Yes, but not by trying to make every supplier run the same stack. KPI alignment usually works by standardizing definitions, calculation rules, time windows, and evidence requirements, then mapping each supplier's ERP, MES, or manual process outputs to that model. The main constraints are data quality, governance, integration maturity, and the effort needed to validate mappings over time.

Use ISO 22400 as a common KPI definition and governance reference, not as a drop-in contract requirement by itself. In aerospace supply chains, contractual use depends on data availability, system mapping, event discipline, and dispute handling. Poorly specified KPI clauses can create scorecard noise, supplier conflict, and misleading comparisons across plants.

Start with a small set of supplier KPIs that are operationally meaningful, consistently definable, and traceable to source data. In most regulated manufacturing environments, that means standardizing delivery, quality, and responsiveness first, not building a large scorecard. The limiting factor is usually data definitions, event timing, and system integration quality across ERP, QMS, MES, and supplier portals.

Shared execution data shifts supplier performance reviews from periodic, disputed scorecards to continuous, evidence-based collaboration. It can improve fairness and speed of SRM decisions, but only if integrations are robust, data definitions are aligned, and change control, access, and validation are handled carefully across ERP, MES, QMS and supplier portals.