Agentic AI Platform for Supply Chain Risk & Compliance
This is a request for proposal for the implementation of a supply chain risk, compliance, and operational resilience built natively on proven agentic AI platform capabilities. Our organization is committed to leveraging autonomous, AI-powered technologies to reduce disruption, ensure compliance, and optimize end-to-end supplier visibility.
This Request for Proposal (RFP) outlines program requirements, business objectives, and detailed questions to help us evaluate the capabilities and experience of potential vendors. We are seeking a solution that can seamlessly integrate with our existing systems, combining advanced agentic AI, human-in-the-loop governance to drive the future – a self-healing supply chain.
We are particularly interested in vendors that demonstrate:
- Proven expertise in autonomous/agent-based risk mitigation, supplier mapping, and regulatory compliance (e.g., UFLPA, ESG, tariff, sanctions)
- Capabilities for multi-tier disruption monitoring, scenario planning, explainability, and override controls
- Out-of-the-box and configurable features to support rapid deployment and measurable business impact
Your proposal should address all scenarios and use cases outlined in this document, providing detailed information on your approach, platform functionality, integration, security, governance, team expertise, and past performance in similar projects.
Please review this RFP carefully and provide comprehensive responses to each section. We look forward to understanding how your solution can meet our needs and contribute to our strategic objectives in risk, compliance, and supply chain transformation.
Proposal Submission Guidelines
- Proposal Due Date: [Insert Due Date]
- Submission Method: [Email or Online Submission Portal]
- Contact Information for Questions: [Email, Phone Number]
Section 1: Executive Summary & Company Information
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| Please provide a brief overview of your company, including core offerings and industry focus. | 10 | Look for supply chain, AI, and risk/compliance domain expertise, not just tech generalists. | |
| What is your experience in delivering agent-based, AI-driven, or automation solutions at enterprise scale? | 10 | Require specifics such as named deployments, years of experience, measurable impact. | |
| What is your company’s financial stability and years in business? | 7 | Request documentation (financials, ratings, years operating, VC/funding if relevant). | |
| What certifications/standards does your organization hold (e.g., SOC2, ISO, FedRAMP pursuit, etc.)? | 7 | Require recent certification evidence, especially for regulated verticals. | |
| Please provide 2–3 client references for similar projects (risk, compliance, supply chain AI/agentic). | 8 | Prioritize enterprise references in relevant industries/regions. |
Section 2: Program Goals and Objectives
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| How will your solution enhance proactive risk and compliance management across all supplier tiers? | 10 | Look for multi-tier reach, forward-looking analytics, compliance triggers. | |
| How does your system support autonomous detection, triage, and mitigation of supply chain risks? | 9 | “Good” = real examples of autonomous or agentic actions, not just dashboards. | |
| How do you ensure transparency for ESG, forced labor, and regulatory reporting/compliance? | 9 | Require direct feeds, reporting automation, traceable workflows for audits. | |
| Describe how you will integrate with our ERP, GRC, and procurement platforms. | 8 | Ask for references, technical diagrams, and documentation of previous enterprise projects. | |
| What KPIs or business impact will you use to measure time-to-recovery, revenue at risk avoided, or audit readiness? | 8 | “Good” = sample dashboards, case studies, clear and customer-facing metrics. |
Section 3: Agentic AI & Autonomous Orchestration Requirements
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal only) |
| How does your solution enable autonomous agent-driven risk detection and mitigation across multi- tier supply chains? | 10 | Look for proactive agents, not just alerting; explain multi-tier (beyond Tier 1) coverage. | |
| Describe how your platform supports agentic orchestration, multi-agent workflows, escalation, and decision logging. | 10 | “Good” includes coordination between agents, not siloed rules. Escalation, logs, and auditability needed. | |
| How is human-in-the-loop (HITL) review, override, and explainability built into your agent actions? | 9 | Require vendor to show actual override mechanism, HITL workflow, and agent audit trail. | |
| In what ways are agent actions traceable, explainable, and version- controlled? | 9 | Look for change logs, decision histories, and ability to revert/trace. | |
| How do you support policy-aware agents (e.g., UFLPA, forced labor, tariffs, sustainability)? | 9 | Require agents to operate under explicit policy rules, not just ad hoc alerting or flagging. | |
| How are override thresholds, escalation triggers, and governance dashboards configured and managed? | 8 | “Good” answers reference configurable thresholds, role- based triggers, and governance visibility. | |
| What predictive modeling, what-if simulation, and scenario planning are available for supply chain risk? | 8 | Expect built-in tools, not just “possible with customization”; include examples. | |
| How does agent behavior improve via feedback (human, system, or external signals)? | 7 | Look for supervised or semi- supervised learning, feedback loop integration, update frequency. | |
| Can agents collaborate and orchestrate actions across compliance, sourcing, and crisis workflows? | 8 | “Good” = agents communicate across modules/functions, not just within one use case. | |
| What out-of-the-box agent catalog do you offer (e.g., Disruption, UFLPA, Tariffs)? How are custom agents created? | 10 | Require named catalog, not just “customizable on request”; creation process should be clear/documented. |
Section 4: Classic Supply Chain Risk & Compliance Requirements
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| How does your solution provide real- time disruption and event monitoring (e.g., natural disaster, geo-political)? | 10 | “Good” = event types, global coverage, proactive alerting, event-to-supplier mapping. | |
| How do you map and maintain visibility to multi-tier suppliers, sites, parts, and products (to Tier 4/5)? | 10 | Require actual multi-tier mapping and part-site relationships, not just Tier 1/2. Look for automated + supplier- validated approaches versus probabilistic models alone. | |
| Describe your approach to risk scoring at supplier, site, product, and category levels. | 9 | Require scoring granularity, frequency, and how risk data is refreshed and benchmarked. | |
| What compliance report libraries are available (e.g., sanctions, forced labor, ESG, sustainability, EUDR)? | 9 | “Good” = out-of-the-box, up-to-date libraries (not just templates); should include core regulatory areas. | |
| How are suppliers onboarded and validated? Does your system support supplier self-reporting and opt-in validation? | 8 | Look for a portal, digital validation workflows, and supplier enrichment, not just surveys or CSV uploads. | |
| How do you enable customizable playbooks for incident mitigation and regulatory enforcement? | 8 | Require real workflow/playbook builder, support for custom triggers, and measurable outcomes. | |
| What benchmarking capabilities do you offer for risk and compliance metrics versus industry peers? | 7 | “Good” = prebuilt benchmarks, dashboards, and peer comparisons, not just download/export. | |
| How does your solution continuously monitor and alert for new or updated regulations (e.g., UFLPA, EU ESG)? | 8 | Look for automated regulatory feed ingestion, trigger creation, and policy mapping, not just newsletters. | |
| What supplier intelligence networks and third-party data sources do you leverage? | 10 | Require access to validated directories/networks (e.g. D&B, TradeAtlas, Moody’s); check for frequency and validation of updates. |
Instructions for Evaluators:
- Reference the Evaluator’s Guide when
- Look for substance and proof in answers; don’t accept “future roadmap” or generic language for critical items.
- Capture notes for each question for downstream reference or
Section 5: Integration, Security & Data Management
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| How does your platform integrate with ERP (SAP, Oracle, NetSuite), GRC (e.g. ServiceNow), and procurement (Coupa, Ariba)? | 10 | “Good” = native connectors, API support, references/examples of live integrations, not just CSV/manual. | |
| What API (REST, webhooks) capabilities are available for inbound/outbound data flow? | 10 | Require API documentation, webhook triggers, frequency limits, and ability to automate common workflows. | |
| How do you enable single sign-on (SSO), role-based access control (RBAC), and granular user/agent permissions? | 10 | Look for SSO standards (SAML, OIDC), fine-grained RBAC by agent/task, approval workflows. | |
| Describe your compliance with SOC2, GDPR, CCPA, and other data privacy/security standards. | 9 | Ask for recent certification dates, scope (entire platform vs. partial), and future roadmap. | |
| How is data encrypted at rest and in transit? | 9 | Require details (AES-256, TLS 1.2/1.3); “Good” = third-party penetration testing, key management policies. | |
| What audit logs are provided for agent actions, human overrides, and system changes? | 9 | Look for immutable logs, timestamps, who/what/when/why, easy export for compliance. | |
| How are system integrations, agent telemetry, and agent health dashboards provided and monitored? | 10 | Require real-time telemetry, error/failure alerts, agent-level dashboards, and SLA tracking. | |
| What data access and change management controls are in place (e.g., approval chains, versioning, rollback)? | 9 | “Good” = policy versioning, change logs, test/sandbox environments, and clear rollback procedures. |
Evaluator’s Note:
- Ask for evidence/screenshots where
- Look for references, not “planned” features for core
- If “integration” requires significant customization, call this out as a risk in the scoring
Section 6: Use Case Scenarios
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| How does your system handle risk mapping and compliance validation for new products and suppliers during New Product Introduction (NPI)? | 9 | “Good” = automated mapping, instant onboarding of new suppliers, scenario modeling for NPI, risk flagging. | |
| Demonstrate end-to-end detection, escalation, and resolution for a UFLPA or forced labor risk event. | 10 | Require step-by-step: detection, supplier/site mapping, agent escalation, audit trail, and corrective action. | |
| Show how the platform detects, triages, and orchestrates a response to multi-tier supply chain disruptions (e.g., natural disaster, supplier fire). | 10 | Look for real-world scenario: alert → mapping to at-risk suppliers → war-room/mitigation playbook. | |
| How do agents flag, quantify, and help mitigate revenue at risk from sudden tariff/trade policy changes? | 9 | Require live example: agent scans, matches to BOM/PO, flags revenue impact, and triggers mitigation. | |
| How is ongoing supplier performance monitored, scored, and flagged for action (performance drops, quality issues, delays)? | 8 | Look for ongoing score-carding, anomaly detection, alerting and integration with SRM or ERP. | |
| Provide an example of “what-if” scenario simulation for a potential site closure or major disruption. What insights and recommendations are produced? | 8 | Require demonstration of scenario builder, simulated impact across network, and agent-generated recommendations. | |
| How does your platform coordinate between automated agent actions and human review/approval in these use cases? | 10 | Look for clear HITL points, override workflows, logging, and escalation ladder. |
Evaluator’s Note:
- Ask for demos or references for these
- Require specific, concrete examples, not “in theory” or “could be ”
- Prioritize solutions that automate multi-step flows and show true agentic
Section 7: Project Deliverables
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| What is your proposed project plan, with phases, milestones, and clear success criteria? | 9 | Look for detailed timeline, clear deliverables for each phase, project management methodology. | |
| Describe the data onboarding/mapping process, and what documentation/checklists are provided. | 8 | Require onboarding plan, data validation steps, and roles/responsibilities. | |
| What agent catalog/configuration will be delivered and tested in pilot scenarios? | 10 | Require sample agent list (e.g., Disruption, UFLPA, Tariffs) and test plans for each. | |
| What governance and escalation playbooks are included or configured? | 8 | “Good” = role matrix, escalation triggers, override logging, RACI chart for escalation. | |
| What training materials, user documentation, and support resources are provided? | 7 | Require end-user guides, admin training, onboarding materials, and support hours/SLA. | |
| What is your plan for post- implementation performance reporting (KPIs, incident log, value metrics)? | 9 | Require automated reporting, value dashboards (e.g., time to recovery, revenue at risk avoided), audit log. |
Section 8: Proposal Instructions & Evaluation Criteria
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| How do you address each requirement, and can you provide specific answers, examples, and documents? | N/A | Look for detailed, direct answers, not boilerplate or vague statements. | |
| Which features are out-of-the-box vs. custom or requiring additional services? | N/A | Evaluate risk and total cost of ownership (TCO). Require clear differentiation. | |
| Can you provide references, demo access, or case studies relevant to our industry/scale? | N/A | “Good” = live demo or sandbox, reference customers in similar environment. | |
| What is your pricing model, payment terms, and cost breakdown by project phase? | N/A | Require transparency; prefer milestone-based or value-based pricing if possible. | |
| What is your experience in agentic AI, supply chain risk, and compliance at enterprise scale? | N/A | Score higher for direct, relevant experience and clear evidence of performance. |
Evaluator’s Note:
- Use these prompts as part of your RFP scoring sheet or in internal consensus
- Assign additional weights or “must-have” flags as appropriate for your buying
Section 9: Submission & Legal Terms
| Requirement (as Question) | Vendor Response | Weight | Evaluator’s Guide (Internal Only) |
| What is your proposed submission method, timeline, and point of contact for questions? | N/A | Ensure deadlines and submission method are clear; capture for tracking. | |
| Are you able to comply with our proposed data ownership and confidentiality terms? | N/A | Must confirm ownership, IP, and privacy policy acceptance. | |
| Do you acknowledge that [Our Company] reserves the right to accept/reject any proposal? | N/A | Confirm vendor acceptance, call out if they propose exceptions. | |
| Are you aware that proposal preparation costs are not reimbursable? | N/A | Require acknowledgment to avoid later disputes. |
Section 10: Internal Evaluation Checklist (Appendix)
(This table is for evaluator use only; do not include in the vendor-facing version.)
| Evaluation Criteria | Weight | “What Good Looks Like” (Evaluator’s Guide) | Score (1–5) | Notes |
| Agentic AI/ Autonomy Capability | 10 | Multi-agent workflows, autonomous triage/action, HITL, explainability, audit logs | ||
| Human-in-the-Loop Oversight | 9 | Clear override, escalation, and review flows, documented in playbooks | ||
| Risk & Compliance Breadth | 10 | Out-of-the-box coverage for all major supply chain risk/compliance needs | ||
| Integration and API Readiness | 9 | Connectors for ERP, GRC, procurement; robust API suite | ||
| Security and Governance | 10 | Recent SOC2/GDPR, SSO/RBAC, encryption, audit trails, change/version control | ||
| Usability/Configurability | 8 | Configurable agents/playbooks, usable dashboards, admin controls | ||
| References/ Past Performance | 8 | Similar size/industry customers, proven results, reference calls | ||
| Price/Value | 8 | Competitive, transparent, milestone/value-aligned pricing |
Instructions for Evaluator’s Guide Column
- The “Evaluator’s Guide” column in each table is for internal use only and should be removed or hidden before sending the RFP template to vendors.
- Use this guidance to ensure scoring is objective, criteria are interpreted consistently, and “checkbox” answers don’t get through.
Download PDF
To download the eBook as a PDF, click here.