---
id: KB-CF-009
url: https://app.codecontract.io/help/use-cases-by-capability/approving-suppliers-against-your-own-criteria
idioma: en
categoria: casos-por-funcionalidad
audiencia: usuario
nivel: intermedio
actualizado: 2026-08-13
tambienEn: [es]
relacionados: [KB-CF-006, KB-TL-011]
citadoPor: [KB-CF-011, KB-CF-018, KB-CR-020]
---

# Approving suppliers against your own criteria

_Making "approved" mean the same thing whoever decides it._

**Responde a:** supplier approval criteria · when do i clear a supplier · supplier approval checklist · vendor qualification criteria

Approving a supplier is not having the paperwork: it is deciding they can work with you. The difference shows on the day two people on the same team reach different conclusions with the same documents in front of them.

## What makes "approved" mean something

**En corto**

- Written criteria, not the judgement of whoever looks that day.
- A minimum per criterion, not "must have insurance" but "insurance of at least X".
- Who decides when something falls outside the rules.

## The three levels that usually suffice

| Level | What it requires | Who approves |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Approved | Everything mandatory, current and meeting the minimum | Automatic on completion |
| Approved with conditions | Something non-blocking is missing, or a minimum is tight | A manager, leaving the note |
| Not approved | Something blocking is missing, or a minimum is breached | Automatic, and communicated |

> [!IMPORTANT]
> The middle level is what stops approval becoming an empty stamp. Without it, people approve what does not quite comply so as not to block the work, and from then on "approved" means nothing.

## The commonest design mistake

Making everything desirable mandatory. It ends with half your suppliers marked not approved over things nobody cares about, and someone bypassing the process to get work done. Mandatory means what genuinely prevents contracting.

> [!WARNING]
> If approval expires — and it usually does, because insurance and certificates expire — the status has to recalculate itself. An approval reading "approved" with insurance that lapsed three months ago is worse than no approval at all.

> [!NOTE]
> Write the criteria down even if it is four lines. The value is not in the document: it is in two different people deciding the same thing.

**Can criteria differ by supplier type?**

Yes, and they should: you do not ask the same of someone entering site as of someone shipping material.

**What about a supplier who fails a criterion but is essential?**

That is what "approved with conditions" is for: it is decided expressly and who decided is recorded.

**Do we tell the supplier why they are not approved?**

It helps: most fix it once they know what is missing.

## Ejemplos

**Two buyers at the same company approve suppliers by different standards.**

- Write four criteria with their minimums
- Add an "approved with conditions" level for exceptions

→ "Approved" comes to mean the same thing whoever decides, and exceptions carry a name and a reason.

**Each department approves suppliers on different criteria and the same supplier passes in one and fails in another.**

- Sets a common list and writes it down
- Marks what is mandatory and what is desirable
- Applies the same criteria to suppliers already working with you

→ Approval means the same across the company and stops depending on who does it.

**A document nobody ever looks at is requested.**

- Reviews what is actually used and drops the rest

→ The supplier delivers sooner because less is asked.

**A critical supplier passes on the bare minimum.**

- Matches the level of scrutiny to the risk

→ What is critical is examined more closely than what is incidental.

**Approval happens once and nobody reviews three years later.**

- Schedules the periodic review

→ The approval stays true.

**The criteria live in one person's head.**

- Writes them into the template

→ Approval outlives whoever set it up.