Outsourcing Management
CODEOUT

The accountable manager
owns the outcome.

Maintenance, ground handling, training partners — kept under structural oversight. SLA targets are tracked against actuals; drift surfaces as a finding. The accountable manager still signs the close-out, regardless of who performed the activity.

PROVIDER SCORECARD · LIVE
SAMPLE
Q1 2026 · IATA SLAPROVIDER · PRV-2026-0008
Menzies Aviation · MADGround Handling · A320 Fleet
AM Chain
  • Turn timetgt 35 min
    38 min+3 min
  • Damage incidentstgt 0 / month
    1breach
  • Audit findings · opentgt 0
    2open
  • Compliance scoretgt 95 %
    92 %−3 pts
  • Training currencytgt 100 %
    100 %on tgt
PROVIDERMenzies · MAD Signed
OPERATIONSGround Ops Lead Signed
ACCOUNTABLEAM Sign-offPending
ACTIVE PROVIDERS14+1 / 90d
SLA BREACH8 %+2 pts
FINDINGS / 90d11−3 vs Q4
01YOUR PROVIDER SCORECARD

Targets versus actuals.
Drift becomes a finding.

Every provider has its own scorecard scoped to the agreement you signed. Bars light by drift class. The accountable-manager signature chain sits beside the metrics — one workflow, one audit trail.

What the regulator looks at.

Scope of work, agreed SLA, drift class, finding history, signature chain. All five live on the same record. Pull the audit-ready package on demand — not the night before the inspection.

ProviderMenzies Aviation · MAD
ScopeGround Handling · A320 Fleet
SLA packageIATA Standard Ground Handling Agreement
Accountable managerPending sign-off
02FIVE MOMENTS THE PLATFORM ANSWERS FOR

Five moments.
No spreadsheets.

  • When you onboard a provider.
    Scope, SLA, agreement — held against the same record.

    A new ground handler, MRO contract, training partner. Each becomes a provider record with its scope of work, its agreed SLA targets, and the contractual evidence linked. The accountable manager is named at onboarding, not after the first audit finding.

  • When SLA drift surfaces.
    Drift becomes a typed finding, with an owner.

    Turn time creeps over target, damage incidents climb, audit findings accumulate. The platform raises a typed finding against the provider, routes it through the same severity ladder as your internal findings, and surfaces it on the scorecard before the next contract review.

  • When a provider needs auditing.
    A shared lane, not a separate audit programme.

    Provider audits use the same checklists, the same finding model, the same evidence rules as your internal QMS. The provider sees only what you scope into their lane — their findings, their evidence, their closure deadlines.

  • When findings need closure.
    Cross-org workflow, single audit trail.

    A finding raised against a provider opens a corrective action with the provider as owner and your team as verifier. Owner cannot bypass verifier; the workflow refuses. Every state change is signed and time-stamped on both sides.

  • When the regulator asks who is accountable.
    The signature chain is already there.

    Provider sign-off, operations sign-off, accountable manager sign-off — the chain is part of the close-out workflow. There is no separate folder of approval emails. The audit trail is the workflow.

OUT · ACCOUNTABILITY THAT SURVIVES AN AUDIT

Open the platform.
Run a provider review.

Walk through the SLA model, a drift finding, and the accountable-manager sign-off — with the founder, on your contract shape, in 30 minutes.