Unreasonable FMEA request? Customer requests additional Steps in our FMEA

I have just had an odd request from a customer.

I should explain the supply chain is a little complex!!

This particular customer is another part of our group that another company was using to 'factor' their supplies into the automotive supply chain. When we were brought into the group we have slowly acquired a number of the jobs.

To the meat, this particular customer (none of our others ) have asked us to add the goods-in, patrol inspection and final release to our process FMEA.

This is covered by our control plan, so I am a little confused.

At the moment I have told them to get lost

Any comments?

What do you have on your FMEA now?

Good Morning,

I guess that what your customer is requesting, I'm not seeing as anything unusual, we put receiving inspection, in-process inspection, and final inspection on our FMEA's as standard practice.

If you don't mind my asking, what do you put on your FMEA's now?

Jonell

To add on to Jonell's response I guess I would like to ask how you put something in your Control Plan without it being addressed in your Process Flow Diagram and then the Process Failure Modes and Effects Analysis?

Jonell is correct - the PFD, PFMEA and CP should address all steps - from receipt of material to receipt at your customer. It doesn't sound like an absurd request at all.

I am also confused, al steps should be there.
In the past Delphi said that they would not accept FMEA with out reference to packaging and labelling

You are right of course.

Oddly enough the company generated the Control Plan many years ago BEFORE FMEA.

The current FMEA was created to satisfy GM, and has been accepted in that state since 1998.

Time for a thorough review I believe.

Thanks to all.

Puzzle said:

....Oddly enough the company generated the Control Plan many years ago BEFORE FMEA.....Time for a thorough review I believe..

Click to expand...

Not odd at all. Don't feel bad. We were in the same position. We made stuff up for the customer only when they demanded it, and gave it no particular thought.

I feel the last few posts had a little "preachiness" to them.

The cream of the crop is here on the Cove.

The rest of the World can hardly spell FMEA, never mind describe it as a part of a Triad (Flow, FMEA, CP)? Why - cause the boss doesn't understand or care.

You have the right idea now, try to get a group together to look at the system. Why not take the last big problem and run it through Flow, FMEA, CP, perhaps people may begin to see some value and lend more than grudging support.

FMEA is a great tool - but even NASA ignores the results! Twice (so far).