New hires usually deal with suppliers in one of two extremes. Some think that since we're the ones paying, we can simply make demands. Others assume the supplier knows best and take their word for it. The first damages the relationship. The second loses the standard.
Partner, supplier, producer, vendor: the name changes from industry to industry, but what a new hire needs to learn is the same. We hold the standard, and we solve the problem together. This article uses the supplier quests on First Run's co-op, semiconductor fab, construction site and IT company maps to set out how to make those calls.
Hold the standard, improve together
This is the co-op's Product Buyer quest. A new supplier's cut salad meets the legal requirements, but the co-op inspection center's microbial test came out above the co-op's own voluntary standard. The catalog slot two weeks from now is already booked, and the supplier asks what the problem is, since it's legal.
- It's legal, so run it in the catalog as planned: Poor
- Launch as planned and increase testing after launch to keep an eye on it: Risky
- Delay the launch by two weeks, leave the catalog slot empty, and just tell the supplier the results were bad and to improve it and bring it back: Good
- Explain that the standard is the co-op's promise to members and share the results. Work with the supplier on causes such as hygiene and temperature control, list it only after a re-test passes, and fill this catalog slot with another item: Excellent
Why Good doesn't reach Excellent is the heart of it. The standard was held, but without the results data and the likely causes, the supplier doesn't know what to fix, and improvement slows down. The feedback's learning point is short: when you ask for improvement, share the data. Share results and improve together, as the Excellent answer does, and the supplier's plant comes up to your standard and they become a long-term partner.
The Risky answer is worth a look too. More testing is good, but in the meantime a product that failed the standard ends up on members' tables. Testing is there to filter before launch.
Get through bad news together
On the same co-op map, the representative of the farm-direct producers comes to see you. Because of the long rain this summer, tomatoes will only reach about 60% of the planned volume for the next three weeks. Members have already ordered.
- Make up the shortfall with market tomatoes and supply them under the farm-direct label: Poor
- To avoid confusion, cancel every tomato order for three weeks and refund: Risky
- Supply what's available and treat the rest as out of stock with a refund: Good
- Get the volumes straight away and allocate them fairly under the rules. Tell members honestly in the delivery notice about the rain and the farm's situation, with the growers' names. Refund the shortfall and don't quietly swap in produce from elsewhere: Excellent
The first answer misrepresents where the food came from and destroys trust in the whole farm-direct system. The second looks tidy, but the 60% that did grow has nowhere to go and the producers lose more. The third is practical, but the words "out of stock" alone don't tell members why. The Excellent feedback includes this line: an honest notice often comes back as members saying they want to support these growers. A relationship means getting through the bad years together, not just the good ones.
In a price negotiation, look at the numbers together
The producers ask for next year's contract price for rice to go up 15% because fertiliser and fuel have become more expensive. The buyer says members will accept 5% at most. Mentioning that others offer cheaper rice and pressing them to settle at 5% is Poor: a 5% won by pressure can come back as producers leaving or quality falling. Settling quickly in the middle at 10% stops at Good. Splitting the difference without evidence means nobody checked whether it actually covers the cost of production. Excellent is going through the production-cost data together, looking at phasing the increase or cutting packaging and logistics costs on the co-op side, and explaining the reasons for the increase to members.
The vendor does the work, the procedure is still yours
In the fab's Equipment Engineer quest, a field service engineer from the tool maker is ready to swap a part on an etch tool. The line says the tool is idle and the panel is off, so skip the 20-minute LOTO (lockout/tagout) and just start. There's one wrong answer new hires pick easily here: the vendor wrote the service manual, so let them follow their own procedure and make the LOTO call. It's Poor. The feedback is clear: vendors follow this fab's safety procedures too, and the tool owner is accountable for the work permit and for confirming LOTO with them.
In the New Line Setup PM quest, four new tools are due to move in next week, but facilities say the process gas and exhaust hook-up won't be ready for another ten days.
- Keep the date: have the vendor run temporary gas and exhaust lines so setup can start: Poor
- Keep the official schedule for now, since facilities often catch up: Poor
- Push every activity back ten days without checking what could run in parallel: Risky
- Rebuild one schedule with facilities and the vendor, pull forward what doesn't need hook-up, and share the impact: Excellent
A setup PM's job is to fuse every team's and every contractor's separate schedule into one. Handing the vendor a temporary workaround isn't the answer, and neither is a schedule that pretends not to know about a delay everyone else knows about.
Don't stop at blaming the vendor
In an IT company map quest, an outside vendor slips two weeks. Blaming the vendor only is Poor; the right answer escalates to the vendor and internally on the basis of contract terms and impact. Even when the cause of the delay is the vendor's, managing its impact is your project's job.
The construction site works on the same principle. When a subcontractor's progress claim is higher than the records show, holding the entire payment blocks even the undisputed amount and can delay the subcontractor's workers' wages. The right answer pays the verified amount on time and re-measures the rest together. This quest is covered in Construction onboarding: safety before schedule.
Checklist for supplier management training
- Are both pushing suppliers around and taking their word for everything included as wrong answers?
- Is the correct answer the one that holds the standard while sharing results data and causes with the supplier?
- Are hiding a supply problem and quietly swapping in another product the worst answers?
- Do the quests cover why splitting the difference without evidence falls short in a price negotiation?
- Do they cover that safety procedures stay your responsibility when a vendor does the work?
- Is there a quest about merging each contractor's separate schedule into one?
- Is there a quest about escalating a delay on the basis of contract terms and impact?
For design rules shared across industries, read Onboarding scenarios for industries beyond IT. Handling complaints from customers and residents is covered in Complaint handling training: action first.
Try workplace scenarios as onboarding quests
Pick the Product Buyer on the co-op map to play the supplier quests, and level up to unlock the farm-direct producer quests. Play the Onboarding