Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL (Approved Vendor List)?

[NikkiQSM]

Hello All -

I have been through alot of customer and registrar audits and one issue that came up was that certain suppliers were not on our AVL. I was told time and time again by my Registrar that any supplier that provides something to the company that could affect the quality of the product should be on our AVL. This is includes calibration services, packaging supplier, etc.

I have 81 suppliers on my AVL.

During the last Management Council Meeting - my GM asked me why I had some many suppliers on the list. I tried to explain, but he said it was over-kill and that the list needed to be cut short.

He said that we should only have to review our top 10 suppliers - whom we purchase the most from.

My re-assessment audit is coming up in a couple months - Does anyone see this as a problem? Obviously we will be using 71 other suppliers who are not going to be on my list anymore!

Any thoughts?

Thanks much!

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

There is no requirement for an approved-vendors list (AVL). The requirements from ISO 9001:2008, 7.4.1 (in part):

The organization shall evaluate and select suppliers based on their ability to supply product in accordance with the organization's requirements. Criteria for selection, evaluation and re-evaluation shall be established.
Records of the results of evaluations and any necessary actions arising from the evaluation shall be maintained.

Your company may have chosen to use an AVL as evidence of supplier selection and evaluation. Nonetheless, you can exercise some control over how the list itself is constituted and the level of control applied to individual suppliers. The level of control for suppliers of stock packaging materials should probably be different from the controls used for suppliers of raw materials used in products, for example. From this perspective the boss seems to be on the right track. Rather than having an AVL, per se, you can determine levels of qualification and control.

 

[treesei]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

AVL is a collection of all suppliers that you have selected using your supplier selection criteria and whose product/service impact the quality of your product. A list of 81 suppliers does not sound so terrible to me.

However, your GM's angle is supplier review. You may only review your top 10, or whatever based on your supplier review criteria.

You may have a supplier that provides some insignificant OTC product once every 2 years. Yes it is an active supplier that you have selected so it should be on the AVL. Do you want to review its performance as you will do with your top 10? Perhaps not.

 

[Big Jim]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

Tell your boss that you have it from good authority that if he imposes that concept he is headed for a crash and burn.

What the standard clearly says is "The organization shall evaluate and select suppliers based on their ability to supply product in accordance with the organization's requirements". There is no provision for a bye because the "list is too long".

You may, however, obtain some relief from how you classify suppliers and apply different levels of control according to how they impact your final product. The standard says: "The type and extent of control applied to the supplier and the purchased product shall be dependent upon the effect of the purchased product on subsequent product realization or the final product".

So you could determine which suppliers are the most critical and refer to them as "Key Suppliers" and apply more frequent attention to them, such as reviewing them annually, and the others, once approved, could be left alone until identified as problematic. If you are properly applying 8.4d and monitoring supplier performance, perhaps with a receiving log, you should be able to see the problem children easily enough.

Ten key suppliers still seems a little thin though.

Other comments are welcome.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

Tell your boss that you have it from good authority that if he imposes that concept he is headed for a crash and burn.

What the standard clearly says is "The organization shall evaluate and select suppliers based on their ability to supply product in accordance with the organization's requirements". There is no provision for a bye because the "list is too long". <snip>

There doesn't need to be a provision for a bye because there's no requirement to have a list.

 

[TPMB4]

Since this is all about product realization then it is the outcome of the evaluation that is more important than how you do it.

In our case we have a very small supplier list that is quite simply the ones we have to use or the ones that contribute most significantly to the majority of the product leaving our site. We ignore bag suppliers, stationary supplier, suppliers of bolts, nuts, screws, oil, etc. Since the approved vendor list is not a requirement of the standard we view it as something to keep some of our customers happy (the ones who audit us and insist we keep one). In these cases they are happy with the way we do it.

Having said that we evaluate all suppliers when we first use them. This evaluation can include external testing of their product through to just trying them out to see if they are suitable for the process that needs their product. Once they are "qualified" they become one of our suppliers but with constant monitoring of their product. If they have any defects we sort that out and if there is repeated issues we will move to other suppliers if we can. Unfortunately being a lower automotive tier (2 or 3 depending on customer) we do get suppliers hoisted on us despite issues and concerns.

I think the main requirements are that you determine the supplier is capable of supplying goods to the required quality (on time, no defects, etc.) and then you monitor them to ensure that does not change. Then I suppose you have other systems in place to trigger actions if their quality drops off. I don't think a comprehensive AVL is necessary for that but perhaps I am missing something.

 

[Big Jim]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

There doesn't need to be a provision for a bye because there's no requirement to have a list.

Your earlier post must have come up as I was posting. I didn't see it before posting and immediately ran off to start my day.

You are absolutely correct, there is no requirement for an ASL/AVL according to the standard.

However, the need for a list does not absolve them of not bothering to approve some of their suppliers. They still don't get a bye because the boss wants a shorter list.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

Your earlier post must have come up as I was posting. I didn't see it before posting and immediately ran off to start my day.

You are absolutely correct, there is no requirement for an ASL/AVL according to the standard.

However, the need for a list does not absolve them of not bothering to approve some of their suppliers. They still don't get a bye because the boss wants a shorter list.

I agree.

 

[bear4489]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

Great information guys but one thing I couldn't quite nail down...
In our most recent audit we were informed that we needed to include "supply houses" (MSC, Grainger, McMaster Carr, etc.) to our Approved Vendor list. Are any of you doing this and if so, what might be the ideal way to approve them?
Many thanks

 

[treesei]

Re: Which Suppliers Belong on my AVL?

Great information guys but one thing I couldn't quite nail down...
In our most recent audit we were informed that we needed to include "supply houses" (MSC, Grainger, McMaster Carr, etc.) to our Approved Vendor list. Are any of you doing this and if so, what might be the ideal way to approve them?
Many thanks

Does "supply house" mean a supplier of many generic parts and you order from a catalog? If so, we put them on the AVL as long as the parts impact the product quality. Our vendor approval is risk-based. Purchased goods are classified into several risk classes and the approval path for each class is specified. The design engineer is the person to classify the parts. Quality, Purchasing, and Engineering work together to come up with approval criteria. In most times, those suppliers fall into a low-risk category (we buy many custom-made parts). Like people said, AVL is not a requirement; but if you do have one, you don't want to leave holes. It is like a positive list. However, the ideal way may be YOUR way. Only you can make your system work for you.