Supplier Performance Dashboard

Purchase Order Analysis — ZMMR002 / ZMMR029
ARABIAN KARIM TRADING LLC
Vendor Code: 0000100110
Report Generated: April 10, 2026
📄
Total Purchase Orders
519
Across 19 years (2008 – 2026)
💰
Total PO Value (USD)
$28.25M
Avg $54,441 per order
📦
On-Time Delivery
50.3%
257 of 511 tracked deliveries
⏳
Avg Late Days
57.8
254 late deliveries observed
⚠
Total Penalties
$73,408
44 POs penalized (8.5%)
PO Value & Volume by Year
2008 – 2026
💡
What this shows: Annual spending (bars) and order frequency (line) with this supplier over 18 years. Spending peaked at $3.2M in 2023 while 2011–2012 had the highest volume (50+ POs/year). A dip in 2015–2018 suggests reduced engagement, followed by a strong recovery.
Key Takeaway: Relationship is active and growing — spending trend is upward since 2019
Delivery Performance
⚠
What this shows: Ratio of on-time vs. late deliveries. Only 50.3% of orders arrived on time, meaning every second order was delayed. Late orders averaged ~58 days overdue.
Action Required: Delivery reliability is a critical risk — escalate with vendor for improvement plan
257
On-Time / Early
254
Late
PO Value by Document Type
16 Types
📊
What this shows: How spending is distributed across SAP purchase order document types. ZMTD (Material Tender Direct) dominates with $7.1M across 189 POs, followed by ZMSS (Material Single Source) at $5.4M. This indicates the vendor is primarily used for direct material tenders and sole-source procurement.
Key Takeaway: Heavy reliance on single-source (ZMSS) orders — consider competitive bidding where possible
PO Value Distribution
519 Orders
💰
What this shows: How purchase orders are grouped by dollar value. 74% of orders (384 POs) are under $50K, making up the bulk of transactions. However, a small group of 6 high-value orders ($500K+) represents a disproportionately large share of total spending.
Key Takeaway: Most orders are routine small purchases; the few large orders need closer oversight and risk management
Purchase Group Performance
By Buyer
👥
What this shows: Which purchasing officers (buyers) handle the most business with this vendor. A/Monim Al-Abbad and Mohammed Al-Amer together account for $10.7M (38% of total spend) across 178 POs. Several buyers are marked "Not used", indicating staff turnover or role changes over the years.
Key Takeaway: Spending is concentrated with a few buyers — ensure proper segregation of duties and approval controls
Penalty Trend by Year
💵
What this shows: Annual penalty amounts imposed on this vendor for non-compliance or delays. Penalties started in 2016 and spiked to $18K in 2021 (highest year). Total penalties of $73,408 represent only 0.26% of total PO value, suggesting penalty clauses may be too lenient.
Action Required: Review if current penalty rates are sufficient to incentivize timely delivery
Top 10 Purchase Orders
By Value
🏆
What this shows: The 10 largest individual purchase orders by USD value. The top 4 orders alone total $3.78M (13.4% of all spend). These are primarily industrial equipment — membrane parts, pipes, buoys, and distillation units.
Key Takeaway: High-value orders are capital/industrial equipment — ensure delivery guarantees and warranty terms are robust
# PO Number Description Value (USD)
14500006346Spare Parts for Bundle Membrane$1,099,980
24500006366Metallic Pipe and Grating$997,200
34500007117Navigation Buoys$855,000
44500007354Water Distillation Unit$823,000
54800000678Supply Contract$726,000
64800001335Various Chemicals (2-Year)$690,900
74500005391Spare Parts for Cooling Tower$459,450
84500001639General Supply$450,000
94500002389Spare Parts - Water Desal Plant$441,900
104800000826General Supply$423,500
Top Penalized Orders
44 Total
🚨
What this shows: The most heavily penalized purchase orders and penalty-to-PO-value ratio. Multiple POs hit the maximum 10% penalty cap, indicating repeated severe non-compliance. The penalty amounts are relatively modest ($2K–$7K), even on orders worth $30K–$130K.
Action Required: Orders consistently hitting the 10% cap may warrant stricter contract terms or vendor warnings
PO Number PO Value Penalty % of PO
4500006337$72,000$7,20010.0%
4500005580$70,000$7,00010.0%
4500004177$62,000$6,20010.0%
4500006181$129,940$5,4794.2%
4500005141$82,500$4,0664.9%
4500005440$38,000$3,80010.0%
4500006865$37,000$3,70010.0%
4500005246$59,000$3,5406.0%
4500005782$30,800$3,08010.0%
4500006600$35,950$2,6967.5%
Year-over-Year Comparison
📈
What this shows: Percentage change in annual spending compared to the previous year. Green dots = growth, Red dots = decline. Sharp swings are visible — e.g., +298% in 2023 (driven by two large POs) and -88% in 2015 (spending collapsed). This volatility makes budget forecasting challenging.
Key Takeaway: Spending with this vendor is highly volatile — consider framework agreements for spend predictability
Executive Summary & Key Insights
Business Relationship
• 18+ year engagement since 2008
• 519 purchase orders totalling $28.25M
• Peak activity in 2011–2012 (100+ POs)
• Largest single PO: $1.1M (Bundle Membrane)
Delivery Concerns
• On-time delivery rate: 50.3% — needs improvement
• Average delay of 57.8 days for late orders
• Nearly half of all deliveries are late
• Significant risk for time-critical projects
Penalty Analysis
• Total penalties: $73,408 (0.26% of PO value)
• 44 orders penalized (8.5% of total)
• Penalties active from 2016 onwards
• Top penalty: $7,200 on PO 4500006337
CONFIDENTIAL — FOR MANAGEMENT USE ONLY • Supplier Analysis Report • ZMMR002 / ZMMR029 • Generated April 2026