Compare the replacement with the actual order requirements
The fictional supplier stops item BR-A and proposes BR-B. Two open customer orders require different attributes: O-S1 accepts either finish but requires size 10; O-S2 specifically requires matte finish and size 10. The proposed BR-B is size 10 with gloss finish. No general equivalence is implied by the supplier’s proposal.
| Order | Requirement | BR-B evidence | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| O-S1 / 4 units | Size 10; either finish | Size 10; gloss confirmed | Owner approves replacement scope |
| O-S2 / 3 units | Size 10; matte only | Gloss conflicts | Keep unresolved; ask order owner |
| PO-S amendment | Only approved customer scope | 4 BR-B units | Do not convert all 7 |
Switch only the approved demand
- Record supplier discontinuation notice
- Gather replacement attribute evidence
- Compare each dependent order requirement
- Owner approves matching scope
- Amend purchase for four; retain unresolved three
Missing replacement evidence stays unknown, rather than being treated as a match. A supplier’s “new version” label cannot supply the absent attribute.
Create a distinct item record or evidenced mapping for BR-B, preserving BR-A on historical receipts and issues. The outcome supplies only O-S1. O-S2 needs its own revised requirement, another proposal or cancellation decision; it must not disappear when BR-A is marked discontinued.
Can PO-S be switched from seven BR-A to seven BR-B under the supplied requirements?
Show the worked answer
No. Four for O-S1 are approved. The three for O-S2 conflict with its matte-only requirement and remain unresolved.