Rechercher

PythonReactSEOPDF
OpenClaw

Vendor Performance Audit

Vendor Performance Audit Framework: Vendor Performance Scorecard VPS Output: Scored vendor review, improvement plan or offboarding recommendation

flynndavid0 installations selon la source☆ 0 Étoiles du dépôtv1.0.0

Installation

Suivez les instructions du dépôt pour votre agent. Consultez les fichiers et dépendances avant l’installation.

SkillHub CLI

skillhub install flynndavid/vendor-performance-audit

Examinez la source et la compatibilité, puis suivez les étapes d’installation.

Donnez le lien à votre agent et demandez-lui d’examiner instructions et dépendances avant d’expliquer les étapes.

Voir la source ↗Guides

Instructions

Vendor Performance Audit

Framework: Vendor Performance Scorecard (VPS) Output: Scored vendor review, improvement plan or offboarding recommendation

Most vendor relationships drift because nobody's measuring them. This quarterly audit system gives you a structured way to evaluate every significant vendor, surface problems before they escalate, and make data-driven decisions about renewing, renegotiating, or replacing.


When to Run This Audit

  • Quarterly for all Priority vendors (ACV > $10K or operationally critical)
  • Semi-annually for Standard vendors
  • Triggered any time a major incident occurs (SLA breach, security issue, delivery failure)
  • Pre-renewal (minimum 60 days before contract end)

Phase 1: KPI Scorecard

Rate each dimension 1-5. Be honest — this is for your decision-making, not the vendor's feelings.

Dimension 1: Delivery & SLA Performance (Weight: 30%)
Score Criteria
5 Consistently exceeds SLA. Proactive communication on any hiccup. Zero surprise failures.
4 Meets SLA >95% of the time. Issues are rare and resolved quickly.
3 Meets SLA most of the time. Occasional misses with reasonable resolution.
2 Frequent SLA misses. Resolution is slow or requires escalation.
1 Regular delivery failures. SLA is aspirational, not operational.

Evidence required: Pull ticket data, delivery logs, or incident records. Don't score from memory.

Dimension 2: Quality of Output (Weight: 25%)
Score Criteria
5 Output exceeds expectations. Error rate near zero. Rework is essentially unheard of.
4 Output meets quality bar consistently. Minor issues handled proactively.
3 Generally acceptable quality. Some rework required.
2 Quality is inconsistent. Rework is common. Internal team spends time fixing vendor output.
1 Output frequently doesn't meet standards. Significant internal overhead to compensate.
Dime...

Informations sur la source

Source
github
Repository
openclaw/skills
Path
skills/flynndavid/vendor-performance-audit
Version
1.0.0
Commit
7ce40e8164ac4a05682cbf9b8d761973b5183346
Source de classification
rules
Statut
active
Visibilité
public

Ces informations proviennent de l’analyse indexée et peuvent être anciennes. Vérifiez les fichiers actuels.

Contenu extrait

SKILL.md
# Vendor Performance Audit
**Framework: Vendor Performance Scorecard (VPS)**
**Output: Scored vendor review, improvement plan or offboarding recommendation**

Most vendor relationships drift because nobody's measuring them. This quarterly audit system gives you a structured way to evaluate every significant vendor, surface problems before they escalate, and make data-driven decisions about renewing, renegotiating, or replacing.

---

## When to Run This Audit

- **Quarterly** for all Priority vendors (ACV > $10K or operationally critical)
- **Semi-annually** for Standard vendors
- **Triggered** any time a major incident occurs (SLA breach, security issue, delivery failure)
- **Pre-renewal** (minimum 60 days before contract end)

---

## Phase 1: KPI Scorecard

Rate each dimension 1-5. Be honest — this is for your decision-making, not the vendor's feelings.

### Dimension 1: Delivery & SLA Performance (Weight: 30%)

| Score | Criteria |
|-------|---------|
| 5 | Consistently exceeds SLA. Proactive communication on any hiccup. Zero surprise failures. |
| 4 | Meets SLA >95% of the time. Issues are rare and resolved quickly. |
| 3 | Meets SLA most of the time. Occasional misses with reasonable resolution. |
| 2 | Frequent SLA misses. Resolution is slow or requires escalation. |
| 1 | Regular delivery failures. SLA is aspirational, not operational. |

**Evidence required:** Pull ticket data, delivery logs, or incident records. Don't score from memory.

### Dimension 2: Quality of Output (Weight: 25%)

| Score | Criteria |
|-------|---------|
| 5 | Output exceeds expectations. Error rate near zero. Rework is essentially unheard of. |
| 4 | Output meets quality bar consistently. Minor issues handled proactively. |
| 3 | Generally acceptable quality. Some rework required. |
| 2 | Quality is inconsistent. Rework is common. Internal team spends time fixing vendor output. |
| 1 | Output frequently doesn't meet standards. Significant internal overhead to compensate. |

### Dime...

Skills associés

OpenClaw

1password

daggerkun007

Set up and use 1Password CLI (op). Use when installing the CLI, enabling desktop app integration, signing in (single or multi-account), or reading/injecting/running secrets via op.