Show TOC

Purchasing: Vendor Evaluation Enhancements

Description

As of Release 3.0, MM Vendor Evaluation includes the following new features:

Change system parameters in customizing

USER EXITS

There are user exits for all subcriteria. This allows you to store a separate method of determination for each subcriterion. That is to say, you can automate manual subcriteria and determine scores for automatic subcriteria in a different way than the one available in the standard system.

This is made possible by the function module "EXIT_SAPMM06L_001", "User exits for vendor evaluation". You must activate the function module with the transaction "CMOD".

To activate the user exits, you must set the indicator "UserExit" for each subcriterion for which you wish to store a separate method of determination. (You do this in Customizing.)

For more on this topic, please refer to IMG Define criteria

Control parameters

The following new features have been provided:

Material-dependent parameters for delivery subcriteria

You can specify whether the parameter "standardization value for delivery time variance" and the parameter "minimum delivery quantity" are to be taken from the Vendor Evaluation Customizing facility or from the material master record (purchasing value key) of the relevant material.

Some parameters dropped/new parameters added for quality subcriteria

The two parameters "Weighting: in-prodn. rejection" and "Weighting: GR lots", which to date had no function, are dropped from Release 3.0.

There is a new control parameter "Proportion of business volume" for the new subcriterion "in-production (shopfloor) rejection/complaints".
This parameter is a percentage, which determines the proportion of the volume of business done with the vendor that the costs associated with in-production (shopfloor) rejections or complaints may not exceed. If the costs incurred through the rejection of a lot exceed this value, the result will be that the vendor will be awarded the lowest possible score.

For more on this topic, please refer to IMG
Define purchasing organization data for vendor evaluation.

Changes to the interface

New "automatic" subcriterion: "complaints (rejection) level"

This new criterion is used to assess whether the materials supplied by a vendor are often rejected (or are the subject of complaints) subsequent to incoming inspection (for example, on the shop floor) due to defects, thereby causing you to incur additional costs.

The score (QM quality score) is determined in QM Quality Management and passed on to MM Vendor Evaluation. This quality score is converted in accordance with the scoring system within vendor evaluation.

For additional information on the QM area, please refer to
Release Note QM Vendor Evaluation

New "automatic" subcriterion: "Adherence to confirmation date"

This new criterion is used to assess whether a vendor keeps to the date set out in the confirmation (e.g. in the shipping notification), that is to say, whether the goods are actually received on the confirmed date.

New field: "Evaluation of quality management system"

On the screen for the evaluation of the main criterion "Quality", there is a new field: "Evaluation of QM system". This field shows the score assigned to the vendor's quality management system.
The score is assigned by the QM System (e.g. ISO 9003 with certificate = 85 points). This points figure is for information only: it is not included in the computation of scores.
To identify the system involved, display the vendor master record via the menu "Environment".

Note:

You can use the content of the field for a program of your own and have this points figure included in the vendor's score.

Logs

Under the menu "Goto", you will find the options "All logs" and "Detailed log", instead of the earlier option "Log for main criterion".
For the automatically determined "quality" subcriteria, the functionality has been increased in scope and the display changed. It is now possible to display specific information on a certain subcriterion via the menu option "Detailed log".

In the logs, the levels of information are more clearly structured:
In the detailed log of the quality audit, at the highest level you obtain the evaluation of a material per plant. Below this is the level "inspection type", and at the lowest level you will find information on the individual audit lots.

In the detailed log of the inspection of the GR lots, at the highest level you get the evaluation per material. Below this comes the level "inspection type", and at the lowest level you will find information on each GR lot.