Evidence reviewed
The stated source and scope were reviewed and recorded. Verification does not remove the buyer's approval duty.
The decision record
Build an evidence-led qualification file.
A structured record of evidence, gaps and buyer decisions for an industrial membrane second source.
Five connected workstreams.
Each workstream records the source, review status, unresolved question, responsible party and the buyer decision that follows.
| Workstream | Fields recorded | Decision supported |
|---|---|---|
| Supplier profile | Legal identity, manufacturing role, facilities, quality process, export responsibility and named contacts | Whether the proposed source is suitable for deeper review |
| Product evidence | Model, application, format, stated test conditions, document issuer, revision, certificate scope and open items | Whether the proposal has enough evidence to enter qualification |
| Sample and batch trail | Sample identifier, batch or serial information, supplied test records, buyer test result and disposition | Whether the trial evidence can connect to the intended order |
| Commercial matrix | MOQ, price validity, lead time, packaging, Incoterm, payment milestones and repeat-order conditions | Whether the option can work commercially beyond a sample |
| Risk and decision register | Verified, pending and unavailable items, deviations, responsible party and decision deadline | Whether to stop, clarify, test, approve or contract |
Every statement receives a visible status.
Status labels describe the evidence position at the recorded review date. They are not grades, certifications or performance promises.
Evidence expected
A named document, clarification, sample result or responsible response remains outstanding.
No usable evidence
The requested item was not provided, could not be confirmed or did not cover the proposed scope.
Acceptance is required
The evidence and deviation are visible, but the responsible buyer must decide whether to proceed.
Evidence strength depends on origin and scope.
A current manufacturer-origin document linked to the proposed model carries a different weight from a marketplace listing, copied brochure or general company presentation.
The file records issuer, holder, model or facility scope, revision or validity, access date and any gap between the document and the buyer's requirement.
- Manufacturer-origin technical and quality documents
- Issuing-body records and certificate scope where available
- Sample, serial, batch, inspection and buyer test records
- Formal quotation, contract and shipping documentation
- Secondary material used only as context and labelled accordingly
Illustrative record structure.
This example shows the type of record used. It contains no supplier result, customer data or implied approval.
Claim
State exactly what is being reviewed, such as model scope, production role, certificate coverage or promised lead time.
Evidence source
Record the issuer, document title, revision or validity, access date and the person who supplied it.
Scope and gap
Identify what the evidence covers, what it does not cover and any difference from the buyer's requirement.
Owner and disposition
Name the responsible party, due date, current status and the next buyer decision.
Confidentiality: A customer-specific file is shared only through an agreed business channel. Public examples must remain composite, redacted and clearly illustrative.
The file supports controlled decisions.
Check whether the proposed source and product scope justify further evidence work.
Resolve critical document, technical, commercial and responsibility gaps before a trial.
Connect sample, inspection or pilot evidence to the product and order under review.
Stop, accept a deviation, request more evidence, place a controlled order or reject the option.
Evidence in practice
See how the file changes a sourcing decision.
The guides below apply the same verified, pending and buyer-decision logic to supplier qualification and replacement selection.
Supplier evidence
Twenty checks for a Chinese RO membrane source
Map every identity, production, certificate, inspection and commercial claim to its evidence and disposition.
Technical comparisonBuild a replacement shortlist without asserting equivalence
Compare stated test conditions and plant requirements, then leave each acceptance decision with the responsible buyer.
Build the file around your real decision.
Send the application, destination, quantity, required documents and decision deadline. The review scope will follow the risk.