Supplier 8D Report-Rating Procedure

Hello everyone,
I'm thinking about implement this procedure in my company. I have problem with my suppliers when I need from them this documentation on time or when I need some analyse with using for example quality tools like a 5Why etc.
My idea regarding to this procedure is connect this rating to each 8d Report and when I receive final 8D Report I will be evaluate this documentation and send result to my supplier, also I'm thinking about use this data in my internal supplier analyse.
At this moment my first idea regarding to this method this is use excel spreadsheet. More precisesily:
-divide each step 1D-8D
-to each step I will create some value of points
-amount of all points it will be 100 (%)
-for example steps D4-D7 will have higher value than steps D1-D3 or D8.
- to each step I will create couple of questions. This questions will be helpful to create better evaluation.
My question is:
Anyone have some interesting questions or main topics to evaluate, which I will be can add into this form?

Re: 8D Report-rating procedure

There is an older Ford 8D 'checklist' that was derived from the original 8D training they developed. I have it but haven't found it yet in my old files.
One thing you might want to consider is to give the "standard" to your suppliers, and your plants, have them rate their own responses before submitting them. This will do two things, one they'll make improvements before submitting based on the review, and two, it will give you a baseline to focus your improvement efforts. If your plants and/or suppliers always rate some element higher than you would, it's and indicator the instructions or expectations aren't clear.

Re: 8D Report-rating procedure

Some basic input (in the form of questions) on the grading approach as a whole:

1. What are you trying to achieve by doing this?
2. What do you expect to gain from having done this?
3. Do you expect a significant change on your suppliers end for getting an 84% instead of a 76%?

The forms submitted either meet your needs or they don't.
Why bother grading them on a scale?

IMO, Suppliers meeting your needs is a pass/fail scenario.
The actions count. The forms sit in a filing cabinet.

You might want to take a look through this thread - Corrective Action Plan FORD 8D form and information

My 2 biggest customers each have developed a very similar evaluation method, which they both claim is based on a Toyota method, so I don't think there should be any problem with sharing these. Take a look at the 2 tabs in this file, it should give you a good starting point.

Re: 8D Report-rating procedure

Ninja said:

Some basic input (in the form of questions) on the grading approach as a whole:

Click to expand...

1. What are you trying to achieve by doing this?
This is required standard in my comapny. But recent documentation is not good. I can't evaulate very good 8D report because current document is to genereal without systematic standard.

2. What do you expect to gain from having done this?
This is very useful tool if I want to see my progress in work with suppliers. Of course I use this only for information. Based on this I can't required any additional work form my suppliers. But I can compare how they do 8D Report for example one year ago and now.

3. Do you expect a significant change on your suppliers end for getting an 84% instead of a 76%?
This is required document. In situation if my supplier do not score enough points I can approve 8D Report.

MatiB,

Have you updated your supplier selection and reselection criteria to include their problem solving capability?

John

Eric is asking some valid questions. If your company "requires" this, but it's not working well for you, then you need to find out why.

- Do your suppliers fully understand your requirements for these forms? If not, why not?
- Are your expectations reasonable?
- Are you doing all you can on your end to aid supplier development so that they can meet your expectations?

There's certainly nothing wrong with grading their performance, even with regards to their 8-D submissions. But, ensuring the results are used in a manner that benefits both parties will go a long way to better relations with your suppliers. If you truly value these suppliers, don't just grade them and tell them how bad they're doing, help them improve. You'll get a better supplier, and they'll get to keep your business. Everyone wins that way.

I'm not opposed to evaluating your supplier 8Ds. I think it could be very valuable for you IF you use the information to continually feedback to your suppliers how to do a better job.

Standard work is a concept that drives consistency in results. If we follow the best known process, the results will follow. However, the evaluator can't do the evaluation by rote. some level of expertise in problem solving is necessary to recognize more than obvious - and often trivial - gaps. for example if the supplier doesn't list the champion, anyone can detect this. If the corrective action is to retrain the operator or discipline them, anyone can detect this. BUT a poorly done root cause investigation or poorly developed solution with some fancy statistical graphs can fool many people - including your suppliers - into thinking that a good job was done.

Some more questions to help us help you:
are your suppliers currently not doing effective root cause and corrective action? How do you know this? what is the evidence?
do you have examples of 8Ds that resulted in effective and ineffective solutions?

Hello everyone, sorry for my late response.
Regarding to your questions:
1. 90% of my suppliers do their job very good (8D report), without good root cause analyse and actions I don't approve 8D report.
2. We have couple of verification method: Lessons Learned, audits on supplier site, copy of documentation, photos etc. So I'm pretty sure that actions are really exists.

Main main problem in this post: How can I build/create questionare regarding to 8D procedure ?
What question I need insert there?

Maybe some checlist will be the best or quationare which You can find in the previous page.