Published on August 20, 2026
A supplier can receive top marks today – and still be the wrong partner tomorrow. This is because traditional supplier evaluations have a systematic weakness: they primarily look in the rearview mirror.
Quality, delivery reliability, costs, complaints – all these key performance indicators show how well a supplier has met requirements so far. That's important. But it doesn't answer the question that is at least as crucial for the future:
What skills can this supplier bring to the table for us tomorrow?
This is precisely where strategic supplier management begins for me.
Years ago, I dealt intensively with these questions in a project for Siemens.
In a technology-driven environment, it wasn't just about identifying reliable suppliers. We needed to know which partners could contribute new technologies, development expertise, and high-performance supply chains in the future.
So we broadened our perspective.
In addition to current performance, we also analyzed and audited the potential of the suppliers.
That fundamentally changed the discussion.
A supplier with excellent current key performance indicators was not automatically the most strategically important partner. And a supplier who hadn't yet fully convinced us in the current evaluation could suddenly become highly interesting if their technological capabilities aligned well with our future development.
This approach later led to the development of our Supplier & Partner Management Program at Emarticon.
The crucial insight gained from this experience still stays with me today:
Performance shows what a supplier delivers today. Potential shows what can be achieved with them tomorrow.
Two axes change the perspective
Those who consider the two axes of performance and potential separately get a much more differentiated picture of their supplier portfolio.
Essentially, four groups emerge:
- High performance, high potential:
These are the strategic partners that should be retained and specifically developed further. - High performance, low potential:
Valuable and reliable suppliers – but not necessarily the partners for the next technological or strategic development stage. - Lower performance, high potential:
For me, this is the most interesting group. Here, a company has to decide whether targeted development is worthwhile. - Low performance, low potential:
Here, the strategic perspective is usually clear.
I consider the third group particularly important. Because that's precisely where it becomes clear whether supplier development is being approached strategically – or merely as a repair program.
Supplier development is an investment decision
In many companies, supplier development begins where a supplier causes problems.
Improve quality. Increase delivery reliability. Stabilize processes.
This may be necessary.
But for me, a different question is more strategically interesting:
What skills do we want to develop together with a supplier because they will be crucial for our company in the future?
Supplier development then takes on a completely different meaning. It no longer serves merely to eliminate existing shortcomings. It becomes an investment in future capabilities.
However, this also means that not every supplier should be developed.
Management time, technical know-how, and resources are limited. They should be deployed where future potential and strategic relevance converge.
It is not enough to simply classify a supplier as "innovative".
A company needs to know very specifically what it is looking for:
- Which technologies will be relevant for us?
- Which skills do we want to develop ourselves – and which do we want to acquire through partners?
- Which suppliers can grow with our requirements?
- How resilient are their own supply chains?
- And does their technological development even fit with our strategy?
Even the most innovative supplier is of little strategic relevance if their capabilities play no role in the future of the company itself.
Therefore, for me, good supplier management doesn't begin with the supplier. It begins with your own strategy.
Anyone who wants to assess supplier potential needs to know where their own company should be headed. This directly links supplier management with corporate, technology, and product group strategy.
And it changes the role of purchasing.
Purchasing then no longer just manages existing supplier relationships. It helps to decide which skills and technologies the company needs.
This goes far beyond a good supplier scorecard.
What companies can learn from this
I wouldn't replace traditional supplier evaluations, but I would consistently add a second perspective to them:
Not just: How well does this supplier meet our requirements today?
Rather:
- What skills will we need in the future?
- Which of our current suppliers can develop them?
- Where is targeted supplier development worthwhile?
- And which partners might we still be missing?
Because anyone who evaluates their suppliers solely based on their past performance is making future decisions with data from the past.
Or to put it even more bluntly: Those who only look at suppliers in the rearview mirror risk missing out on the future with yesterday's best partners.
👉 More on this topic:
Here's how we at Emarticon approach supplier management:
→ Strategic supplier management:
Do you want to make purchasing and supply chain a key factor for success?
I would be happy to discuss your specific situation with you in a personal conversation.