IDB-RFQ-007
Sourcing · RFQ · supplier qualification
Supplier RFQ checklist
Reference for assembling an RFQ package that returns comparable quotes, qualifying suppliers, scoring offers, and writing the contract clauses that prevent the disputes that surface later.
Abstract
The lowest unit price in a stack of supplier quotes is rarely the lowest total cost. The supplier who quoted it usually interpreted a different problem than the one described — different finish, different tolerance, excluded tooling, excluded inspection, excluded packaging.
This document covers the RFQ package contents, supplier qualification questions, the warning signs in responses, the apples-to-apples comparison framework, tooling cost references, and the contract clauses that prevent disputes during production. Companion XLSX (supplier-rfq-comparison.xlsx) normalises responses.
1.RFQ package
Suppliers can only quote what they understand. The RFQ package is the only thing between you and ambiguous quotes; over-document, not under-document.
1.1Design intent (mandatory)
- 3D CADSTEP (preferred), IGES (fallback). Native (SolidWorks, Fusion) as bonus. Lock the revision.
- PDF drawingsCritical dimensions, tolerances, finish callouts. Title block matches the CAD revision.
- Bill of materialsEvery line item with MPN, manufacturer, qty, target cost. Mark factory-sourced vs. customer-supplied.
- Critical dimensionsTolerances flagged on the drawing per ISO 8015 (independence principle).
- Materials and finishPlastic grade, colour (Pantone + sample chip), surface finish (SPI / VDI codes), paint or print spec.
1.2Order intent
Volume + timing
- Annual volume (estimated, year 1 + 2)
- First-order quantity
- Re-order quantity (typical batch)
- Required start date
- Required delivery date
Assembly + packaging
- Sub-assembly vs. full assembly
- Retail vs. bulk packaging
- Country of destination
- Certification needs (CE / FCC / UKCA)
- Sample stages requested
1.3Quality + compliance intent
| Topic | What to specify |
|---|---|
| Inspection plan | IQC + IPQC + FQC + PSI scope |
| AQL levels | Critical 0 %, Major 2.5 %, Minor 4.0 % |
| Test requirements | Hi-pot, drop, ESD, functional, environmental |
| Certifications | RoHS evidence, REACH SVHC, ISO 9001 |
| Traceability | Lot codes, date codes, batch numbers |
| Defect catalogue | Photo + classification per known defect |
| Warranty terms | Defect rate, rework, RMA process |
2.Tooling cost reference
For tooled parts (plastic injection, sheet metal stamping, die cast), tooling is the dominant up-front cost. Benchmarks for budgeting:
2.1Plastic injection mold cost
| Part size | Cavities | Mold material | Mold cost (USD) | Lifetime (shots) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Small (<50 g) | 1 | P20 steel | $3 000–8 000 | 100 k |
| Small (<50 g) | 1 | NAK80 / H13 | $6 000–15 000 | 500 k–1 M |
| Medium (50–200 g) | 1 | P20 steel | $8 000–20 000 | 100 k |
| Medium (50–200 g) | 1 | NAK80 / H13 | $15 000–35 000 | 500 k+ |
| Medium (50–200 g) | 2-up | P20 steel | $12 000–28 000 | 100 k |
| Medium (50–200 g) | 4-up | NAK80 / H13 | $25 000–60 000 | 500 k+ |
| Large (>200 g) | 1 | P20 steel | $20 000–50 000 | 100 k |
| Large (>200 g) | 1 | NAK80 / H13 | $40 000–100 000+ | 500 k+ |
| Family mold (multi-part) | 1 each | varies | + 50–80 % vs single | varies |
2.2Sheet metal tooling
- Progressive die$5 000–30 000 (complex stampings, high volume).
- Single-stage die$1 000–5 000 (simple stamping, mid volume).
- Press brake fixturing$200–2 000 (custom bending).
- Laser cut$0 tooling (file-driven), $0.30–2.00/cut.
2.3Other tooling
- Vacuum forming mold$500–5 000 (per part); short lead, lower lifetime.
- Die casting tool$20 000–80 000 (Al), $40 000–150 000 (Zn).
- Silicone overmold$1 000–10 000 per tool.
- Custom packaging die$300–2 000 (printing setup).
- PCB SMT stencil$30–150 (single-use, reorder).
3.Qualification questions
Suppliers know more about their process than you do. A few well-chosen questions surface what they actually intend to build.
3.1Process and capability
- What process do you recommend, and why?A supplier who only says "yes, we can do it" without a recommendation is quoting your spec, not solving your problem.
- What tooling is required, and who owns it?Most-disputed line in supplier contracts.
- What tolerances and finishes are realistic for this process at this volume?Production tolerances are looser than prototype tolerances; surface this before you sign.
- What test or inspection plan will you use?Should map to your spec. Mismatches are early signs of misalignment.
3.2Commercial and operational
| Topic | Confirm |
|---|---|
| Lead time | First samples, pre-production, mass production |
| MOQ | Production MOQ + sample MOQ |
| Payment terms | Milestones (30/70 standard; 50/50 is negotiation) |
| Late delivery clause | Per-day or per-week penalty |
| Rework / rejection policy | Who pays for which defect type |
| Tooling location | Where the mold lives + access rights |
| IP terms | Drawings, firmware, tooling ownership |
3.3Risk and references
- Two or three similar production casesConfirms process capability without exposing other clients.
- Failure modes seen on similar productsA supplier with a clear answer has actually run the process; one who deflects probably hasn't.
- Technical contact during production, and languageSales contact is fine for RFQ; production needs an engineer.
4.Supplier verification (China-specific)
Many Chinese suppliers can be verified through public + commercial sources.
4.1Free / public verification
- Business license (营业执照)Search by company name on the local provincial Administration for Market Regulation site or via gsxt.gov.cn (national).
- Customs registrationCheck on Chinese customs site to confirm export rights.
- Court recordsPublic court database for litigation history.
- TrustPass on AlibabaPaid verification with audit. Tier (Diamond, Gold) signals investment in the platform.
- Google searchTrade fair appearances, news mentions, social media.
4.2Paid / professional verification
| Service | Cost (USD) | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| TÜV / SGS / Intertek factory audit | $2 000–8 000 | On-site audit: capacity, QMS, sample line |
| Asia Inspection Audit | $300–1 500 | Initial assessment, on-site walk |
| Dun & Bradstreet report | $200–800 | Financial standing, registration, credit |
| Sinosure or Coface insurance review | varies | Commercial credit check |
| Independent consultant on-site (Ideambox-style) | $1 500–5 000 | Process review, sample verification |
5.Contract clauses that matter
The contract is where the disputes get resolved. Cover these.
5.1IP and tooling ownership
`` 1. All product designs, drawings, firmware, source code, trademarks, brand assets, and tooling created by the Buyer or paid for by the Buyer remain the exclusive property of the Buyer. 2. The Supplier shall not use, sell, or distribute the Buyer's designs to any third party. 3. Upon termination of this agreement, the Supplier shall, at the Buyer's option, deliver or destroy all tooling, fixtures, and drawings, with proof of destruction. 4. Tooling is buyer's property regardless of physical location. ``
5.2Sample approval and golden sample
`` Sample stages: Engineering Sample (ES) → Pre-Production Sample (PPS) → Golden Sample (GS, signed by both parties) Production must match the signed Golden Sample. Disputes resolved by reference to GS. Supplier maintains GS on production floor. ``
5.3Payment terms
`` Standard: 30% deposit on PO; 70% balance on successful pre-shipment inspection (PSI) per AQL agreed in QC Plan. Tooling: 50% on tooling order; 50% on T1 sample acceptance. Late delivery: 0.3% of order value per calendar day, capped at 10%. ``
5.4Quality
`` Defect rate threshold: ≤1% major defects on PSI sample. Above threshold: full re-inspection at supplier's cost; rework or replace at supplier's cost; if not resolvable, refund of full deposit + shipping cost. ``
5.5Confidentiality (NDA)
`` Supplier shall maintain all Buyer's product information, drawings, firmware, and commercial terms in confidence. Disclosure to sub- suppliers requires written Buyer approval. NDA survives termination by 3 years. ``
6.Red flags
Most bad supplier choices show their signs during the RFQ.
TOO CHEAP
excludes tooling, testing, or rejects
DEFLECTS QUESTIONS
"we'll handle it" without specifics
NO REFS
no proof of similar work
6.1Quote shape
- Much cheaper but excludes tooling, testing, assembly, or rejectsMissing costs are deferred, not absent.
- Suspiciously round numbers$1.00 per unit, $20 000 tooling. Real costs aren't round. Ask for the breakdown.
- Quote arrives much faster than competitorsSometimes capability, often a templated number with no engineering review.
- Excludes shipping or import documentsStandard at FOB, but make it explicit.
6.2Conversation shape
- Avoids technical questions"Don't worry, we'll handle it" is the most expensive sentence in sourcing.
- No clear sample approval pathIf "samples" don't have a definition, the supplier and buyer are about to disagree.
- No evidence of similar productsEspecially dangerous for tooled parts.
- No willingness to sign NDA or IP clauseA signed NDA is a low bar; reluctance is significant.
6.3Documentation shape
- Certificates are scans of scans, undated, or refer to a different productVerify with the issuing lab.
- ISO 9001 expired more than a year agoRenewed and forgotten, or lapsed.
- Material declarations are templated, not product-specificCommon in trade-only suppliers reselling someone else's parts.
7.Comparing offers — scoring matrix
Apples-to-apples is a discipline. Force every quote into the same shape before scoring.
7.1Build the comparison sheet
- Same units across suppliersPer-piece price at the same volume, tooling cost amortised over annual volume, MOQ, lead time in weeks.
- Same scope across suppliersStrip what one supplier included that another excluded, then compare. Add the excluded line back to whichever supplier missed it.
- Same risk profileNote who has ISO 9001, US/EU certs, similar products.
7.2Scoring matrix (weights × 1–5 score)
| Dimension | Weight | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Per-piece price at target volume | 30 % | Most weight |
| Tooling cost amortised | 15 % | Spread over annual volume |
| Lead time | 15 % | Quoting and production |
| Quality / certifications | 15 % | ISO 9001, similar product evidence |
| Communication quality | 10 % | Response time, fluency, hard-question willingness |
| Risk profile | 10 % | Capacity headroom, single-customer dependence |
| Compliance maturity | 5 % | RoHS / REACH evidence depth |
Total weighted score 1–5. Pick top 2; final selection by on-site visit or paid trial.
7.3Total landed cost (TLC) formula
`` TLC per unit = Per-piece price + (Tooling cost / annual volume) + Per-unit freight + Per-unit duties + Per-unit inspection + Per-unit defect allowance (~1-3% of unit cost) ``
7.4Before signing
- Visit the factoryIn person or via video walkthrough of the line that would make your product.
- Run a small paid trialA sample run or first-order pilot before committing to tooling.
- Lock tooling and IP in writingDrawings, molds, fixtures, firmware, brand assets.