New supplier = new article number?

[Dudes]

For a given packaging element, we are in the process of changing supplier. The specifications remain identical and the new element is validated.

There is dissent about the internal article number the new element should have.

Some say it should have a different article number as it is from a different supplier and it is not known if the quality is as good as the old one (it is however way over the norm and our specs are fully fulfilled...)

As far as I am concerned, it should keep the same article number. The description of the article doesn't say anything about the supplier. It just says what it is. The element still have the same composition (layers incl. thickness) and the same use. As an example, I'd say that we wouldn't have 2 article numbers if we were to have two suppliers for ethanol (same grade).

Is any of us right or is it more a philosophocal question that should be discussed and decided upon by the management?

Sorry if this is posted in the wrong forum, I wasn't sure where it belongs. Moderators, please feel free to move it if you deem appropriate...

[JoCam]

Hi Dudes,

Part of your assessment of a new Supplier should include their ability to supply to your specification, just as your existing Supplier does. I see no reason to change the article number. If this is the case, you should already have at least two different article numbers for the same product, one for the existing Supplier and one for your alternative Supplier. This would be very confusing.

[JoCam]

Your Suppliers should be controlled in a different manner. We have an Approved Suppliers List, held as an excel spreadsheet, which clearly shows the current approved Suppliers and the alternatives to be used in an emergency. This list is checked both before an order is placed and on receipt of the delivery.

[ScottK]

Originally Posted by Dudes

For a given packaging element, we are in the process of changing supplier. The specifications remain identical and the new element is validated.

There is dissent about the internal article number the new element should have.

Some say it should have a different article number as it is from a different supplier and it is not known if the quality is as good as the old one (it is however way over the norm and our specs are fully fulfilled...)

As far as I am concerned, it should keep the same article number. The description of the article doesn't say anything about the supplier. It just says what it is. The element still have the same composition (layers incl. thickness) and the same use. As an example, I'd say that we wouldn't have 2 article numbers if we were to have two suppliers for ethanol (same grade).

Is any of us right or is it more a philosophocal question that should be discussed and decided upon by the management?

Sorry if this is posted in the wrong forum, I wasn't sure where it belongs. Moderators, please feel free to move it if you deem appropriate...

could go either way.

My company uses 1" brass bar stock, for example.
We get it from several suppliers who all have their own part numbers but all conform to ASTM B16, 12 foot length, 1" +- .00X" diameter, etc etc.
When it's received into our facilty it all becomes B-1.000-R and is stored by heat number.

On the other hand, we use a lot of o-rings too.
For one o-ring we might have two suppliers. These o-rings can be used interchangeably for finished parts but, because they are from two different suppliers, they are two different compounds that differ chemically even though performance is identical.
So they must have different part numbers.

If the specifications are exactly the same I see no reason not to use the same part number.

If quality is concern I would qualify them first before switching over.

[Dudes]

Thanks Jo for the quick answer!

I do also see no reason to change the number. Of course the supplier was assessed to ensure he could deliver the product fulfilling our specs. It is not a new supplier per se, but a new supplier for this particular product. We have already different products from him and we audited him last year...

As for the supplier control, itis ensured. We have a list of approved supplier in our ERP system which is used for ordering.

[Dudes]

Originally Posted by ScottK

could go either way.

My company uses 1" brass bar stock, for example.
We get it from several suppliers who all have their own part numbers but all conform to ASTM B16, 12 foot length, 1" +- .00X" diameter, etc etc.
When it's received into our facilty it all becomes B-1.000-R and is stored by heat number.

On the other hand, we use a lot of o-rings too.
For one o-ring we might have two suppliers. These o-rings can be used interchangeably for finished parts but, because they are from two different suppliers, they are two different compounds that differ chemically even though performance is identical.
So they must have different part numbers.

If the specifications are exactly the same I see no reason not to use the same part number.

If quality is concern I would qualify them first before switching over.

We've done the qualification, so quality is no concern on my side. This is exactly my reasoning, if the specs are the same, why have 2 part numbers? Of course if they were different (for example different layer thicknesses) I would give them different numbers, even if they are for the same use...

[qusys]

The suggestion is that of not to proliferate with the issuing of many part numbers.
Traceability of the purchased product are assured by means of purchase order as well as via SAP , to make statistics and so on.