Here is something that concerns both philosophy and controversy:
in the Gripe Bar thread ( http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6859 ) in the coffee break forum.

Just remember.............The customer is always right :rolleyes:

Is he really? Personally, I strongly disagree... The customer is however always the customer. So how do we handle it?

Over to the forum...

/Claes

Here is something that concerns both philosophy and controversy:

Is he really? Personally, I strongly disagree... The customer is however always the customer. So how do we handle it?

Over to the forum...

/Claes

I also disagree. How do we handle it? With a great deal of tact & diplomacy.

Hi, all.

One thing that throws a wrench in all of this, IMO, is the trend towards some big customers charging a unilateral fee whenever they want to claim some sort of damage (SCAR). Sometimes even for things like damage in transit, though the contract says FOB producer's plant, and its their trucker.

This is on top of demanding the lowest price, which already squeezes margins. Instead of a partnership, this is a tyranical, dictatorial, relationship. Some of them we need to let swing in the wind.

Is the customer always right? Absolutely not.

Here is something that concerns both philosophy and controversy:



Is he really? Personally, I strongly disagree... The customer is however always the customer. So how do we handle it?

Over to the forum...

/Claes

Hey! You're quoting me out of context and without my permission!!! I'll Sue!

The :rolleyes: is the key here. I do not even believe the customer always thinks they are right. I strongly believes sometimes the customer knows they are wrong, but are willing to procede anyway. I think it was the book "Lean Thinking" that discussed how American business are always trying to position ourselves in power over our customer/supplier. Instead of work with each other, we attempt to find the perfect angle to leverage ourselves.

Is the customer always right? No, but the customer is the customer and we need to decide which fight is worth it and when is it time to say the customer is no longer the customer (I've fired a customer before).

This is on top of demanding the lowest price, which already squeezes margins. Instead of a partnership, this is a tyranical, dictatorial, relationship. Some of them we need to let swing in the wind.

Is the customer always right? Absolutely not.Unfortunately, this happens, and it is obviously tyrannical... Some people would be well adviced to have a look at ISO9004:2000, clause 4.3h:

h) Mutually beneficial supplier relationshipsAn organization and its suppliers are interdependent and a mutually beneficial relationship enhances the ability of both to create value./Claes

Unfortunately, this happens, and it is obviously tyrannical... Some people would be well adviced to have a look at ISO9004:2000, clause 4.3h:

h) Mutually beneficial supplier relationshipsAn organization and its suppliers are interdependent and a mutually beneficial relationship enhances the ability of both to create value./Claes

Very nice sounding but not an auditable clause - most likely on purpose - Some BIG companies could care less about their suppliers or their relationship regardless how nice their letters and mandates sound.

ISO like systems in the hands of BIG tyranical companies just make life **** for the (small) suppliers that can't afford to "fire" their customers...

Quote: "One thing that throws a wrench in all of this, IMO, is the trend towards some big customers charging a unilateral fee whenever they want to claim some sort of damage (SCAR). Sometimes even for things like damage in transit, though the contract says FOB producer's plant, and its their trucker."

We don't see alot of this, but we do see it and it is ridiculous and disgusting!!! Especially the FOB part! Partial shipment lost/damaged, and WE are expected to make the claims and replace the parts and possibly take a negative hit in our delivery performance, and probably get a SCAR for something the truckers did.

Many days (the quiet ones) I like my quality job. But when customers start bitching about minor things we realistically can't control, I know why I was happy NOT being the Quality Guy in the past... *sigh*

Bob said:

" We don't see alot of this, but we do see it and it is ridiculous and disgusting!!! Especially the FOB part! Partial shipment lost/damaged, and WE are expected to make the claims and replace the parts and possibly take a negative hit in our delivery performance, and probably get a SCAR for something the truckers did.

Many days (the quiet ones) I like my quality job. But when customers start bitching about minor things we realistically can't control, I know why I was happy NOT being the Quality Guy in the past... *sigh*"

Unfortunately, we see this often - at least a couple times a month. We are trying inflatable bladders for the trucks, so maybe that will help. We take pictures of each load just before the door is closed. Even when we prove that the load was packed properly, the fact that the trucker drove like an idiot does not take us off the hook. If it was small customers that did it, we would tell them off. But its the big boys, and sometimes on their own truck with their driver.

There are certain companies that will never see a dollar of mine...


:frust:

The customer is always right.

Is he really?
/Claes

Of course not -- unless your customer is God. ;)

I think db was being sarcastic.

Is the customer alwys right, no, will a customer ever admit they were at fault not likely. As was stated before you need to choose which battles to fight and when to part ways with a customer on good terms.

Put yourself in the shoes of the customer, how many times have you ever admitted to your supplier (grocery, shoe, clothing stores, etc..) you were wrong?

Of course not -- unless your customer is God. ;)

I think db was being sarcastic.

I know he was... But somehow the :rolleyes: got lost on the way... Sorry about that db, but it was there in the first post in this thread.

/Claes

Here is something that concerns both philosophy and controversy:



Is he really? Personally, I strongly disagree... The customer is however always the customer. So how do we handle it?

Over to the forum...

/Claes

I agree. Unless the customer is automotive OEM , still they might not always be right, but they are never wrong.

Unless the customer is automotive OEM , still they might not always be right, but they are never wrong.

How right you are Sam. A lot of times, in this business, we have to tell the customer what they want. With lack of customer direction and input, we are always wrong. But if it wasn't for us you wouldn't be seeing the '04 F150's out there!

I'm not much of a truck person, but those bad boys are a nice lookin' and ridin' pick-em up. I appologize for the plug.

It seems to me, according to my current understanding and past experience that, the customer has to initially underdstand what they want, they basically have to be educated. The customer needs to be handed information that can be used and understood. The customer uses the understood information to make the choice of either buying into or rejecting a service, product or thought process that encompasses their current understanding and alignment of a quality characteristic associated with the product, service or thought process developed, produced and distributed.
Just my thoughts of course.
Wallace.

We're currently helping a hospital Accident & Emergency Department with the change to the new standard, and we're also doing work for a police force. Neither of them would find it easy to accept that their "customers" are always right, especially on a Saturday night after the pubs close. Even if you regard the general public as the "customer" of the police, the attitude of the public does not always match up to what is proven to be "good policing".

Perhaps we need to look at balancing the needs of all stakeholders, rather than focussing on "customers" all the time.

Regards

Peter Fraser

Perhaps we need to look at balancing the needs of all stakeholders, rather than focussing on "customers" all the time.

Regards

Peter Fraser

Interesting outlook Peter... and maybe also a fair description of what we're in fact already doing (because we have to). That would bring us right back to ISO9004:2000, clause 4.3h again, because I honestly do not believe that the customer has anything to gain from pain suffered by the other stakeholders.

/Claes

Mandos

I would not consider the drunken yob being arrested by the police for being drunk and disorderly as the customer of the police.

In this case I would say the customer is the general public, to whome the drunken yob is causing a nuisance.

Its the police job to restore order in the community. The community is the customer, not the criminal.

Bob said:

" We don't see alot of this, but we do see it and it is ridiculous and disgusting!!! Especially the FOB part! Partial shipment lost/damaged, and WE are expected to make the claims and replace the parts and possibly take a negative hit in our delivery performance, and probably get a SCAR for something the truckers did.
We are trying inflatable bladders for the trucks, so maybe that will help. We take pictures of each load just before the door is closed. Even when we prove that the load was packed properly, the fact that the trucker drove like an idiot does not take us off the hook. If it was small customers that did it, we would tell them off. But its the big boys, and sometimes on their own truck with their driver.

:frust:

Customer does have the right to get his purchase right! (san the shipping part, if delivery is accepted by the customer's own trucker).
And hence there have been developments in packaging technology and logistics management. Bob rightly declared,"We are trying inflatable bladders for the trucks". I wish we get kind-of-a-black box installed in the shipping vehicleswhich record the jerks and perks of driving nerds

Thareja

pthareja:

How about this?

http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/spinoff2000/t1.htm

We have not tried it because you have to have someone at the other end to retrieve it.

Craig

Customer is a vital partner in each business process,
So his 'contract clause' can't be defied for any cess.

Validity of the 'supply criterion' debars all ignorance,
His stated or unstated attributes all get preference.

Customer has the privillege to curse the merchant,
if his coveted requirements weren't put to acid test.

When merchant, paying no cognizance to His quest,
overrules safety & statutory regulations to his best.
To pinch our mother earth out of her fragerant nest,
Shouldn't merchant get a wrath for being dishonest?

But say if customer strikes back with modesty mean,
the cool merchant: high sincerity and no less esteem,
Should the merchant now not forgo his perseverence,
bring customer to books, documenting the nonsense?

&copy Priyavrat Thareja 2003

“The customer is the most important person, he is not dependent on us, we are totally dependent on him. He is not an interruption in our work, he is the very purpose of our work. He is not an outsider in our business; he is a part of the business. We are not doing him a favour by serving him, he is doing us a favour by allowing us to serve him”.

Mahatma Gandhi.

The customer might not always be right but as it's Friday let's end on a positive note.

I really love my customers! :)

Simon

Re: Is the customer always right?

[Quote: ]
Originally Posted by Claes Gefvenberg

The customer is always right.[/Quote: ]
[Quote: ]

Of course not -- unless your customer is God.
__________________
Mike S..[/Quote: ]

In Hindu Mythology both Guest and Customer were considered as God!
But that was in good old days; when The culture of Total Quality people was epiced.

Mahatma Gandhi tried to be more practical. Honestly! the path is difficult. may be enthuses one to renounce worldly pleasures. but the rewards are high!
He understood the requirements of his customers. and planned processes strategically for his customers' objectives.

We don't see alot of this, but we do see it and it is ridiculous and disgusting!!! Especially the FOB part! Partial shipment lost/damaged, and WE are expected to make the claims and replace the parts and possibly take a negative hit in our delivery performance, and probably get a SCAR for something the truckers did.


New guy popping in to stir the pot... :eek:

So is there anything that we can do from a process improvement perspective to take control of the situation? That is, instead of dusting our hands and pointing to the FOB as backup, how do we drive improvements to increase delivery performance even when we hand it off to somebody else?

New guy popping in to stir the pot... :eek:

So is there anything that we can do from a process improvement perspective to take control of the situation? That is, instead of dusting our hands and pointing to the FOB as backup, how do we drive improvements to increase delivery performance even when we hand it off to somebody else?

Short of finding a carrier who really cares, nothing! Keep firing them and you will soon run out of carriers that will take your order. Go "Brown" for the little stuff. Try new companies who promise you the world. You may get lucky! ;) JMHO :smokin:

New guy popping in to stir the pot... :eek:

So is there anything that we can do from a process improvement perspective to take control of the situation? That is, instead of dusting our hands and pointing to the FOB as backup, how do we drive improvements to increase delivery performance even when we hand it off to somebody else?

Welcome, "new guy".

A tough issue. But, in my experience, it is usually an issue of damage, not loss or late delivery, that is the source of complaint after it leaves the factory. In that case you can try to beef-up your packaging a bit, and try to have reasonable discussions with the customer to try to come up with a joint agreement on how to solve the problem -- the best scenerio.

Hi, all.

One thing that throws a wrench in all of this, IMO, is the trend towards some big customers charging a unilateral fee whenever they want to claim some sort of damage (SCAR). Sometimes even for things like damage in transit, though the contract says FOB producer's plant, and its their trucker.

This is on top of demanding the lowest price, which already squeezes margins. Instead of a partnership, this is a tyranical, dictatorial, relationship. Some of them we need to let swing in the wind.

Is the customer always right? Absolutely not.

Our main customer is pressuring us to sign a two year LTA which would require that we give a 5% discount every time our approval rating dips below 95% (such as on time performance) and if our PPM goes above 2,000 that is another 5% discount rate for the entire year. We have a niche in the business and the volume of parts they purchase is so low that one nonconformance could set us back for the year. Our quality is great, I am concerned about the on time delivery. We deliver the parts on time and they stamp the packing list with a received date and by:, we keep that document, our parts sit on the receiving doc for a couple of days and is received into their computer when they get around to it. Which makes our parts late in their eyes. What to do, what to do? They have no physical record that the parts arrived on time! We do. We would like them to revise the contract but I don't think that is going to happen. If we sign it, and our quality rating takes a dive because of the issues I have stated above, then I feel my only choice is to issue corrective action requests to my customer.
We have talked this over and over with our buyer, he said it is not his job and does'nt know or care who's it is! Any suggestions are greatly appreciated. :thanx:
Paula

We deliver the parts on time and they stamp the packing list with a received date
Wow! They stamp with a received date. This just has to be a part of your customers receiving process. Does your customer have a formal QMS in place.
I would run all over that issue if I were auditing this facility.

They have no physical record that the parts arrived on time! We do.
Here's another large gap in your customers receiving processes.

I would take the "We would like to help you" approach to your customer's quality function. Suggest that you write a receiving process and procedure that can be verified by both parties.
Wallace.

Paula,

Another bonehead customer, huh? It takes restraint not to want to go over there and whack them over the head with a shipping box! How about just raising your price 10% and saying, sure, your idea sounds great! ;)

Welcome New Guy

In that case you can try to beef-up your packaging a bit

Most packaging companies will offer free assistance with a packaging analysis if the packaging is an issue. They will educate your organization on proper palletization methods and proper carton selection (based on application). :bigwave:

mshell

Paula,
During your LTA negotiations, see if the customer will add a "Dock Receive" date field to their receiving screen. That will accomplish two things. You can measure Ship to Dock Receive Time (which is the actual reflection of your performance) and it will allow you to measure the gap between Dock Receive and System Receipt.
You can help both companies that way. I suspect your customer has someone in a big office upstairs that doesn't know that your parts are sitting around waiting to be checked in. A nice little shot of metric would fix that I bet.

Glenn

Thanks for the response... Negotiations? The only negotiation they are doing is when will we sign the LTA. I would love to suggest to our customer to add that field but no one wants to take ownership of their program. I called the person who is in charge of assigning passwords and user names. I asked how to modify the information on the report she referred me to our buyer, and well now we know where that got me. :frust:
Our supplier is the one who required us to become AS9100A registered. I am not sure if they have been through their transistion or not, but I sure wish I could put a bug in the ear of their auditor! :vfunny:
ISO like systems in the hands of BIG tyranical companies just make life **** for the (small) suppliers that can't afford to "fire" their customers...
Aint that the truth!

Another bonehead customer, huh? It takes restraint not to want to go over there and whack them over the head with a shipping box! How about just raising your price 10% and saying, sure, your idea sounds great! :biglaugh: :vfunny: :D :bigwave:
Paula

Our main customer is pressuring us to sign a two year LTA which would require that we give a 5% discount every time our approval rating dips below 95% (such as on time performance) and if our PPM goes above 2,000 that is another 5% discount rate for the entire year. We have a niche in the business and the volume of parts they purchase is so low that one nonconformance could set us back for the year. Our quality is great, I am concerned about the on time delivery. We deliver the parts on time and they stamp the packing list with a received date and by:, we keep that document, our parts sit on the receiving doc for a couple of days and is received into their computer when they get around to it. Which makes our parts late in their eyes. What to do, what to do? They have no physical record that the parts arrived on time! We do. We would like them to revise the contract but I don't think that is going to happen. If we sign it, and our quality rating takes a dive because of the issues I have stated above, then I feel my only choice is to issue corrective action requests to my customer.
We have talked this over and over with our buyer, he said it is not his job and does'nt know or care who's it is! Any suggestions are greatly appreciated. :thanx:
Paula

Main customer with a low purchase volume? It's Christmas; tell them to shop around.

Got one today I just had to share:

Date on a C of A: 1/02/04

Date on corresponding C of C: 1/2/04

Customer complains. We had to change date on C of C to 'match' C of A. They haven't explained to us what material difference it makes if there's a zero in front of the day or not.

This really steams me, we have bigger fish to fry with this customer, but this sort of minutia keeps getting in the way. They've never specified a date format they would prefer, now we're being threatened with a "vendor performance issue". Whatever.

Just had to vent. :mad:

Got one today I just had to share:

Date on a C of A: 1/02/04

Date on corresponding C of C: 1/2/04

Customer complains. We had to change date on C of C to 'match' C of A. They haven't explained to us what material difference it makes if there's a zero in front of the day or not.

This really steams me, we have bigger fish to fry with this customer, but this sort of minutia keeps getting in the way. They've never specified a date format they would prefer, now we're being threatened with a "vendor performance issue". Whatever.

Just had to vent. :mad:

Vent Away! :bigwave:
We signed the LTA and were told because of the low volume of sales the 5% issue would not pertain to us... time will tell!
Paula

Raptorwild & Scott,

Just a thought, but have you ever taken these "minutia" type issues to your customer's senior management? After attempting to deal with their Buyers and their Quality people, if you still have no resolution to the problems take it up with their senior management (President, CEO, etc.).

Let their senior management know of the types of trivialities her/his people are spending their time on (and in Raptorwild's case how effecient and effective the dock workers and receiving department are).

You may see a change. :bigwave:

Vent Away! :bigwave:
We signed the LTA and were told because of the low volume of sales the 5% issue would not pertain to us... time will tell!
Paula:ca: "told"?? Just send the person who told you that a memo and ask him/her to acknowledge it in writing "for your audit team who are very persnickity about details."

:topic: (well, slightly off topic) Over the years, we've FIRED several "prestigious" but "high maintenance" customers. When we did a hard-nosed cost analysis, the extra time spent hand-holding and brown nosing translated into zero profit.

MarkTwain supposedly quoted a fellow being tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail:
"If it weren't for the honor of the thing, I'd just as soon leave without ceremony!" Ever feel like that with some customers?

Raptorwild & Scott,

Let their senior management know of the types of trivialities her/his people are spending their time on (and in Raptorwild's case how effecient and effective the dock workers and receiving department are).

You may see a change. :bigwave:

Good Idea! I will look into that...
Paula :bigwave:

Raptorwild & Scott,

Just a thought, but have you ever taken these "minutia" type issues to your customer's senior management?

Be assured, we're working on that.

We beginning to think we're caught in the middle of an internal struggle between the customer's management and the production people who are upset that the business they used to do in-house has been out-sourced to us. Looks like the inspectors are trying to cause trouble for us. We've been accommodating with every little persnickety request in the past, but it's getting silly now.

It's good to talk about these things. I was really boiling over this earlier. It just galls me what a waste of time all this is when there are larger issues to address.

Got one today I just had to share:

Date on a C of A: 1/02/04

Date on corresponding C of C: 1/2/04

Customer complains. We had to change date on C of C to 'match' C of A. They haven't explained to us what material difference it makes if there's a zero in front of the day or not.

This really steams me, we have bigger fish to fry with this customer, but this sort of minutia keeps getting in the way. They've never specified a date format they would prefer, now we're being threatened with a "vendor performance issue". Whatever.

Just had to vent. :mad:
Sounds like a Dilbert cartoon. What idiots. FWIW I would fire (or at least write-up) any one of my people who wasted their time and yours on such a stupid issue. :frust: I agree wit the idea of taking it to the Top Dogs in the customer's organization. He/she may want to know.

Got one today I just had to share:

Date on a C of A: 1/02/04

Date on corresponding C of C: 1/2/04

Customer complains. We had to change date on C of C to 'match' C of A. They haven't explained to us what material difference it makes if there's a zero in front of the day or not.

This really steams me, we have bigger fish to fry with this customer, but this sort of minutia keeps getting in the way. They've never specified a date format they would prefer, now we're being threatened with a "vendor performance issue". Whatever.

Just had to vent. :mad:



I have found after many years dealing with the Big Guys (Big 3) that everyone in their organizations are primarily jockeying for position or hanging on to retirement.

The former need to make their mark. . . the latter don't want any hassles.

I have always followed the direction of "help your customer and you help yourself".

With the position changes that go on up there, especially in the Supplier Quality arena, people are put into positions that have histories with suppliers. The newbie needs to review the past to manage the present. This is not always done.

In the automotive world, the Golden Rule of automotive has been, and is, "He who has the gold makes the rules. . . if you want some, you play by their rules." Autocratic and tyranical. . . absolutely. :mad:

How about charging suppliers for the reporting software. . . a new profit center???

Enough venting. . . :bonk:

I would contact the customer and explain the issue. You would think that there are more important issues to deal with. We received a report card from one of our suppliers last week and it indicated that we were late on 2 shipments in 2003 which reduced our on-time delivery rating from 100% to 98%. Due to the fact that we are never late, I contacted the customer and requested details for both shipments. Upon receiving the requested information, I investigated the 2 shipments and found that the customer had made a mistake. I then informed my contact of the findings and he issued a new report card with the correct rating.


So the customer is not ALWAYS right.

Upon receiving the requested information, I investigated the 2 shipments and found that the customer had made a mistake. I then informed my contact of the findings and he issued a new report card with the correct rating.

So the customer is not ALWAYS right.Was there an apology with the correction?
So many OEMs financially penalize suppliers for errors, missed deliveries, etc. Does this customer do that? Did he offer to reimbuse your organization at the same rate he would charge if you caused an extra "research" cost?

Be cautious if you answer that he did apologize and offer compensation. Some of us might not be able to stand the shock.

They do not penalize our organization.

You are not going to be shocked because he did not apologize or offer reimbursment. He thanked me for my interest and wish me a good day.

I have always followed the direction of "help your customer and you help yourself". Taz,
Keep this in mind with your suppliers, don't make the same mistake.
Supplier development is a lot deeper than what the "standard" makes it out to be. If you are a "tier 1" you know all the horror stories. Don't be the same way with your vendors.
I've moved from a tier 1, to a company that has 30% B-3 business. It may be big $$$, but the management has said "take your parts some place else" to more than one of the 3 big guys!
You don't have to be the dog in the back window saying yes sir, yes sir, 3 bags full! Be stern, but be diplomatic. It's a fine art.
Help your vendor and you help yourselve!:eek:

Raptorwild & Scott,

Just a thought, but have you ever taken these "minutia" type issues to your customer's senior management?

Just to follow up on this, by boss contacted our contact in contract services who issued the "vendor performance issue" threat (his quote: "You don't want to go there") and it was obvious he didn't know what his quality team was complaining about. He agreed it wasn't a quality issue and should never have been brought up.

All's well that end's well, I guess. I'd like to think it's path independent but in this case I'm not too sure.

What's the expression? Don't lose the forest for the trees?

Taz,
Keep this in mind with your suppliers, don't make the same mistake.
Supplier development is a lot deeper than what the "standard" makes it out to be. If you are a "tier 1" you know all the horror stories. Don't be the same way with your vendors.
I've moved from a tier 1, to a company that has 30% B-3 business. It may be big $$$, but the management has said "take your parts some place else" to more than one of the 3 big guys!
You don't have to be the dog in the back window saying yes sir, yes sir, 3 bags full! Be stern, but be diplomatic. It's a fine art.
Help your vendor and you help yourselve!:eek:

Thanx Randy. . . I think I was having a bad week. . . trying to transition a company from QS to TS2 with little or no support. . . :bonk:

Anyway, I have always been and am still a proponent of mutual cooperation and teamwork. . . . be it with a customer or supplier. amazingly, when I was done at one contract, usually the supplier would contact me to help with another customer or two. Nice niche. . .

I have spend many many hours sucking fumes at assembly plants around the country and out of it. The customers were very happy to get feedback about their processes. . . and any improvment suggestions. . . in the same light, I have spent countless hours at supplier sites. . . resolving issues and training. in both cases, good relatinships were built. Even with customer/competitors.

I spent 2 years traveling doing contract work for companies that had quality issues. I would position myself between the customer and supplier with the position that "you will get the truth even if you do not like it".

I was able to successfully put alot of myths to rest. . . eliminate the finger pointing. Didn't matter which was paying me, they both got the truth.

I am not one to roll over and play dead (Hence the Taz!), but I am also a person who knows what fights to pick and when. This may be a little off topic, but I think that I may have come across wrong. . . my appologies to the rest of the gang. . . :o

We all have bad weeks, days, months, and even years!!!!
I always hated when the SQA's came to the plant, usually they were right out of school and felt they needed to make their mark.
Suppliers always catch the flak. It's the old "last to touch is the one who broke it" mentality. There is soooo much CYOA anymore that you can't do anything to correct a problem.
I'm trying to do a root cause analysis on a problem where the customer wants us to sort over 30,000 parts just to make sure that they are not introducing the problem!
If I sort they will not pay for the time and they will not certify stock to us. All they want to do is to charge us for the rejected parts.
In other words - no help.
Like I said, remember how tough it is.:thedeal:

Ya know Randy . . . I think that I will start a revolution of sorts. . . being the upstart revolutionary from the 60's that I am. . . I think that I will solicit information from all newer car owners I know. . . and find out if they have had any problems. . . then I think I will write up some CAR's and send them to the Big Guys. . . :eek:

Wonder if I'll get a response?? :vfunny:

I have been involved in several cases where the customer/supplier wanted us to sort their work. . . if I found something. . . a CAR was issued. . . that is what our system stated. . .

This policy was established up front so there were no surprises. . . ONE QUALITY SYSTEM . . .

They already have the Customer Satisfaction awards (Toyota usually tops the chart) based on complaints. The only Corrective Action you'll hear is recalls.
But here's the kicker. If the B3 responded to customer complaints the way they want their suppliers too, would we need a "Lemon Law"????
May be, the OEM's would just blame it on the Dealers. :eek: The old "whoever touched it last, broke it" philosophy.