I am in the process of writing procedures and documents at a manufacturing facility. My question is whether or not I need both a Vendor Return form and a Supplier Corrective Action Report.
To clarify, I consider 'Vendor' and 'Supplier' to mean the same.

Yep...that's pretty much it....

To clarify, I consider 'Vendor' and 'Supplier' to mean the same. I usually replace 'vendor' in thread titles and such because 'supplier' is the most 'modern' term. I admit it's a personal thing. I *hate* the term 'vendor'.

But to your post, a supplier return form is not the same as a supplier corrective action request form.

Is there a danger in trying to combine the two into one document?

I hadn't really thought about it, but I can't say it would be a problem. I would include a 'trigger' which could be as simple as a couple of check boxes together one of which would be "Requires a Corrective Action Response" and the other saying "Does not require a Corrective Action Response". You are probably not going to be requiring a full blown corrective response for every return.

Maybe one of the others here will chime in on this.

Thank you Marc for your thoughts on this. I realized sometime after posting this that there is a forum for procedures and documentation. I probably should have posted this there for a greater response.

Thanks again.

The 2 forms are often used for distinctly different purposes. The returns form may be used to trigger cost recovery and geared towards accounts, whereas the corrective action report is for specific problem definition, root cause analysis, countermeasure recording and verification of the countermeasure.

It is possible to combine the 2 forms, but it would depend on how your business functions.

In my research of these forms I have seen some crossover in both forms. I think that I will add a check box to the VR to indicate whether or not a SCAR was started and I will add a line in the SCAR to allow reference to a VR number.

Thanks.

Your SR should just be to document p/n, quantity, etc., and initial analysis/assignment of responsibility. Once responsibility is established, it's time to shift gears. At that point, why not use the very recognized format of a "standard" 8D?

I don't know much about the "8D", I'll have to look into it. Thanks.

Her's a quickie to start you off: Eight Disciplines Problem Solving (http://elsmar.com/8D/)

Generally one would associate the Supplier Return form serving as a Financial/Materials/Quality Releated document. Return Authorization for the pending evaluation and credit/replacement of a component(s) or device.

In the event of a non-compliance or conformance, the Supplier involved would respond to the complaint via the Supplier Corrective Action Report.

It's a matter of personal preference more than anything. There is nothing that says you have to have 2 completely seperate forms. It just makes control a bit more easier.

I have decided to keep the forms separate and reference the SR on the SCAR. The main reason is that if they are consolidated there would be a lot of unnecessary information on the page if you are just doing a SR and telling someone to ignore information on a form is a bad idea.

I am in the process of writing procedures and documents at a manufacturing facility. My question is whether or not I need both a Vendor Return form and a Supplier Corrective Action Report.
To clarify, I consider 'Vendor' and 'Supplier' to mean the same.

Insofar as the standard is concerned, you don't "need" either. If you decide to have a form, make it work for you and your suppliers.

If these are not needed then how do you suggest documenting these tasks?

If these are not needed then how do you suggest documenting these tasks?

Those tasks do not need to be documented unless the need to take action arises.

Stijloor.

I understand that a SCAR is not always needed but a SR is needed every time something needs to be 'returned' to the supplier. How else do you document returning items?

If these are not needed then how do you suggest documenting these tasks?

Note that I qualified my statement with "Insofar as the standard is concerned..." There's nothing in the standard that requires you to have any particular form, so you're free to meet the needs of your business as you see fit, assuming the requisite controls are in place. If you want to combine two different types of data-gathering with a single form, there's nothing in the standard that would prohibit you from doing so.

As far as documenting things are concerned, when you want CA from a supplier, you can inform your suppliers of your expectations in that regard, and just send an e-mail asking for a report--no form required. Forms are best suited to repetitive tasks, and instances where the information provided must meet specific criteria.