Scenario: answering a 12% price-increase letter
A key supplier wants more, citing costs. Meet it with a should-cost model and hold the line where the data supports it.
A key supplier sends a 12% price-increase letter, citing costs. Meet it with a should-cost model and hold the line where the data doesn't support it.
Your main casting supplier writes: prices up 12% across the board next quarter, citing "raw material and energy costs." It's real money. Is it justified?
Decompose the claim
Your should-cost model already breaks the part into its cost drivers — and only some of them actually moved.
The evidence-based counter
The drivers that genuinely rose justify about a 5.8% increase — not 12%. You're not saying no; you're saying "here's what the numbers support."
The outcome
You settle at 6% — with a supplier who now knows you price on evidence. The relationship survives because the conversation was about numbers, not leverage.
You can't negotiate a price increase you can't decompose. A should-cost model turns "we can't absorb 12%" into "the data supports 6%."
Holding the line with evidence is what SourceWright equips you to do.
It's in the works.
SourceWright is in development — join the waitlist for early access.