Tony:

Hello, I’m Tony Mangino from TC2, and this is Staying Connected—the podcast where we talk about what really matters to enterprise buyers navigating today’s technology and sourcing decisions.

I’m joined today by my TC2 colleague Bryan Carriker, and we’re talking about supplier escalation.

More specifically, how enterprise customers can escalate serious supplier problems without turning the relationship into open warfare. And that balance matters.

Most enterprise customers are not looking for a fight. They want the service to work, costs to be predictable and the supplier relationship to be productive.

But sometimes, the relationship stops working.

Tickets stall. Service quality drops. Delivery milestones slip. Change orders keep appearing and the managed services model becomes harder to operate than expected. Or the supplier’s answer to every issue starts to sound like, “That’s outside scope.”

At some point, normal governance is just not enough.

Guest:

Right. And the hard part is that customers usually wait too long.

Nobody wants to escalate too early. Nobody wants to be accused of overreacting. So the team keeps meeting, keeps tracking, keeps asking for improvement.

Tony:

And then three months go by.

Guest:

Same issues. Same excuses. Same open items.

That’s when escalation becomes necessary. But it has to be controlled. If it’s driven only by frustration, it can create more heat than progress.

Tony:

That’s the tension. You can underreact and let the problem continue. Or you can overreact and create a bigger conflict than you need.

Guest:

The goal isn’t to make noise. The goal is to get the supplier to act.

When Governance Stops Working

Tony:

Let’s talk about the trigger point. How does a customer know the issue has moved beyond normal supplier management?

Guest:

Repetition is usually the first sign.

The same problems keep coming back. Missed SLAs. Delayed tickets. Poor handoffs. Unclear ownership. Billing issues. Scope disputes. Whatever the category is, the pattern matters.

Tony:

And sometimes the strongest signal is that everyone is busy, but nothing is improving.

Guest:

That’s a great way to say it.

There’s a weekly call, a tracker and action items. People are polite. Everyone agrees the issue is important.

And then next week looks almost exactly the same.

Tony:

Governance somehow morphs into activity instead of progress.

Guest:

Yes. And in managed services or outsourcing deals, that can get painful quickly because the supplier is part of the operating model. They’re not just providing a product. They’re doing work the business depends on.

Tony:

So, if the arrangement breaks down, the impact spreads.

Internal teams get pulled back into work they thought had been outsourced. Users feel the service impact. Finance starts asking why costs don’t match expectations. Vendor management gets stuck in the middle.

Start with the Facts

Tony:

Bryan, before the customer escalates, what does it need?

Guest:

A fact base.

Not just, “The supplier is underperforming.” That may be true, but it’s too broad. The customer needs to show what happened, what was promised, where performance fell short, and what impact it created.

Tony:

And what has already been tried.

Guest:

Yes. That matters.

If the customer can show the supplier had notice, had time to respond, and still didn’t fix the issue, the escalation becomes much stronger.

Tony:

The evidence is usually scattered though.

Guest:

Very scattered. Tickets. Meeting notes. SLA reports. Project plans. Invoices. Emails. Contract schedules. Escalation logs.

The work is to organize that into a clear story.

Tony:

Otherwise, the supplier can slow everything down by debating details.

Guest:

They can say the issue is isolated. Or unclear. Or not tied to a contractual commitment. Or caused by the customer.

Sometimes some of that may even be partly true. That’s why the customer needs to be objective.

Tony:

That’s important. The goal isn’t to create a one-sided complaint. It’s to build a credible record.

Guest:

Right. Frustration may start the conversation internally. Proof is what moves the supplier.

Know What You Want

Tony:

Another thing customers need before escalation is a clear outcome. Because “fix this” is not enough.

Guest:

It really isn’t.

The customer should know what it wants the supplier to do. Is the ask a remediation plan? Better staffing? Credits or commercial relief? A governance reset? Replacement of a delivery lead? A scope clarification? Maybe a transition plan?

Tony:

And sometimes the answer is a combination.

Guest:

Often. But the ask still needs to be clear.

If the escalation is just a complaint, the supplier may respond with sympathy and a new meeting. If the escalation includes evidence, business impact, and a specific remedy, the tone changes.

Tony:

That’s the difference between venting and managing.

Guest:

Exactly.

Tony:

And in most cases, the customer actually wants the relationship to work. They’re not trying to terminate. They’re trying to restore accountability.

Guest:

Right. So the escalation should leave room for the supplier to recover, if they act quickly and credibly.

Sequence the Escalation

Tony:

Let’s talk about the approach. Not every issue should go straight to the executive level.

Guest:

No. Executive escalation can be powerful, but if you use it too early or too often, it loses impact.

Tony:

So the customer starts close to the problem.

Guest:

Yes, but with discipline.

Document the issue. Set expectations. Give the supplier a chance to respond. If that doesn’t work, move up with a cleaner record and a sharper message.

Tony:

Sharper, not louder.

Guest:

Exactly. The message should become more precise.

Here is the issue and the evidence. Here is the business impact and the remedy required. Here is the timeline and what we will consider if the issue is not resolved.

Tony:

That last part is important. Escalation without consequence is just another meeting.

Guest:

And suppliers know the difference.

Protect the Business While You Push

Tony:

There’s another practical reality here. The customer may be angry, and maybe rightly so. But the supplier may still be running critical services.

Guest:

Yes. That’s especially true in managed services and outsourcing. The supplier may support infrastructure, applications, end users, security operations, service desk functions, or other core services.

You can’t escalate in a way that puts the business at risk just to make a point.

Tony:

So the posture has to be firm, but controlled.

Guest:

Exactly. Preserve service continuity. Keep the right people engaged. Create a record. And protect options.

Tony:

By options, you mean things like a remediation plan, a commercial reset, a partial transition, or eventually a competitive process.

Guest:

Yes. The customer may not want to exit. But having a credible path if the supplier fails to improve changes the conversation.

Tony:

Because suppliers behave differently when the customer has options that are credible.

Guest:

They do. Even if the option is not immediate.

Practical Buyer Questions

Tony:

For listeners dealing with a supplier problem right now, what should they ask before escalating?

Guest:

First: do we have facts, or do we mainly have frustration?

Tony:

Second: can we show the pattern?

Not just one bad incident, but the repeated problem or the broader impact.

Guest:

Third: what does the contract say in practical terms? Which commitments, remedies, governance rights, or scope obligations matter here?

Tony:

Fourth: what outcome do we actually want?

Guest:

And fifth: what are our options if the supplier doesn’t respond?

Tony:

Bryan, what should customers avoid?

Guest:

Avoid vague complaints and making it personal. Avoid accepting soft promises with no timeline. Avoid letting the supplier turn the conversation into a debate over every minor detail.

Tony:

And avoid waiting so long that every available path is painful.

Guest:

That may be the biggest lesson. Early, structured escalation is usually less disruptive than waiting until the relationship is already in crisis.

Closing Remarks

Tony:

The key takeaway is that escalation does not have to mean open warfare. It should be a disciplined process for restoring accountability.

That means building the fact base, defining the outcome and sequencing the message. And keeping credible options available if the supplier does not respond.

Bryan, any final thoughts?

Guest:

Supplier problems rarely improve just because the customer is frustrated. They improve when the customer shows up with facts, a clear ask, and a practical path forward.

The tone should be professional. The posture should be firm. And the objective should be remediation, not conflict for its own sake.

Tony:

That is a great place to leave it.

To our listeners, if you would like to discuss supplier escalation, disputes and workouts, managed services remediation, or how to address supplier performance problems without creating unnecessary conflict, or if you’d like to discuss other technology strategy, sourcing and cost reduction needs with Bryan, me, or any of our TC2 and LB3 colleagues, please give us a call or shoot us an email.

You can also stay current by subscribing to Staying Connected, by checking out our websites, and by following us on LinkedIn.