System Audit for New Supplier Qualification

[KCIPOH]

Hello Cove members,

I have a scenario as below :

Let say a company Alpha want to perform a system audit (mainly for ISO9001:2008 and ISO14001:2004) to qualify a new supplier before register them into the AVL.

This supplier are having 2 different manufacturing location (i.e. Location A and B) which is having the same process for the parts to be manufactured. The parts are running at location B.

But due to some reason, company Alpha are instructing the QA team to perform system audit to the supplier at location A (which same process but the parts are not running here) and verifying their procedure versus process at location A for compliance verification.

My question is since the parts are running at location B, it is valid to perform system audit at location which the parts are not been manufactured and by only verifying their process at location A for compliance to their procedure?

Will this be an issue?

Please advice.

Thanks and appreciate

[Jennifer Kirley]

Good day KCIPOH,

If parts are likely to be supplied by both plants A and B, in my view their manufacturing processes should both be audited. If the quality management system is the same, it may be possible to only audit the support processes at one plant but I would do so at the plant that is actually sending me the goods.

Why would Plant A be audited if the parts were being made in Plant B?

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by KCIPOH

Hello Cove members,

I have a scenario as below :

Let say a company Alpha want to perform a system audit (mainly for ISO9001:2008 and ISO14001:2004) to qualify a new supplier before register them into the AVL.

This supplier are having 2 different manufacturing location (i.e. Location A and B) which is having the same process for the parts to be manufactured. The parts are running at location B.

But due to some reason, company Alpha are instructing the QA team to perform system audit to the supplier at location A (which same process but the parts are not running here) and verifying their procedure versus process at location A for compliance verification.

My question is since the parts are running at location B, it is valid to perform system audit at location which the parts are not been manufactured and by only verifying their process at location A for compliance to their procedure?

Will this be an issue?

Please advice.

Thanks and appreciate

I agree with Jennifer in principle, but in reality it probably makes no difference because there is no evidence that I know of that supplier qualification audits help to predict anything.

[ssz102]

clarify the reason to be audited for location is important
though audited is process, if no product manufactured in here, i think the system is inperfaction, as the system is together with products

[Big Jim]

In Reply to Parent Post by KCIPOH

Hello Cove members,

I have a scenario as below :

Let say a company Alpha want to perform a system audit (mainly for ISO9001:2008 and ISO14001:2004) to qualify a new supplier before register them into the AVL.

This supplier are having 2 different manufacturing location (i.e. Location A and B) which is having the same process for the parts to be manufactured. The parts are running at location B.

But due to some reason, company Alpha are instructing the QA team to perform system audit to the supplier at location A (which same process but the parts are not running here) and verifying their procedure versus process at location A for compliance verification.

My question is since the parts are running at location B, it is valid to perform system audit at location which the parts are not been manufactured and by only verifying their process at location A for compliance to their procedure?

Will this be an issue?

Please advice.

Thanks and appreciate

The biggest issue here is that ISO 9001:2008 is silent on how to audit a supplier. What is required is that you determine that the supplier has the ability to meet your needs, and that can be done in any of several ways. You may have written more prescriptive requirements into your procedure though. What is really important is to make sure that any such procedures provide you with the flexibility to go about it as you feel best.

In the case you cited, if I were in your shoes, I would want to see how parts were made that end up in my company, whatever that takes.

[amit_rd]

I will try to make it simpler for you:

Instead of calling it supplier audit, please call call site audit. Is there any difference? Yes definitely! To which location are you releasing the purchase order? If its A, you audit A.

Have you ever heard of a bank verifying somebody else's credentials to give you a bank account? "NO"

In cases where the supplier is putting up a new location, we may audit other location with similar processes to get certain level of confidence; otherwise we audit the site - only.

[KCIPOH]

Hello Cove members,

I really thankful for all your feedback and hints. Yes, i have the same thinking as to have the site which is running the parts to be audited in actual instead of audit another site with similar process and comparing against the procedure for compliance.

As cited by Big Jim, yes, I think we need to be specific about the procedure to qualifying our new supplier to avoid any arguments and to have those new supplier to comply to our requirements before they are being approved into AVL.

As for your information, we actually did not get a clear direction from top management on the reason behind not auditing the actual plan where the parts are manufactured, but i think maybe cost concern as the supplier plan (parts to be run) as in our neighbor country.

Appreciate all your explanation and advise again.

Good job and keep in touch ya