Sourcing engineers in complex manufacturing are routinely handed portfolios of 50 to 100 parts and asked to drive impact. There is rarely a structured method to determine where to allocate effort, which risks are existential versus noise, or which cost opportunities represent real leverage.
Prioritization defaults to reactive, meeting-driven, and personality-influenced, not system-driven.
A $50K part that stops a line is more urgent than a $2M part with diversified supply and stable delivery. The right system must be explainable, surface operational risk, and produce defensible action categories without relying on escalation pressure or institutional memory.
Supply continuity failures in aerospace are catastrophic and difficult to reverse. Cost opportunity, while meaningful, is a second-order priority.
Default weights reflect a production-continuity-first philosophy. All weights are configurable in the SETTINGS tab. Switch modes to reprioritize the portfolio based on current business objective without rebuilding the model.
| Capability | Description |
|---|---|
| Dynamic Weight Configuration | A dedicated SETTINGS tab allows users to switch between three preset scoring modes: Production First, Cost Down, and Supply Resilience, or define custom weights. The entire ranking updates instantly without touching any formulas. |
| Reason Codes | Each ranked part now displays a plain-language reason code in the OUTPUT tab explaining why it scored where it did. Example: "CTB, Single Source, OTD Critical, High Cost Delta." Eliminates the need to scan across eight columns in leadership meetings. |
| Should-Cost Flag | Parts missing should-cost delta data are flagged with a warning in the OUTPUT tab. Surfaces incomplete data before sourcing action is taken rather than silently treating missing values as zero. |
| Risk vs. Opportunity Matrix | A dedicated MATRIX tab plots all 60 parts across Supply Risk (X) and Cost Exposure (Y). Four quadrants — Act Now, Cost Opportunity, Risk Watch, and Monitor — give an instant visual overview of portfolio composition and sourcing priorities. |
| Feature | Description |
|---|---|
| Data Confidence Flag | Each part is rated H/M/L for input reliability. Low-confidence parts surface a warning before action is taken. The tool informs, the sourcing manager decides. |
| Escalation Override | Leadership-escalated parts receive a minimum score of 70 and forced action category without corrupting the underlying calculated score. Political context stays visible without contaminating model integrity. |
| AI Rationale Layer | Top 10 ranked parts are passed through a structured Claude prompt generating a 3-sentence business rationale and action recommendation in plain language, ready for leadership reviews. AI does not create scores or facts — it only rewrites computed drivers into a narrative. Scoring and action categories are fully deterministic. |
Instead of "Part A feels urgent," the system produces a scored, ranked, and explainable output with reason codes automatically generated from the underlying data:
The same overall score can result from very different underlying conditions. Action categories are assigned by profile. Supplier Crisis takes precedence over Dual Source escalation when both conditions are met.
| Condition | Action Category |
|---|---|
| Leadership Escalation = Y | ESCALATE — Active Leadership |
| Production Impact 4+ and Instability 4+ | ESCALATE — Supplier Crisis + Production Risk |
| Production Impact 4+ and Supply Risk 3.5+ | ESCALATE — Dual Source + Eng Review |
| Production Impact 4+ | Dual Source Priority |
| Supply Risk 3+ and Cost Exposure 3+ | Strategic RFQ — Cost Down + Risk |
| Supply Risk 4+ | Supply Risk Mitigation |
| Cost Exposure 4+ | Cost Down / RFQ |
| Instability 3+ | Supplier Performance Review |
| Priority Score 40 or below | Monitor |
This framework is the first in a series of structured sourcing tools being built to address the most common pain points in manufacturing procurement. Each tool is designed to stand alone, solve a specific operational problem, and produce outputs that are defensible in a leadership setting.
Built to structure sourcing decisions under pressure. Intentionally simple in structure, rigorous in logic. The goal is clarity, repeatability, and leverage — not complexity. The model surfaces the data. The sourcing manager makes the call.