{"id":6890,"date":"2026-05-07T10:31:04","date_gmt":"2026-05-07T02:31:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/?p=6890"},"modified":"2026-05-11T11:07:08","modified_gmt":"2026-05-11T03:07:08","slug":"supplier-quality-management-guide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/supplier-quality-management-guide","title":{"rendered":"\uacf5\uae09\uc5c5\uccb4 \ud488\uc9c8 \uad00\ub9ac: \ub370\uc774\ud130 \uae30\ubc18 \uacf5\uae09\uc5c5\uccb4 \ud3c9\uac00 \uc2dc\uc2a4\ud15c \uad6c\ucd95 \ubc29\ubc95"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/span>Introduction: Why Supplier Quality Management Is Now a Core Manufacturing Discipline<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

A single weak supplier can stop an entire factory line. In manufacturing, supplier quality management<\/a><\/strong> is the discipline of making sure the materials, components, and services you buy consistently meet specifications, arrive on time, and support stable production. That matters more than ever when supply chains are tighter, product tolerances are narrower, and the cost of defects is higher. In fact, industry studies have shown that poor quality can consume 15% to 20% of sales revenue<\/strong> in many organizations once scrap, rework, returns, and downtime are added up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Imagine a production manager at an automotive parts plant who receives out-of-spec rubber seals, or a quality leader at an electronics factory dealing with high incoming rejection rates on PCBs. The issue is rarely just one bad shipment. It is usually a system problem: supplier qualification is separated from supplier quality control, incoming inspection data sits in spreadsheets, and supplier performance management happens months too late. In food manufacturing, the same gap can trigger traceability risks and customer complaints.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article explains how to build a data-driven supplier evaluation system<\/strong> that connects qualification, inspections, corrective actions, and scorecards into one process, so you can make faster, more reliable supplier decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>The Hidden Costs of Weak Supplier Quality Control<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Weak supplier quality control<\/strong> rarely shows up as one dramatic failure. More often, it drains performance through small but repeated losses across receiving, production, quality, and customer service. For quality and procurement leaders, the real issue is not just defect volume, but how slowly the organization can detect patterns, coordinate containment, and prevent the same supplier issue from returning. That is why strong supplier quality management<\/strong> matters: it turns scattered supplier data into faster, more consistent decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Defects Become Operational Cost Multipliers<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

When incoming quality is unstable, the cost goes far beyond scrap at receiving inspection. In an electronics assembly plant, a batch of connectors with inconsistent plating may pass a basic visual check but later cause intermittent failures during functional testing, forcing rework, retesting, and delayed shipment. One study by the American Society for Quality has long reinforced the broader point: the cost of poor quality can reach 15% to 20% of sales revenue<\/strong> in many organizations, and supplier-related issues are often a significant contributor. For procurement and quality teams, that makes supplier defects a margin problem, not just a compliance problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The higher hidden cost is disruption to flow. Imagine a production manager at a food packaging plant who finds that supplied film rolls vary in thickness outside the agreed tolerance, creating sealing problems on high-speed lines. The result is not only material waste, but lower OEE, more frequent machine adjustments, and missed production targets on a shift that was already tightly scheduled. In this situation, weak vendor quality management<\/strong> creates instability that spreads well beyond the warehouse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Manual Systems Make Recurring Issues Hard to See<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Many factories still track supplier complaints, concessions, and corrective actions in separate spreadsheets owned by different teams. Procurement may have one supplier list, incoming quality may log defects in another file, and engineering may keep 8D reports in email threads or shared folders. This setup makes it difficult to see whether three \u201csmall\u201d nonconformances over six months actually point to one recurring supplier process problem. Without connected records, supplier performance management<\/strong> stays reactive because no one has a clean, shared picture of trend, frequency, severity, and response time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Comparison<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

This also weakens the value of the supplier scorecard<\/strong>. If the scorecard is updated monthly by hand and only reflects PPM or on-time delivery, it misses leading indicators such as response speed, containment effectiveness, repeat defects, and overdue corrective actions. A supplier may appear acceptable on paper while repeatedly causing inspection burden, scheduling pressure, and customer risk. In practice, that means teams spend time arguing over supplier priority instead of acting on clear evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Slow Containment Increases Customer Risk<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

When supplier incidents are managed through email, containment tends to move too slowly. A quality engineer may send photos, wait for acknowledgment, then chase for sorting instructions while suspect stock remains in receiving, on the line, or already transferred to WIP. In fast-moving operations, even a 24-hour delay can expand the impact from one lot to several production orders. That delay is where weak supplier quality management<\/a><\/strong> becomes a customer-facing risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Poor traceability makes the situation worse. If you cannot quickly link a defective lot to affected finished goods, you cannot confidently decide whether to stop shipment, sort inventory, or launch field action. In regulated or high-mix environments, that uncertainty can be expensive. A delayed or incomplete response often forces teams to over-contain, quarantine more material than necessary, and consume labor that should have gone to preventive work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Weak Data Leads to Misplaced Supplier Audit Effort<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A common problem in supplier audit<\/strong> planning is that audit schedules are based on habit instead of risk. Teams revisit familiar suppliers every year because that is the routine, while a newer supplier with repeated documentation gaps or rising defect severity gets less attention. Without reliable defect history, CAPA status, and trend analysis in one system, it is hard to justify why one supplier needs an on-site audit and another only needs remote follow-up. The result is wasted audit capacity and weaker prevention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A better approach ties audit frequency to actual supplier behavior. For example, if a packaging supplier has had four label verification escapes, two late corrective actions, and a rising rejection trend over one quarter, that supplier should move up the audit list immediately. This is where digital supplier performance management<\/strong> is much stronger than spreadsheet-based reviews: it helps teams rank risk using live data instead of memory and manual compilation. That shift allows procurement and quality leaders to focus limited resources where they can reduce the most exposure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Reactive Communication Keeps Teams One Step Behind<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Email-based supplier communication creates lag, version confusion, and poor accountability. One person may be reviewing an outdated corrective action plan while another has the latest supplier reply in a separate mailbox, and no one can easily confirm who approved what or when containment started. In global supply chains, time zone gaps make this even harder, especially when quality, procurement, and the supplier are all working from different records. By the time everyone aligns, the defect may already have reached the customer or disrupted the next production run.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is why companies investing in stronger supplier quality control<\/strong> increasingly move toward shared workflows, standardized forms, and real-time dashboards. With a platform like Jodoo<\/strong>, teams can digitize nonconformance capture, supplier response tracking, escalation workflows, and supplier scorecard<\/strong> reporting in one system without heavy custom development. Instead of managing vendor quality management<\/strong> through disconnected spreadsheets and inboxes, you can create a structured process that flags recurring issues earlier, shortens containment time, and gives both quality and procurement a single source of truth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>What a Strong Supplier Evaluation System Should Measure<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

A strong supplier quality management<\/strong> system measures more than whether a supplier passed the last shipment. It combines quality, delivery, responsiveness, compliance, and financial impact into a practical supplier scorecard<\/strong> that helps you decide who to approve, who to develop, and where to shift future business. For quality managers and procurement teams, the goal is not to create another monthly report. The goal is to build a reliable decision framework for supplier performance management<\/strong> and long-term vendor quality management<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Quality Metrics: Start With Defects and Acceptance Performance<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The core of any supplier evaluation system is quality performance at the part or material level. The most common metric is PPM (parts per million) defect rate<\/strong>, which is especially useful in electronics and precision manufacturing, where even small defect volumes can create high downstream costs. A supplier shipping 500 defective connectors in 1 million units performs very differently from one shipping 5,000, even if both technically \u201cmet spec\u201d on most lots. PPM gives your team a normalized way to compare suppliers with different shipment volumes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You should also track the incoming inspection acceptance rate<\/strong> because it shows how often shipments pass your receiving quality checks without rework, sorting, or rejection. In practice, this is one of the clearest indicators of day-to-day supplier quality control<\/strong>. Imagine a quality engineer at an electronics assembly plant receiving printed circuit boards from three approved suppliers. If Supplier A has a 99.4% acceptance rate, Supplier B has 97.8%, and Supplier C has 92.1%, the scorecard immediately shows which supplier creates hidden inspection workload and line risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Delivery Metrics: Measure Reliability, Not Just Shipment Dates<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

On-time delivery should be measured against the confirmed delivery window, not just the supplier\u2019s requested ship date. For most manufacturers, a useful KPI is OTD (on-time delivery) percentage<\/strong>, often tracked as deliveries made in full and on time against purchase order commitments. A supplier that delivers 98% on time with stable lead times is usually easier to plan around than one swinging between early and late deliveries. In regulated or high-mix environments, consistency matters as much as speed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is also worth separating delivery performance into date adherence<\/strong>, quantity adherence<\/strong>, and lead-time variability<\/strong>. For example, a food packaging manufacturer may receive labels on the promised day, but only 85% of the ordered quantity arrives, forcing a short-term packaging schedule change. In that case, the supplier should not score as fully on-time simply because the truck arrived when expected. A useful supplier scorecard<\/strong> captures the whole delivery outcome, not one partial success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Responsiveness and Corrective Action: Evaluate How Suppliers Recover<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Strong supplier performance management<\/strong> also measures how suppliers respond when issues occur. Two suppliers may have similar defect rates, but one contains problems quickly, submits structured root cause analysis, and closes actions in 10 days, while the other takes 30 days and sends incomplete responses. That difference directly affects line stability and engineering workload. This is why SCAR\/CAPA closure speed<\/strong> should be a standard scorecard criterion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Track at least three response indicators: initial response time<\/strong>, corrective action submission time<\/strong>, and verified closure time<\/strong>. In many plants, a practical target might be an initial containment response within 24 hours and formal corrective action within 10 working days, though the exact standard should match your product risk. For example, in a beverage bottling operation, a cap supplier that resolves torque variation within two days protects production continuity far better than one that needs repeated follow-ups. These responsiveness metrics make supplier evaluations more predictive, not just historical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Audit and Compliance Results: Include Process Capability, Not Just Shipment Outcomes<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A strong system should include supplier audit<\/strong> results, because shipment quality alone does not show whether a supplier\u2019s process is under control. Audit scores can cover process discipline, traceability, calibration, change control, operator training, and document management. This matters because some suppliers pass inspections today but carry weak systems that increase future risk. In vendor quality management<\/a><\/strong>, audits help you evaluate process capability before it becomes a field failure or customer complaint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can make audit scoring more useful by breaking it into weighted categories rather than using one total score. For instance, in a food ingredients supply base, allergen control and traceability may carry heavier weighting than general housekeeping. In an electronics environment, ESD control, revision control, and test record integrity may matter more. A weighted supplier audit<\/strong> model makes your scorecard more aligned with operational risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Cost of Poor Quality: Turn Supplier Performance Into Financial Terms<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

If you want the scorecard to influence sourcing decisions, include cost of poor quality (COPQ)<\/strong>. This can include incoming inspection labor, sorting costs, premium freight, line stoppages, rework, scrap, warranty exposure, and supplier recovery gaps. According to industry studies, poor quality can consume 5% to 15% of sales revenue<\/strong> across manufacturing businesses, and supplier-related issues often account for a meaningful share of that total. Translating quality failures into money helps procurement, quality, and finance work from the same priorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, a garments manufacturer may find that a fabric supplier\u2019s visible defect rate looks only moderately worse than peers, but the real impact includes extra inline inspection hours, urgent replacement fabric shipments, and delayed export orders. Once these costs are quantified, the supplier\u2019s true performance looks very different. This is where supplier quality management<\/strong> becomes commercially relevant, not just technically accurate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Segment Suppliers So the Scorecard Drives Action<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Not every supplier should be measured the same way. The most effective systems segment suppliers by risk<\/strong>, commodity<\/strong>, and business criticality<\/strong>, then apply different thresholds and review frequencies. A supplier providing standard cartons should not be managed with the same intensity as one supplying safety-critical electronic components or customer-facing ingredients. Segmentation keeps your supplier performance management<\/strong> process realistic and focused.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A practical model is to group suppliers into tiers such as strategic\/critical<\/strong>, high-risk<\/strong>, approved standard<\/strong>, and transactional<\/strong>. Critical suppliers may receive monthly scorecard reviews, quarterly business reviews, and mandatory audit cycles. Lower-risk suppliers may be reviewed quarterly with lighter controls. This turns the supplier scorecard<\/strong> into a live management tool for qualification status, business allocation, and supplier development planning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Supplier<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Use the Scorecard for Qualification, Allocation, and Development<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The final step is to link scorecard results to decisions. A supplier with strong PPM, high acceptance rates, stable OTD, and fast SCAR closure may qualify for more business share or reduced inspection levels. A supplier with acceptable delivery but weak audit controls may remain approved with a development plan and tighter monitoring. A supplier with repeated quality failures and slow corrective action may be frozen from new sourcing until performance improves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is where digital systems matter. With a platform like Jodoo<\/a><\/strong>, manufacturers can build a no-code supplier evaluation workflow that captures incoming inspection data, supplier audit findings, SCAR status, and delivery performance in one place, then display the results in role-based dashboards. Instead of maintaining disconnected spreadsheets across quality and procurement, your team can standardize scoring logic, automate review reminders, and track whether supplier development actions actually improve results over time. That makes supplier quality control<\/strong> \uadf8\ub9ac\uace0 vendor quality management<\/strong> measurable at the plant level and scalable across the supplier base.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>How to Compare Supplier Quality Management Approaches<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Choosing the right supplier quality management<\/strong> approach is less about software category names and more about operational fit. A quality manager should compare options against the actual work involved: incoming inspection, corrective action follow-up, supplier audit<\/strong> tracking, supplier scorecard reviews, and cross-functional decisions between quality, procurement, and production. In practice, most manufacturers evaluate four models: spreadsheets, ERP customization, traditional QMS or SQMS tools, and flexible no-code workflow platforms. The best choice depends on how much process variation you have, how often supplier requirements change, and how quickly your team needs usable data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Comparison<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Spreadsheets: Low Cost, Low Control<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Spreadsheets are still common for basic supplier quality control<\/strong>, especially in smaller plants or single-site operations. They can handle approved supplier lists, defect logs, and a simple supplier scorecard<\/strong> if one person owns the file and updates it consistently. For a food packaging plant with 40 raw material and label suppliers, that may be enough at the early stage if reviews happen monthly and data volume is manageable. The cost is low, but reporting quality depends heavily on manual discipline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The limitation shows up when you need traceable workflows rather than just stored data. A spreadsheet can record a late CAPA response or failed delivery, but it cannot easily automate escalation, lock records for audit integrity, or give suppliers controlled external access to respond. If your supplier performance management<\/strong> process includes approvals, evidence attachments, and recurring review cycles, spreadsheets usually become a coordination tool rather than a system. That makes them hard to scale once supplier incidents involve multiple departments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>ERP Customization: Strong Transaction Linkage, Slower to Adapt<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

ERP-based approaches work well when supplier quality is tightly connected to purchasing, inventory, and receiving transactions. If you want to tie nonconformance data directly to PO lines, lot numbers, and receipt records, ERP customization can create strong data consistency. Imagine a consumer electronics assembler that wants incoming defect rates automatically linked to supplier batches and replenishment decisions. In that case, ERP integration can improve accuracy for vendor quality management<\/strong> and purchasing control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, ERP customization is often slower and more expensive when the workflow needs frequent changes. Supplier onboarding checkpoints, audit questionnaires, and risk-based review rules tend to evolve faster than core ERP structures. Many teams find that they can capture transactions well, but struggle to adjust approval paths, mobile inspections, or supplier-facing forms without IT support. Buyers should ask not only whether the ERP can do it, but also how long it takes to change a live process after the business revises a quality standard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Traditional QMS or SQMS Tools: Strong Compliance Structure, Variable Usability<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Traditional QMS or SQMS tools are usually designed for formal quality processes, which makes them strong candidates when compliance and auditability are top priorities. They typically support document control, nonconformance management, CAPA, audit scheduling, and standardized supplier records. For manufacturers in regulated or specification-heavy sectors, that structure is useful because it creates repeatable workflows and cleaner evidence trails. If your organization runs formal quarterly supplier business reviews and annual supplier audit<\/strong> plans, these tools often provide a solid backbone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The trade-off is that some tools are rigid outside their core workflows. A plant may have strong audit tracking but limited flexibility for custom supplier risk scoring, packaging compliance checks, or procurement-specific review logic. Reporting depth can also vary; some systems are good at case-level records but weaker at operational dashboards that combine quality, delivery, and cost signals into one supplier scorecard<\/strong>. Buyers should test whether the tool supports the way their teams actually review supplier performance, not just whether it checks compliance boxes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Flexible No-Code Workflow Platforms: Faster Configuration, Broader Process Coverage<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Flexible no-code workflow platforms are a good fit when supplier quality processes cross multiple teams and need frequent refinement. They allow you to build tailored forms, approval workflows, supplier portals, dashboards, and automated notifications without waiting for heavy custom development. For example, a garments manufacturer sourcing fabric, trims, and packaging from regional suppliers may need different inspection criteria, sample approvals, and escalation rules by supplier category. A no-code setup can adapt those workflows faster than most ERP customization projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This model is especially useful when supplier performance management<\/strong> depends on connected operational data rather than one isolated quality module. You can combine incoming inspection results, SCAR status, on-time delivery, audit findings, and claims history into a live supplier scorecard<\/strong> that procurement and quality both use. On a platform like Jodoo, teams can digitize supplier evaluations, route corrective actions, collect audit evidence, and visualize trends in dashboards from one system. That makes it easier to support both internal governance and external supplier collaboration without building separate tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>The Evaluation Criteria Buyers Should Use<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

When comparing approaches, start with workflow flexibility<\/strong>. Ask how easily your team can change inspection forms, approval rules, score weighting, or escalation logic without a long IT cycle. In many factories, supplier requirements change at least quarterly as new materials, customer specifications, or compliance standards are introduced. If every process update becomes a mini software project, the system will lag behind operations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Next, assess supplier audit<\/strong> support in detail. Can the system schedule audits, assign findings, collect evidence, photos, and documents, and track closure dates by supplier and site? Can external suppliers submit responses securely without seeing other supplier data? In a multi-site beverage operation, that matters because ingredient, packaging, and contract manufacturing partners may all require different audit workflows and evidence requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then look at cross-functional visibility<\/strong>. Effective supplier quality management<\/strong> is rarely owned by quality alone; procurement, engineering, operations, and in some cases, R&D all need to see the same supplier facts. A useful system should show incoming PPM, defect trends, open corrective actions, audit status, and commercial impact in one place. According to industry benchmarking across manufacturing sectors, companies with stronger supplier collaboration and visibility tend to reduce supply disruptions and quality escapes more effectively than those working in disconnected systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Compare Implementation Speed, Reporting, Collaboration, and Total Cost<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Implementation speed matters because long rollout cycles delay the value of better supplier quality control<\/strong>. Spreadsheets can start in a day, but their governance weakens as complexity rises. ERP customization and traditional enterprise tools often require longer design, testing, and user training cycles, especially when multiple departments are involved. No-code platforms usually sit in the middle or faster, particularly when you need to launch a focused supplier evaluation workflow first and expand later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reporting depth should go beyond static monthly summaries. Buyers should test whether the system can build a dynamic supplier scorecard<\/strong> with trend lines, drill-down by plant or commodity, and weighted scoring across quality, delivery, responsiveness, and audit results. For example, if an electronics component supplier has a low defect rate but slow containment response, the system should surface that distinction clearly. Better dashboards support better supplier reviews, not just prettier charts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

External collaboration is another major differentiator. Many teams now expect suppliers to submit 8D reports, certificates, audit evidence, and corrective action updates digitally. If your system cannot support controlled supplier access, your internal team will spend time re-entering data and chasing attachments by email. That weakens both vendor quality management<\/a><\/strong> efficiency and audit readiness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, compare total cost<\/strong>, not just license price. Include setup time, internal admin effort, IT dependency, change request costs, training, and the hidden cost of parallel tools. A system that looks inexpensive but still needs spreadsheets, email follow-up, and manual reporting may end up costing more than a configurable platform that centralizes the full process. The right choice is the one that matches your process complexity, supplier base, and need for continuous improvement without creating a maintenance burden.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>How Jodoo Turns IQC Data Into Automated Supplier Scorecards<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Build Supplier Quality Management From the Inspection Record Up<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In many factories, the most reliable starting point for supplier quality management<\/strong> is the incoming quality control process itself. Every accepted lot, rejected batch, defect code, containment action, and re-inspection result creates usable evidence about supplier performance. Jodoo helps manufacturers turn that IQC data into a connected system that supports supplier quality control<\/strong>, vendor quality management<\/strong>, and ongoing supplier evaluation without moving data between separate spreadsheets, forms, and reporting tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instead of treating incoming inspection as a standalone checkpoint, you can use Jodoo to connect supplier master data, approved part lists, inspection plans, nonconformance workflows, corrective action tracking, and dashboards in one environment. That matters because supplier performance is rarely defined by a single rejection event; it is shaped by trends such as repeat defect types, lot consistency, response speed, and closure effectiveness. With one structured system, your team can measure those trends automatically and feed them into a live supplier scorecard<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Connect Onboarding, IQC, NCR, and CAPA in One Workflow<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A practical supplier evaluation system needs more than pass\/fail inspection records. In Jodoo, a quality team can build supplier onboarding forms that capture certifications, process capability requirements, approved commodities, audit status, and escalation contacts, then link those records directly to incoming inspections. When an IQC inspector logs a failed lot, the system can automatically reference the supplier, material code, defect category, severity level, and previous incident history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From there, Jodoo can route the issue into<\/p>\n\n\n\n

a nonconformance and corrective action workflow. For example, if the same solderability defect appears in three incoming lots from the same electronics component supplier within 30 days, Jodoo can trigger a supplier notification, assign an 8D or CAPA request, and set deadline reminders for supplier response and internal verification. This creates a closed-loop vendor quality management<\/strong> process where inspection data does not stop at the receiving dock but drives follow-up and accountability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Automated<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Practical Example: Electronics IQC to Monthly Supplier Scorecard<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Imagine a quality manager at an electronics assembly plant receiving printed circuit boards, connectors, and passive components from 25 suppliers each month. Inspectors use mobile forms in Jodoo to capture lot-level results, including sample size, AQL result, defect type, photos, supplier lot number, date code, and disposition. If a connector shipment shows terminal deformation above the acceptance threshold, the record automatically creates a nonconformance case and alerts both procurement and supplier quality engineering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If similar defects recur across multiple lots from the same supplier, Jodoo can trigger an escalated follow-up workflow based on rules you define. The supplier is asked to submit containment actions and root cause evidence, while the internal team tracks response time, verification status, and recurrence after closure. At the end of the month, Jodoo updates a real-time supplier performance management<\/strong> dashboard that scores each supplier on incoming defect rate, lot acceptance rate, CAR closure time, repeat defect frequency, and on-time response.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This removes the usual manual consolidation step where someone exports IQC logs, NCR files, and email updates into a spreadsheet before a supplier review meeting. The data is already structured, linked, and current. For plants managing high-mix electronic parts, that speed is important because even a small defect trend can affect line stoppage risk, rework cost, and customer delivery performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Extend the System to Supplier Audit and Governance<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Jodoo also supports broader supplier governance beyond incoming inspection. You can add digital supplier audit<\/strong> forms for process audits, packaging audits, hygiene checks, or document compliance reviews, then tie those results back to the same supplier record used in IQC and corrective action workflows. That gives procurement, quality, and operations teams a more complete picture of supplier capability instead of evaluating suppliers only on reject quantity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, a food manufacturer sourcing packaging film and seasoning materials may want to combine incoming defect rates with audit findings on traceability control, allergen segregation, and certificate validity. In Jodoo, those audit outcomes can become part of the same supplier scorecard<\/strong>, with weighted scoring by category, supplier type, or material criticality. This helps teams make better sourcing and development decisions using one shared data model rather than separate audit files and quality logs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Why This Approach Is Different<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Jodoo\u2019s differentiation is not just digital form capture; it is the ability to build a full supplier quality management<\/strong> workflow without custom software development. You can configure inspection forms, approval logic, automatic alerts, score calculations, supplier-specific views, and executive dashboards in the same platform. That means your supplier quality control process can evolve as defect criteria, scorecard formulas, audit requirements, or escalation rules change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For manufacturers that want faster review cycles and stronger traceability, this approach is especially useful. A plant can move from static monthly reports to continuous supplier monitoring, where each IQC event immediately contributes to supplier evaluation. In practice, that gives quality managers and procurement teams a more actionable foundation for supplier performance management<\/strong> and more consistent decisions across suppliers, commodities, and plants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Conclusion: Build a More Scalable Supplier Quality Management System With Jodoo<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Strong supplier quality management<\/a><\/strong> does not come from a single inspection form or an annual supplier review. It comes from connecting the full process: supplier qualification, incoming quality control, corrective action tracking, supplier audits, scorecard reporting, and continuous supplier performance management. When these steps are managed in separate spreadsheets and emails, teams react slowly, miss trends, and struggle to align procurement, quality, and production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A better approach is to build one shared system around real operating data. Imagine a quality manager at an electronics plant who can instantly see PPM trends, audit findings, response times for SCARs, and on-time delivery performance by supplier in one dashboard. That visibility helps teams act earlier, reduce incoming defects, and protect line uptime. In many factories, even a small reduction in supplier-related disruption can prevent hours of lost production and costly premium freight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jodoo<\/a> helps manufacturers build this kind of system without heavy custom development. As a no-code lean manufacturing platform, Jodoo lets you digitize forms, automate workflows, standardize supplier evaluations, and create real-time dashboards that fit your process. If you are ready to make your supplier quality management<\/strong> system more consistent and scalable, you can \ubb34\ub8cc \uccb4\ud5d8\uc744 \uc2dc\uc791\ud558\uc138\uc694<\/a><\/strong> \ub610\ub294 \ub370\ubaa8 \uc608\uc57d\ud558\uae30<\/a><\/strong> to see how Jodoo can support your team.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\uc2a4\ucf54\uc5b4\uce74\ub4dc, CAPA, \uac10\uc0ac \uae30\ub2a5\uc744 \ud65c\uc6a9\ud558\uc5ec \ub354\uc6b1 \uc2a4\ub9c8\ud2b8\ud55c \uacf5\uae09\uc5c5\uccb4 \ud488\uc9c8 \uad00\ub9ac \uc2dc\uc2a4\ud15c\uc744 \uad6c\ucd95\ud558\uc138\uc694. Jodoo\uac00 \uc81c\uc870\uc5c5\uccb4\uc5d0 \uc5b4\ub5bb\uac8c \ub3c4\uc6c0\uc774 \ub418\ub294\uc9c0 \uc54c\uc544\ubcf4\ub824\uba74 \ub370\ubaa8\ub97c \uc608\uc57d\ud558\uc138\uc694.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":6718,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6890","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-solutions"],"blocksy_meta":[],"yoast_head":"\nSupplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System - Jodoo Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Build a smarter supplier quality management system with scorecards, CAPA, and audits. See how Jodoo helps manufacturers\u2014book a demo.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/supplier-quality-management-guide\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ko_KR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System - Jodoo Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Build a smarter supplier quality management system with scorecards, CAPA, and audits. See how Jodoo helps manufacturers\u2014book a demo.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/supplier-quality-management-guide\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Jodoo Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/company.jodoo\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-05-07T02:31:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-05-11T03:07:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"464\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jodoo\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@JodooHQ\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@JodooHQ\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\uae00\uc4f4\uc774\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jodoo\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"\uc608\uc0c1 \ub418\ub294 \ud310\ub3c5 \uc2dc\uac04\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22\ubd84\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Jodoo\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b958cef486b1eb00d0f82e6f0a294481\"},\"headline\":\"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-07T02:31:04+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-11T03:07:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide\"},\"wordCount\":4647,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png\",\"articleSection\":[\"Solutions\"],\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide\",\"name\":\"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System - Jodoo Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-07T02:31:04+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-05-11T03:07:08+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b958cef486b1eb00d0f82e6f0a294481\"},\"description\":\"Build a smarter supplier quality management system with scorecards, CAPA, and audits. See how Jodoo helps manufacturers\u2014book a demo.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/04\\\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png\",\"width\":768,\"height\":464,\"caption\":\"EMS-cover\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/supplier-quality-management-guide#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"\u9996\u9875\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Jodoo Blog\",\"description\":\"Get the latest information about no-code development, updates, events, and other news about Jodoo.\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b958cef486b1eb00d0f82e6f0a294481\",\"name\":\"Jodoo\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ko-KR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/250e0d43b77e764b8fd961bf41dc0e46963912235f6724430a4fdb771e857168?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/250e0d43b77e764b8fd961bf41dc0e46963912235f6724430a4fdb771e857168?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/250e0d43b77e764b8fd961bf41dc0e46963912235f6724430a4fdb771e857168?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Jodoo\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/wp.sre.jodoodevelop.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.jodoo.com\\\/blog\\\/ko-kr\\\/author\\\/wp-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System - Jodoo Blog","description":"\uc2a4\ucf54\uc5b4\uce74\ub4dc, CAPA, \uac10\uc0ac \uae30\ub2a5\uc744 \ud65c\uc6a9\ud558\uc5ec \ub354\uc6b1 \uc2a4\ub9c8\ud2b8\ud55c \uacf5\uae09\uc5c5\uccb4 \ud488\uc9c8 \uad00\ub9ac \uc2dc\uc2a4\ud15c\uc744 \uad6c\ucd95\ud558\uc138\uc694. Jodoo\uac00 \uc81c\uc870\uc5c5\uccb4\uc5d0 \uc5b4\ub5bb\uac8c \ub3c4\uc6c0\uc774 \ub418\ub294\uc9c0 \uc54c\uc544\ubcf4\ub824\uba74 \ub370\ubaa8\ub97c \uc608\uc57d\ud558\uc138\uc694.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/supplier-quality-management-guide\/","og_locale":"ko_KR","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System - Jodoo Blog","og_description":"Build a smarter supplier quality management system with scorecards, CAPA, and audits. See how Jodoo helps manufacturers\u2014book a demo.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/supplier-quality-management-guide\/","og_site_name":"Jodoo Blog","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/company.jodoo","article_published_time":"2026-05-07T02:31:04+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-05-11T03:07:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":768,"height":464,"url":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Jodoo","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@JodooHQ","twitter_site":"@JodooHQ","twitter_misc":{"\uae00\uc4f4\uc774":"Jodoo","\uc608\uc0c1 \ub418\ub294 \ud310\ub3c5 \uc2dc\uac04":"22\ubd84"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide"},"author":{"name":"Jodoo","@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/b958cef486b1eb00d0f82e6f0a294481"},"headline":"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System","datePublished":"2026-05-07T02:31:04+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-11T03:07:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide"},"wordCount":4647,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png","articleSection":["Solutions"],"inLanguage":"ko-KR"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide","url":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide","name":"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System - Jodoo Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png","datePublished":"2026-05-07T02:31:04+00:00","dateModified":"2026-05-11T03:07:08+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/b958cef486b1eb00d0f82e6f0a294481"},"description":"\uc2a4\ucf54\uc5b4\uce74\ub4dc, CAPA, \uac10\uc0ac \uae30\ub2a5\uc744 \ud65c\uc6a9\ud558\uc5ec \ub354\uc6b1 \uc2a4\ub9c8\ud2b8\ud55c \uacf5\uae09\uc5c5\uccb4 \ud488\uc9c8 \uad00\ub9ac \uc2dc\uc2a4\ud15c\uc744 \uad6c\ucd95\ud558\uc138\uc694. Jodoo\uac00 \uc81c\uc870\uc5c5\uccb4\uc5d0 \uc5b4\ub5bb\uac8c \ub3c4\uc6c0\uc774 \ub418\ub294\uc9c0 \uc54c\uc544\ubcf4\ub824\uba74 \ub370\ubaa8\ub97c \uc608\uc57d\ud558\uc138\uc694.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ko-KR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ko-KR","@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/\u5236\u9020\u4e1a-1-4.png","width":768,"height":464,"caption":"EMS-cover"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/supplier-quality-management-guide#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"\u9996\u9875","item":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Supplier Quality Management: How to Build a Data-Driven Supplier Evaluation System"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/","name":"\uc870\ub450 \ube14\ub85c\uadf8","description":"Jodoo\uc758 \ub178\ucf54\ub4dc \uac1c\ubc1c, \uc5c5\ub370\uc774\ud2b8, \uc774\ubca4\ud2b8 \ubc0f \uae30\ud0c0 \uc18c\uc2dd\uc5d0 \ub300\ud55c \ucd5c\uc2e0 \uc815\ubcf4\ub97c \ubc1b\uc544\ubcf4\uc138\uc694.","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ko-KR"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/b958cef486b1eb00d0f82e6f0a294481","name":"Jodoo","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ko-KR","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/250e0d43b77e764b8fd961bf41dc0e46963912235f6724430a4fdb771e857168?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/250e0d43b77e764b8fd961bf41dc0e46963912235f6724430a4fdb771e857168?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/250e0d43b77e764b8fd961bf41dc0e46963912235f6724430a4fdb771e857168?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Jodoo"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/wp.sre.jodoodevelop.com"],"url":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/author\/wp-admin"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6890","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6890"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6890\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6941,"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6890\/revisions\/6941"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/6718"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6890"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6890"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jodoo.com\/blog\/ko-kr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6890"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}