Turning the matter over
An old saying goes that "clear accounts keep amistades ”and it is certainly on this subject that I will address the present; focused, fundamentally on the relationships that our organizations maintain with their suppliers (or suppliers).

The raison d'être of any organization is to create value for its client and that it also does so. Undoubtedly, efforts to offer a luxury service without adequate resources are vain, those that contribute to that subjective perception of what we call quality and that is defined by the client in different ways, but whose effect comes to the result of choosing between one or the other restaurant, motivated by those own perceptions. In short, if we do not adapt our services to the needs, desires and demands of our clients, we are doomed to failure.
Based on this, the company must adopt actions that contribute to the satisfaction of those wants and needs. Define strategies that make it easier for the client to obtain what they are looking for and for the company to obtain income.
It often happens, and not infrequently I have seen and lived it, that services and products are offered to me through the different means available in the restaurant and when I try to make use of them they don't have them: The cause? Poor planning in the purchasing process and management inventory that is caused by the lack of studies and, many times, most of the time, I dare say, by dependence on suppliers.
Casting the subject
I start from the idea that the absence of a raw material forces us to desperately turn to suppliers that we do not even know, but that in the long run impregnate us with an image of tranquility and make us see the world in a different way and force us to rethink a series of questions that we did not ask ourselves before because, out of habit, “we did not leave the house” given the degree of dependency that we create towards our suppliers.
In essence, I imagine those involved in strategic of purchase expressing the typical phrases that finally lead to failure: "It is a good supplier"; "We have been with them for years"; "Prices are cheaper"; "We get along well"; "Let's sacrifice ourselves and wait for it to supply us"
And certainly, we are clients, clients that we retain, but special clients, in which the act of production and services occur simultaneously and on which we depend, in most cases on stocks.
 It is good to think about stability; Frequent change of providers will not make us better either; because not all raw materials have the same characteristics and when you change from one to another, they impact other areas of the business, which necessarily lead to other transformations that start from the redesign or update of the technical specifications, budgets, prices of the offers, etc. and in the client who perceives them and establishes a dangerous judgment on quality.
Solving the problem
It is for this reason, and that everything runs smoothly, as well as the services are not affected by the lack of raw materials for the elaboration of the different preparations, that it should be an act of good faith of the company towards its clients that the Suppliers of the organization must undergo a periodical evaluation process in order to have elements (when these are needed) that support the continuation or suspension of established relationships and also to provide information that provides feedback on the execution and monitoring of the contract.
In this sense, the equation that is proposed to carry out an evaluation of this type, includes the criteria that most often have an impact on the final results such as: a) quality of the articles, b) delivery time, c) lack of delivery, d) flexibility in responding to requests from the organization and setting prices. However, the variables to be evaluated are in the judgment of those who carry them out in correspondence with the characteristics of the organization that applies them.
Likewise, the periodicity of the evaluations must be determined according to the characteristics indicated: a) duration of the contract, b) results of previous evaluations and c) time elapsed since the beginning of the relationship.
The basic equation for conducting the evaluation is as follows:
ESij= A 1* RC ij + a 2* RTij+ a 3* FAITH ij + a 4 * F ij+ a 5 * RP ij
ES ij:   J-th evaluation of the i-th supplier.
i:   i-th supplier.
j:   j-th evaluation.
a1,a2,a3,a4,a5:  Magnitudes that reflect the weight that each organization gives to each of the evaluated criteria. (The sum of these values ​​in the resulting equation equals one)
RC ij:   Quality ratio of the i-th supplier in the j-th evaluation.
RT ij:   Relation of the supply time of the i-th supplier in the j-th evaluation.
FE ij:   Missing in the delivery of the i-th supplier in the j-th evaluation.
Fij:   Flexibility demonstrated by the i-th supplier in the j-th evaluation.
RP ij:   Price relation of the i-th supplier in the j-th evaluation.
Pay attention that all these criteria must be expressed in values ​​between 0 and 1, inclusive.
The content of each of the terms of the equation is explained below.
Quality ratio (RC)
This variable expresses the degree of compliance with the qualitative characteristics of the items supplied by the supplier according to the purchase specifications formulated by each of the parties that have an impact on it (Maître and Chef) from the division of the total of accepted articles among the quantity of articles that the supplier delivers and that mathematically we can express from the following formula:
TAC is the total of accepted items of the total that the supplier delivers (TAE)
Supply time ratio (RT)
This expression bases its Insights in the degree of fulfillment of the supplier of the agreed times for the deliveries of the articles that are ordered and is defined as follows:
RT = 1 yes, Real delivery time = Agreed time
RT = 0,8 yes, Real delivery time = Agreed time + 1 or 2 time intervals
RT = 0,5 yes, Real delivery time = Agreed time + 3 or 4 time intervals
RT = 0 yes, Actual delivery time = Agreed time + 5 or more time intervals
In view of the above, it is recommended that a scale of values ​​be established that penalizes deliveries prematurely, since this situation, too, may have undesirable implications in the evaluation of the inventory level.
Missing delivery (FE)
It refers to the degree of fulfillment of the quantities in each order. It is good to clarify that this does not contradict the quality indicator, because the weight of the variable measurement associated with the shortages does not take into account the quantities accepted according to the purchase specifications, but rather the quantities requested and those that served by the provider upon receipt.
The values ​​they can take are the following:
FE = 1 if, Number of items or batches received / Number of items or batches requested = 1
FE = 0,8 if, 1>Number of items or lots received / Number of items or lots requested ³ 0,95
FE = 0,5 yes, 0,95 > Number of items or lots received / Number of items or lots requested ³ 0,90
FE = 0 yes, 0,9 Number of items or lots received / Number of items or lots requested
Flexibility (F)
It expresses the degree of response of the supplier against variations requested by the organization, of the agreed contracts.
F = 1 if, there are no variations or if the response to the variations is very satisfactory.
F = 0,8 yes, the answer is satisfactory
F = 0,5 yes, the answer is unsatisfactory
F = 0 yes, no changes are accepted 
Price ratio (RP)
It expresses the relationship between the minimum price at which the item is on the market and the price set by the supplier and whose formulation is expressed as follows:
MPM corresponds to the Minimum Price Established in the Market and
PS is the price raised by the supplier.
Finally, the general evaluation of a supplier is the result obtained from averaging the evaluations carried out over a period of time, which results from applying the following equation:
ESi (avg) =? IT IS ij  / k
ES i (avg): Average evaluation of the ith supplier in the period considered.
k: Number of evaluations carried out in the period considered.
The result obtained can be compared with a scale that evaluates the supplier as excellent, good, fair or poor and that I leave to the administrators' consideration, because personally I consider that each company is a world in itself, with its particularities.
The title of the article states that when you evaluate your suppliers, the client appreciates it, and it is true.
The client is not interested if in the delivery process the supplier did not deliver everything that was requested, or if of the total of the goods delivered you returned 15 or 20% of the total received for not fulfilling its qualities; what the client appreciates is that you have the product at his disposal when he requests it, with the quality that he has defined and at the price he is willing to pay.
Finally, dear businessman, let me philosophize and tell you that this is how our clients are, and this is how business is: a maze with many paths and a way out.
I am a dreamer and in my dreams I believe that a better world is possible, that no one knows more than anyone, we all learn from everyone. I love gastronomy, numbers, teaching and sharing all the little I know, because by sharing I also learn. "Let's all go together from foundation to success"
Last entries of MBA Yosvanys R Guerra Valverde (see everything)