Evidence of Supplier Corrective Action - Poor Responses by Suppliers

[psquared]

We issue SCARs (supplier corrective action requests) on a pretty regular basis.

We ask them to respond with:
-Root cause
-Correction to eliminate RC
-Reason why NC was not detected
-C/A to assure future detection should the N.C repeat.

It is very rare to have these filled out well. We get the gist of what they are saying and doing, but most of the time we would grade the responses as a "C." They rarely provide evidence of compliance such as copies of revised control documents, setup sheets, work instructions etc... This poor response pattern includes ISO 9001, TS16949 and As9100 registered suppliers.

Here are my questions.


1)Do others see the same general response.

2)Are we expecting too much?

3)Are we leaving ourselves vulnerable during audits (ISO9001) if we accept
what they say they are doing without seeing evidence.

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by psquared

We issue SCARs (supplier corrective action requests) on a pretty regular basis.

We ask them to respond with:
-Root cause
-Correction to eliminate RC
-Reason why NC was not detected
-C/A to assure future detection should the N.C repeat.

It is very rare to have these filled out well. We get the gist of what they are saying and doing, but most of the time we would grade the responses as a "C." They rarely provide evidence of compliance such as copies of revised control documents, setup sheets, work instructions etc... This poor response pattern includes ISO 9001, TS16949 and As9100 registered suppliers.

Here are my questions.


1)Do others see the same general response.

2)Are we expecting too much?

3)Are we leaving ourselves vulnerable during audits (ISO9001) if we accept
what they say they are doing without seeing evidence.

Your request for corrective action should include what you expect to see in the supplier's report. The fact that you issue requests "on a pretty regular basis," combined with the quality of the responses indicates that you have supplier issues that aren't likely to be corrected by badgering, however.

[somashekar]

In Reply to Parent Post by psquared

We issue SCARs (supplier corrective action requests) on a pretty regular basis.

We ask them to respond with:
-Root cause
-Correction to eliminate RC
-Reason why NC was not detected
-C/A to assure future detection should the N.C repeat.

It is very rare to have these filled out well. We get the gist of what they are saying and doing, but most of the time we would grade the responses as a "C." They rarely provide evidence of compliance such as copies of revised control documents, setup sheets, work instructions etc... This poor response pattern includes ISO 9001, TS16949 and As9100 registered suppliers.

Here are my questions.


1)Do others see the same general response.

2)Are we expecting too much?

3)Are we leaving ourselves vulnerable during audits (ISO9001) if we accept
what they say they are doing without seeing evidence.

I have seen this happen as well. When you say that you raise SCAR on a pretty regular basis, perhaps every detected rejection in your inward goods inspection process leads to an SCAR.
We are open to use our 8D form or the suppliers 8D form as long as we get the necessary inputs sufficient to the extent to say that the root cause and corrective actions have been taken and the subsequent supplies are monitored to be free from that defect. We do not raise a SCAR for every rejection in inspection. During our regular production planing interface meetings, managers decide based on the criticality of the detected non conformance, which supplier and on which part must demonstrate a corrective action. We have been effective though it needs constant pushing and follow-up from purchase and quality function to bring this out effectively.

[Chris Ford]

In Reply to Parent Post by psquared

We issue SCARs (supplier corrective action requests) on a pretty regular basis.

We ask them to respond with:
-Root cause
-Correction to eliminate RC
-Reason why NC was not detected
-C/A to assure future detection should the N.C repeat.

It is very rare to have these filled out well. We get the gist of what they are saying and doing, but most of the time we would grade the responses as a "C." They rarely provide evidence of compliance such as copies of revised control documents, setup sheets, work instructions etc... This poor response pattern includes ISO 9001, TS16949 and As9100 registered suppliers.

Here are my questions.


1)Do others see the same general response.

2)Are we expecting too much?

3)Are we leaving ourselves vulnerable during audits (ISO9001) if we accept
what they say they are doing without seeing evidence.

I agree with Jim. I think you're also right to be concerned about what your own auditor will think about these SCAR's, as well.

First, is the level of detail you requested actually necessary? In some cases, I'm sure it is, but if you're asking every supplier to provide this information for every SCAR you issue, you may be going overboard.

If you're not satisfied with the information you receive from the supplier (i.e. you give them a "C") but you accept it anyway, you're saying that the information really isn't relevant. So, why require it?

[Sidney Vianna]

In Reply to Parent Post by psquared

Are we expecting too much?

As a customer, you are obviously entitled to expect seriousness and thoroughness from your suppliers, but if you (as a customer organization) keep accepting anything less than meaningful as root cause analysis and real corrective actions, the suppliers will perceive it as the standard.

Until you show them what your level of expectations are, they (like most suppliers) will try to do as little as possible to make the SCAR "go away". Until you CLEARLY show that you are going to keep them accountable to proper corrective action management, they will do as little as possible. That is human nature.

In Reply to Parent Post by psquared

Are we leaving ourselves vulnerable during audits (ISO9001) if we accept what they say they are doing without seeing evidence.

If your CB auditor is serious, s/he would expect you to be able to demonstrate a robust corrective action process, which includes supplier corrective actions; so, in a way, yes, you are exposing your system to that risk. But, in my opinion, much more important than you getting dinged, during an external audit, is the fact that you allow a substandard practice with your suppliers. That, in itself, brings risks to your business. Such risks are, for the most part much direr than a non-conformity.

Having said all of that, I would like to mention that, you should look at your own systems to assess what are the reasons for so many SCARS. Are all of them valid? Are any of them due to poor communication and flowdown from your end. Should your supplier evaluation and monitoring process improve? Remember that problem suppliers exist (many times) because the customer did a poor job of selecting them, in the first place. For example, does your supplier evaluation and selection process delve into their corrective action resolution process robustness? If it doesn't, it should. An assessment like that, done in the front end, will prevent the headaches you are experiencing at the moment.

Great question.

[psquared]

Thank you all for the great input. You have offered opinions on many facets of this subject.

Although I mentioned auditors, and they certainly play a role in the continuous improvement process. Our primary motivation for the SCAR process is facilitating continuous improvement. So pleasing them is just one step.

Sydney makes a great point about responsibility for poor suppliers falling on the customer that chose them. We are working hard to improve that process also.

[arin_23]

In Reply to Parent Post by psquared

We issue SCARs (supplier corrective action requests) on a pretty regular basis.

We ask them to respond with:
-Root cause
-Correction to eliminate RC
-Reason why NC was not detected
-C/A to assure future detection should the N.C repeat.

It is very rare to have these filled out well. We get the gist of what they are saying and doing, but most of the time we would grade the responses as a "C." They rarely provide evidence of compliance such as copies of revised control documents, setup sheets, work instructions etc... This poor response pattern includes ISO 9001, TS16949 and As9100 registered suppliers.

Here are my questions.


1)Do others see the same general response.

2)Are we expecting too much?

3)Are we leaving ourselves vulnerable during audits (ISO9001) if we accept
what they say they are doing without seeing evidence.

The issue remains as why you want to gather the evidence of supplier corrective action ? The only possible reason is you want to exercise quality control over your suppliers so that you don't have to face unpleasant issues with your end customer.

Now the fact is the SCARs you are receiving are appearing as scars to you(Jokes apart !!!!) and I understand you are not able to add value out of this entire process.

Now answering your questions one by one:

1.Majority of us see these type of responses (Apart from a very few)

2.You are not expecting too much,they are not understanding the imprtance of this process.

3.You are leaving yourself vulnerable not to the auditors, but to the customers, as you know customers are the biggest auditors , and there is limites scope of initiating corrective action if you receive a major NC from your customers.

Auditors might be satisfied if you show them some documentary objective evidences which can satisfy the requirements of the audit trails sampled by them (Exceptions can be there).

You can do significant value addition to this activity by following the simple steps as mentioned below:

1. Conducting a few awareness sessions with the supplier representatives on the importance of SCARs.

2. Talking one to one to rough suppliers.

3.Showcase to them what is the end destination of the material ( Like a "The fuse valve supplied by you is going to space along with the next NASA mission")

4.Share with them if you have received some compliments from your end customers about your product and give them credit on this achievement.Similarly if you receive customer complaints , share with them what is the complaint and how it has affected your relationship with the end customer.

5.Sometimes involve them in your review metting and give them a feeling with how much importance you treat the SCARs.

If you follow some or all of these simple prescriptions , your suppliers would understand the importance on SCARs, and your problems would subside to much extent.

Happy begining.

Regards,

Arin