SolutionsPlanningSupplier & Procurement

Dual-Source Switching

Your primary source is wobbling — shift volume to the backup?

The decision

The primary supplier's quality and on-time numbers are drifting. The qualified alternate costs more but is steady. Shift a portion of volume now, wait for a clearer signal, or split going forward?

Why it's hard today

Shift too soon and you pay more for a problem that might resolve; too late and you're exposed when the primary fails. The call depends on trend confidence, the cost delta, and switching friction.

Why your systems don't help

Your procurement system tracks each supplier's metrics; it doesn't decide when the trend is bad enough to move volume, or how much. It reports scorecards, not a sourcing decision.

What AgentForgeOS does

It assembles the picture you can't see, and makes the call under your rules.

Move a portion of volume to the steady alternate now and keep the primary on watch — hedging the exposure — under your sourcing policy.

Operational context assembled
  • Primary supplier trend (quality, OTD)
  • Alternate capacity and cost
  • Switching cost and qualification status
  • Volume at risk
  • Contract commitments
Governed by your policy
  • Cost-delta bands
  • Qualification requirements
  • Volume-shift limits
  • Contract split rules
decision-workspace · source · part 7740

⚠ Primary drift — part 7740: OTD 96% → 88% over 6 weeks

Evidence assembled

  • Quality escapes up in 2 of the last 3 lots
  • Alternate qualified, +5% cost, steady
  • Switching cost low; capacity available
  • Contract allows split sourcing

Recommendation · shift 40% to the alternate, keep the primary on watch

Policy: cost delta within band · qualification valid · awaiting buyer

Decision Object #7740Evidence ×4Policy ✓ApproveWait

What improves

  • Exposure reduced before a failure
  • Cost increase contained
  • Supply kept steady
The knowledge it keeps

Each shift and whether the primary recovered or failed is kept, so the model learns this supplier's real trajectory and the right trigger point.

Under the hood

Underneath, this is the same operating model the rest of the platform runs: verified context is assembled, options are weighed and adversarially challenged, the decision is governed by your policy, and the outcome is learned. The decision changes from one of these to the next. The architecture does not.

See how it works

This is exactly how your team works today.

Only now the decision is assembled, governed, and remembered — instead of made from memory and lost.