group, or a material, and for long7term
planning !ith regard to vendors and material groups, the list !ill include #ey figures for the
delivery :uantity variance and date variance %among other things&. The e,tent of the variances
is determined via a grid containing certain !indo!s. The !indo!s are defined !ithin the
Purchasing 8ustomizing facility for each purchasing organization. The #ey figures are updated
follo!ing each goods receipt according to the relevant !indo!.
This means that you can see ho! the deliveries are distributed among the individual !indo!s,
and find out ho! many deliveries !ere received too late or too early, or !hether too much or too
little !as delivered.
The follo!ing !indo!s have been defined for delivery "uantity variances in
8ustomizing0
7n to 7G(
7)@ to 7)(
7@ to )(
)) to G(
G) to n
A goods receipt in !hich, for e,ample GBK too little material !as delivered falls
!ithin !indo! ), !hereas a 2D in !hich <K too much material !as delivered
falls !ithin !indo! *.
Vie?ing 9ey Figures in U*C0IS
1. 6rom the Purchasing menu, choose >Purchasing document>
0e,orting Purchasing info s!stem.
2. 8hoose -tandard anal!sis and then one of the options Vendor/ Material grou,, Material,
Long-term ,lanning %vendor or material group&.
3. Enter the desired parameters and run the analysis.
/ou !ill obtain a list of results.
". Position the cursor on a #ey figure and choose E+tras #ll e! figures.
In the dialog bo, that no! appears, you !ill see 7 among other things 7 the #ey figures for
delivery date variance and "uantity variance.
Vie?ing 9ey Figures in t!e Vendor Evaluation S!eet
The !indo!s are also displayed in the vendor evaluation sheet. 6rom the Purchasing menu,
choose Master data Vendor evaluation 3ollo)-on functions Print evaluation sheet. A
prere"uisite is that an appropriate scope7of7list parameter has previously been maintained in
8ustomizing.