How to Handle an Invalid Customer Complaint?

[KELVIN]

Hello Members...

I've received a customer complaint on the printing defects-discoloration on the label.He has requested 8D report because of they have found 3 pcs defect from 10000 pcs ~ 0.03%. See attached Photo.

In fact , this cosmetic defect is not likely to reduce the usability of the product for its intended purpose such as identification.The end user still able to identify the product & defect is not visible under normal viewing inspection guideline.Moreover, our contract only specify AQL 0.65 , not 100% inspection plan or 100% detection service.

In view of the point above, pls advise your thoughts should I reply my customer that pls UAI the parts & would not accept the 8D report due to the defects still acceptable which low consumer risk as well.Note: My customer is a new SQE who taking care for mechanical commodity. I was thinking to educate this customer abt the cost of doing the business.If you pay peanuts,dun expect you got the six sigma vendor , or you must be sick sigma customer.

Thanks for the advise that how you deal with this kind of invalid customer complaint.

Best Regards,
Kelvin

[Jim Wynne]

Originally Posted by KELVIN

Hello Members...

I've received a customer complaint on the printing defects-discoloration on the label.He has requested 8D report because of they have found 3 pcs defect from 10000 pcs ~ 0.03%. See attached Photo.

In fact , this cosmetic defect is not likely to reduce the usability of the product for its intended purpose such as identification.The end user still able to identify the product & defect is not visible under normal viewing inspection guideline.Moreover, our contract only specify AQL 0.65 , not 100% inspection plan or 100% detection service.

In view of the point above, pls advise your thoughts should I reply my customer that pls UAI the parts & would not accept the 8D report due to the defects still acceptable which low consumer risk as well.Note: My customer is a new SQE who taking care for mechanical commodity. I was thinking to educate this customer abt the cost of doing the business.If you pay peanuts,dun expect you got the six sigma vendor , or you must be sick sigma customer.

Thanks for the advise that how you deal with this kind of invalid customer complaint.

Best Regards,
Kelvin

Many companies have painted themselves into a corner by requiring CA every time a defect is discovered, and the same companies often don't allow reasonable people to use their own discretion.

If the "defect" in question really isn't a defect in view of the documented specifications, you're within your rights to diplomatically point that out to the customer, and ask for the CAR to be rescinded. You should inform the customer that you're glad they notified you, but that CA shouldn't be required under the circumstances, and will not be cost-effective. If they balk, you can suggest revisiting the specifications and the pricing.

[SteelMaiden]

Originally Posted by KELVIN

Hello Members...

I've received a customer complaint on the printing defects-discoloration on the label.He has requested 8D report because of they have found 3 pcs defect from 10000 pcs ~ 0.03%. See attached Photo.

In fact , this cosmetic defect is not likely to reduce the usability of the product for its intended purpose such as identification.The end user still able to identify the product & defect is not visible under normal viewing inspection guideline.Moreover, our contract only specify AQL 0.65 , not 100% inspection plan or 100% detection service.

In view of the point above, pls advise your thoughts should I reply my customer that pls UAI the parts & would not accept the 8D report due to the defects still acceptable which low consumer risk as well.Note: My customer is a new SQE who taking care for mechanical commodity. I was thinking to educate this customer abt the cost of doing the business.If you pay peanuts,dun expect you got the six sigma vendor , or you must be sick sigma customer.

Thanks for the advise that how you deal with this kind of invalid customer complaint.

Best Regards,
Kelvin

hmmmm....it appears that the label was not the color that the customer asked for. That makes it nonconforming. It doesn't matter if it is usable or not. If I order a red car and I get an orange one off the line, I am not going to take it.

Now, the place where your arguments come into play would be in determining just how much of a monetary settlement is called for. Do not, I repeat, do not confuse investigating and resolving quality problems (wrong color) with claim resolution ($ exchanged)

If your contract allows for a certain percentage of variance, then you might have a leg to stand on, but in my world, if you don't give the customer what you promised, you are going to have to credit him for what was not right. (and maybe more if you screw up his world bad enough)

Just remember that you decide when to do a corrective action, based on the importance to you and your customers. But, you do (when requested by a customer especially) need to perform some sort of investigation. How can you assess what this problem means without figuring out how, where, why, when it happens?

[Coury Ferguson]

Originally Posted by SteelMaiden

hmmmm....it appears that the label was not the color that the customer asked for. That makes it nonconforming. It doesn't matter if it is usable or not. If I order a red car and I get an orange one off the line, I am not going to take it.

That is true and I agree. The customer ordered a specific type/color and it did not meet their needs/expectations. It is nonconforming.

Originally Posted by SteelMaiden

Now, the place where your arguments come into play would be in determining just how much of a monetary settlement is called for. Do not, I repeat, do not confuse investigating and resolving quality problems (wrong color) with claim resolution ($ exchanged)

I think the settlement would be upon the supplier to reduce the costs, if it is accepted, by the customer.

Originally Posted by SteelMaiden

If your contract allows for a certain percentage of variance, then you might have a leg to stand on, but in my world, if you don't give the customer what you promised, you are going to have to credit him for what was not right. (and maybe more if you screw up his world bad enough)

I totally agree with this.

[somashekar]

Originally Posted by KELVIN

Hello Members...

I've received a customer complaint on the printing defects-discoloration on the label.He has requested 8D report because of they have found 3 pcs defect from 10000 pcs ~ 0.03%. See attached Photo.

In fact , this cosmetic defect is not likely to reduce the usability of the product for its intended purpose such as identification.The end user still able to identify the product & defect is not visible under normal viewing inspection guideline.Moreover, our contract only specify AQL 0.65 , not 100% inspection plan or 100% detection service.

In view of the point above, pls advise your thoughts should I reply my customer that pls UAI the parts & would not accept the 8D report due to the defects still acceptable which low consumer risk as well.Note: My customer is a new SQE who taking care for mechanical commodity. I was thinking to educate this customer abt the cost of doing the business.If you pay peanuts,dun expect you got the six sigma vendor , or you must be sick sigma customer.

Thanks for the advise that how you deal with this kind of invalid customer complaint.

Best Regards,
Kelvin

There is something wrong somewhere and believe me, instructions for use is an important requirement per regulatory. More important is the customer to you. A frank discussions across will solve it in a simple way. If I were you, I would give a lot of weightage to customer's perception first then to the actual problem. Customer complaints are problems and they can be solved, but get one up in customer satisfaction. Good luck.

[Wes Bucey]

I'm old and apparently have lost my inspector's eye due to age and encroaching senility. I don't see where the PP slide helps me understand the distinction between requested color and delivered color.

What was the specification on the customer order for the label color? Did it specify a color on a Pantone scale? What is the difference between the order and the nonconforming labels? What inspection system does the customer use to make the determination? What does the supplier use? Did they agree (Contract Review!) on how to inspect? Was color gradation one of the critical characteristics? What is the cost difference between full-fledged root cause investigation and CA report versus saying, "Oops, sorry! Let me rebate the cost of the nonconforming labels from this shipment and I will add an inspection step to assure no miscolored labels reach you on future deliveries/orders." ?

As others have written, EVERY nonconformance does not necessarily require a full root cause and corrective action process, but bureaucrats within organizations are not normally allowed discretion on gray areas and everything must be black and white (like kindergartens expelling students for bringing rubber "Pirate's of the Caribbean" swords to school as part of a Zero Tolerance policy.) If such is the case with this customer, it might be better to suck it up on this instance, but ensure ALL future contracts contain exculpatory clauses about non-cost-effective re-inspections and root cause/corrective action investigations and reports.

[Manix]

I would agree with the majority of points so far, but do be careful in terming a customer complaint "Invalid". The "Voice of your Customer" is letting you know something is not as they were expecting and although it may appear trivial, it is as valid as any other comment the customer makes.

Your problem may well be easily fixed, but somewhere in your system there may well be an issue in terms of either predicted the failure, preventing it and/or protecting your customer from it (I have swallowed a GM drill down training manual today), but as you have said, contracted acceptance values, although "old hat", may well be your acceptable defence.

Finally, just learn from it. It may cost but what savings can you make from the added knowledge of investigating the issue.

Although it is important to appease the customer, shallow gestures rarely work in enhancing reputation. Be grateful you have this added in sight into your customers expectations, it takes the guesswork and therefore risk out of your process if followed up.

[Jim Wynne]

Originally Posted by Manix

I would agree with the majority of points so far, but do be careful in terming a customer complaint "Invalid". The "Voice of your Customer" is letting you know something is not as they were expecting and although it may appear trivial, it is as valid as any other comment the customer makes.

Your problem may well be easily fixed, but somewhere in your system there may well be an issue in terms of either predicted the failure, preventing it and/or protecting your customer from it (I have swallowed a GM drill down training manual today), but as you have said, contracted acceptance values, although "old hat", may well be your acceptable defence.

Finally, just learn from it. It may cost but what savings can you make from the added knowledge of investigating the issue.

Although it is important to appease the customer, shallow gestures rarely work in enhancing reputation. Be grateful you have this added in sight into your customers expectations, it takes the guesswork and therefore risk out of your process if followed up.

It's easy to agree in general with all of this, but what's missing is that the reality of the situation is probably not what it appears. "The customer" is not a single entity with opinions, perceptions and inviolable standards. The customer is an amalgam of people who might very well have different opinions, perceptions and standards, depending on who you talk to, and in what situation.

In this case, it's quite possible that an inspector or operator noticed what he/she felt might be a problem, and rejected the parts, with documentation. Thus begins a chain of overly-constrained decisions: "ISO says" we need to send these back to the supplier, and open a CAR. No one is allowed to look at the situation rationally. The supplier QA person, who is probably already overburdened with what might be charitably characterized as "non value-added" tasks, realizes that (A) the specified requirements haven't actually been breached; (B) there is no possible cost-effective preventive action that can be taken, and (C) he can't reason with the customer.

Sometimes the "Voice of the Customer" is babbling incoherently, or making patently unreasonable demands. Customers need to explicitly tell their suppliers what's required, and not invoke artificial "corrective" measures when what they get is what they asked for.