New supplier assessment
Provides a structured supplier profile and ratings against the organisation’s review criteria. Sets out material risks, evidence gaps and proposed safeguards to support an approval decision.
— Procurement & Vendors
Supplier risk review
Assesses supplier evidence against procurement criteria to produce a rated review of operational, financial, information-security and dependency risks, with mitigations and proposed contract conditions.
- Procurement & Vendors
- Traceable reasoning
- Runs anywhere
2–3 weeks → ~25 minutes
For a typical multi-document review workflow
No coding required
- Input
- Supplier proposals and information packs
- Output
- Structured supplier profile
- Runs in
- Skillsize · ChatGPT · Claude · Copilot
- Export
- SKILL.md · MCP
- Time saved
- ~2–3 weeks per run
— USE CASES
What people use Supplier risk review for
Critical supplier renewal
Assesses operational resilience, financial viability and dependency exposure at renewal. Identifies mitigations and contract conditions that address the risks of continued reliance.
Security-sensitive procurement review
Examines supplier policies, security questionnaire responses, certificates and incident history against information-security criteria. Documents concerns and proposed conditions for handling sensitive information.
Supplier concentration assessment
Evaluates concentration and dependency risks using the available supplier evidence and review criteria. Clarifies where reliance creates exposure and proposes measures to reduce it.
What it works from
- Supplier proposals and information packs
- Operational policies and security questionnaires
- Certificates and supporting assurance evidence
- Supplier accounts and financial information available for research purposes
What you get back
- Structured supplier profile
- Criterion-by-criterion risk ratings and supporting rationale
- Financial viability, ownership and incident history findings
- Overall supplier risk assessment and material evidence gaps for further review purposes
— HOW IT BEHAVES
How Supplier risk review produces its result
The mechanics behind this specific template — what it reads, what it calculates, and where a human stays in the loop.
Scored against your criteria
Each risk is assessed against criteria you control and weight, so the same standard applies to every risk in the risk universe in scope.
Risk registers, controls and policy documents pulled into one schema
Every risk is captured in the same field structure, so records drawn from different documents and sources stay comparable.
Whole sets of risk registers, controls and policy documents at once
All of your risk registers, controls and policy documents is processed as one set, so patterns across documents surface instead of being read one file at a time.
Live research on the risk universe in scope
Current external sources on the risk universe in scope are researched during the run rather than recalled from training data, and every source travels with the output.
Composed as work product
Findings on the risk universe in scope are written up as a document that reads like professional output, with each claim tied back to a risk.
Why this is expensive by hand
Supplier decisions often depend on evidence spread across proposals, policies, accounts and security questionnaires. New supplier assessment is the typical trigger — provides a structured supplier profile and ratings against the organisation’s review criteria. Sets out material risks, evidence gaps and proposed safeguards to support an approval decision. Done properly it is defensible; done at pace it becomes a judgement call nobody can retrace. And "properly" usually means 2–3 weeks of manual work.
How this Skill produces it
As a Skill, the work is already sequenced. You bring the evidence, and the run produces structured supplier profile plus criterion-by-criterion risk ratings and supporting rationale. The judgement is built in — how items are broken up, what standard they are held to, and where the run stops for a human review. In effect, 2–3 weeks of senior time compresses into ~25 minutes — and the output is comparable across clients, quarters and colleagues instead of shaped by whoever ran it.
Who it's for
- Procurement and category managers
- Third-party risk and vendor management teams
- Bid and proposal teams
- Consultants running sourcing exercises
Run it in Skillsize — or export it anywhere
Supplier risk review exports as a structured SKILL.md file and is MCP-ready, so the same method runs in ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or your own AI products. Adapt it to your methodology, and the intelligence stays yours — not locked to one vendor.
ChatGPTClaudeCopilotAI Products (MCP)
Related Skill Templates
More Procurement & Vendors templates →Procurement & Vendors
Vendor Risk & Onboarding Engine
Evaluates a prospective supplier against your own vendor policy and returns a governed onboarding decision — approve, approve with conditions, refer for deeper due diligence or reject — with the risk reasoning shown and a procurement lead sign-off required before a purchase order can be raised.
Procurement & Vendors
Category spend & savings
Rolls an invoice or contract export up by spend category, charts it, and quantifies savings opportunities with the suggested lever per category.
Procurement & Vendors
Vendor due-diligence questionnaire
Runs a vendor due-diligence questionnaire, scores it deterministically into risk bands, and writes the contractual conditions to attach before onboarding.
Procurement & Vendors
Supplier failure risk
Scores every supplier line for the risk of failing to deliver, based on how comparable deliveries have actually performed, and sets out where dual-sourcing or contract action is warranted.
Procurement & Vendors
Vendor scorecard & rank
Scores vendor responses on quality, cost and risk, computes weighted totals, ranks the field and writes a recommendation with trade-offs stated.
Procurement & Vendors
RFP bid comparison matrix
Extracts and scores every bid against every evaluation criterion with a reason per cell, rendered as a heatmap showing the decisive differences.