Prioritisation allocates each category a score from 1 to 5 based on its spend amount. This is scored in quintiles so that the highest 20% of spending categories will score 5 and the lowest 20% of spending categories will score 1.
The spend amount feeds into the Risk v’s Spend results graph. This graph shows the relationship between risks (environmental, socio-economic and reputational) and spend, identifying priority categories to focus overall effort on.
Reputational risk is assessed on a subjective basis. It does not necessarily follow that a category where there is a high environmental or socio-economic risk or opportunity also has a high reputational risk and vice versa.
The maximum reputational risk score is 3 (Scored: 0 = Not relevant; 1 = Low relevance; 2 = Medium; or 3 = Critical issue)
The environmental and socio-economic risk scores are assessed on the relevance of the risk or opportunity to the organisation's procurement of each category (Scored: 0 = Not relevant; 1 = Low relevance; 2 = Medium; and 3 = Critical issue). The risk scores are averaged and then weighted so that those which are identified as being critical score higher.
The maximum environmental and socio-economic risk scores are 12 for each.
The maximum Overall Risk Score is 27 (This is calculated using the environmental risk score + the socio-economic risk score + the reputational risk score)
The environmental and socio-economic scope scores are assessed on the scope to improve the sustainability of procurement, in relation to the risk or opportunity (Scored: 0 = None; 1 = A little; 2 = Medium; 3 = A lot). The scope scores are averaged and then weighted so that those which are identified as having a lot of scope to improve score higher.
The environmental and socio-economic scope scores feed into the Scope v's Risk, and the Scope v's Influence results graphs. The Scope v's Risk graph focusses on the key categories where buyers can improve sustainability outcomes. The Scope v's Influence graph highlights the key categories where the organisation can achieve sustainable outcomes through effective market engagement relative to the influence they have over the market.
The maximum environmental and socio-economic scope scores are 12 for each.
The maximum overall scope score is 24 (environmental + socio-economic).
The influence score assesses the organisations influence over the market. The maximum influence score is 7 (if all questions are scored ‘yes’). The influence score feeds into the Scope v's Influence results graph. This graph displays the scope to do more to mitigate risks or capture opportunities relative to the influence the organisation has over the market.
In the Download XLS summary the influence scores display as 1 (Yes) and 0 (No).
Risk v’s Spend - compares Spend v Risks and Opportunities highlighting which are the priority categories.
Scope vs Risk - compares Risks and Opportunities v Scope to do more to mitigate the identified risks or capture the opportunities, highlighting which are the key categories where buyers can address these.
Scope v’s Influence - compares Scope v Influence of the organisation over the market, highlighting the key categories where the organisation can achieve sustainable outcomes through effective market engagement.
Overall - an overall summary combining Risks and Opportunities, Scope and Influence.
Note: In addition to the spend, risk, scope and influence scores users will notice '10' also appears in the graphs, for example (5000, 11, 10). ‘10’ is the radius of the point being drawn, as there is no need to scale the points to communicate any relative importance they are all set to a fixed 10 pixel radius. The ‘10’ can be ignored.
For more information on using the results graphs please see the Prioritisation Tool user guide.
Categories - while 'Category' is used to describe groups that describe procurement of goods or services (e.g. classification of expenditure), this may also relate to commodities or other terms. It refers to the classification of expenditure groups (e.g. ProClass / Thomson etc.).
Influence - the influence an organisation potentially has over the market for goods or services, based on the questions included in the Influence assessment.
National Performance Framework (NPF) – The NPF is for all of Scotland, it’s a single framework to which all public services in Scotland are aligned, encouraging more effective partnership working. Scotland’s National Outcomes describe the kind of Scotland it aims to create.
Opportunities - Opportunities for improving relevant environmental or socio-economic outcomes, where procurement is the appropriate delivery mechanism.
Risks - Potential environmental or socio-economic risks within supply chains, where procurement is the appropriate delivery mechanism to manage these.
Relevance - The relevance of the environmental or socio-economic risk to the organisation's procurement.
Scope - Scope to improve by the organisation, to mitigate the relevant environmental or socio-economic risks or capture relevant opportunities.
