Raising NCRs for Supplier Errors

C

ChrisDanger

Hi,

I work for an engineering company that design, and manage the manufacture of, various custom items. We sometimes pick up errors at our suppliers. For example, they are supposed to manufacture and paint something according to our drawings, but during a visit to their premises we find they have maybe painted incorrectly, or assembled something with the incorrect orientation.

What would be the most appropriate action to take if we want to formalize these errors and request them to correct them? We've raised NCRs in these instances, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it.

Thanks.
 
T

t.PoN

Re: Raising NCRs for supplier errors?

I think you are on the right track. you should raise an NCR and you should have system to track these error to reflect them on the supplier evaluation.

You just need to agree on how to follow up on closing these NCR.

does your supplier agreement has arrangement for handling NC?
 

somashekar

Leader
Admin
Hi,

I work for an engineering company that design, and manage the manufacture of, various custom items. We sometimes pick up errors at our suppliers. For example, they are supposed to manufacture and paint something according to our drawings, but during a visit to their premises we find they have maybe painted incorrectly, or assembled something with the incorrect orientation.

What would be the most appropriate action to take if we want to formalize these errors and request them to correct them? We've raised NCRs in these instances, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it.

Thanks.
Yap. Just make sure that the NCR resolution is not meant to be entirely an activity of the supplier and you just press for a NCR response.
A study to assess if your inputs have been correctly communicated and likewise understood by the supplier will perhaps give you surprising outputs. The corrective actions could be at either ends, or both ends.
 
C

ChrisDanger

Re: Raising NCRs for supplier errors?

Thanks for the replies.

You just need to agree on how to follow up on closing these NCR.

This is our current problem. Our client has a problem with the fact that they haven't been closed out correctly. We don't really have a system in place for incorporating these into our Supplier Evaluation process as yet (our system is quite new - we are currently in between initial certification audits) so nothing has really been done about it. How would this normally be handled?

Thanks.
 
P

PaulJSmith

Re: Raising NCRs for supplier errors?

Out of curiosity, is your supplier actually shipping non-conforming product, or are you just finding it while it is still in-process at their facility?
 

John Broomfield

Leader
Super Moderator
Hi,

I work for an engineering company that design, and manage the manufacture of, various custom items. We sometimes pick up errors at our suppliers. For example, they are supposed to manufacture and paint something according to our drawings, but during a visit to their premises we find they have maybe painted incorrectly, or assembled something with the incorrect orientation.

What would be the most appropriate action to take if we want to formalize these errors and request them to correct them? We've raised NCRs in these instances, but I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it.

Thanks.

ChrisDanger,

It would appear that your supplier re-selection criteria need upgrading to include:

A. Able to manage quality.

Right now they rely on you to manage their quality re-actively instead of them doing it for themselves proactively.

Unless your supplier has an effective management system these product nonconformities will continue to plague your relationship.

So, issue the NCR to the supplier and a CAR to yourselves for improving supplier performance.

John
 

Big Jim

Admin
You do need something that provides tight and consistent follow up. Lack of follow up indicates that you may not really care.

Make it an exercise of help, not discipline (punishment). Most people really want to do the right thing, but sometimes they need help in understanding just what the right thing is.
 

Wes Bucey

Prophet of Profit
First, those of us suffering through snow and deep freeze in Midwestern winter in the USA will sympathize and empathize when I say: "I'm willing to come down to Capetown for a month or so - no fee - just pay my expenses of travel, food, and lodging to help you resolve this issue." ;)

Second, I agree the issue is not your NCR, but the system your organization uses to select suppliers and communicate requirements for the materials and their fabrication to meet your end product requirements.

The BASICS:
  1. the products you want are YOUR design, so that means collaborating with a supplier BEFORE the contract is written to assure both parties understand the requirements and the methods used to achieve such requirements. This may mean every supplier needs to be aware of how its product's form, fit, and function will interact with the products made by the other suppliers.
  2. in such cases, a supplier is chosen, then a price is negotiated, versus sending drawings out asking for bids.
  3. the supplier's Control Plan should be determined and agreed between parties BEFORE any work begins (a control plan may be as detailed as necessary to assure the finished product will meet requirements. This usually means a FMEA (Failure Mode & Effects Analysis), maybe a mockup (scaled or full size) on a 3D printer, specification of inspection instruments and gages, inspection plan (both in-process and final), qualifications of operators, etc., etc.)

Large organizations have a SQE (Supplier Quality Engineer) who works hand-in-glove with suppliers to assure everyone is on the same page to produce a quality product to meet the customer requirements. I understand from the relative newness of your operation that it isn't large enough for a full-time SQE, so one of your more knowledgeable designer/engineers will have to handle that function on a part-time basis.

Remember this, even if it IS "rocket science," the process of going from design to finished product is relatively straightforward. The primary criterion is that everyone understands and agrees on the requirements BEFORE wasting time or money on making products that do not meet the requirements.
 
C

ChrisDanger

Re: Raising NCRs for supplier errors?

Thanks again for your comments.

It seems two things are coming out here. First we need to refine the supplier selection or re-selection criteria to at least include their ability to manage quality. And on investigation of each NCR we need to assess whether we have correctly communicated the requirements and whether they have seemingly understood them.

Out of curiosity, is your supplier actually shipping non-conforming product, or are you just finding it while it is still in-process at their facility?

Actually, it was a bit of both on this last project. :mg:

Wes, we are currently suffering with heat! It was 34?C (68?F) on Monday. Slightly "cooler" today, but yes, I would much rather be here than in the snow.
 

Wes Bucey

Prophet of Profit
Re: Raising NCRs for supplier errors?

Thanks again for your comments.

It seems two things are coming out here. First we need to refine the supplier selection or re-selection criteria to at least include their ability to manage quality. And on investigation of each NCR we need to assess whether we have correctly communicated the requirements and whether they have seemingly understood them.



Actually, it was a bit of both on this last project. :mg:

Wes, we are currently suffering with heat! It was 34?C (68?F) on Monday. Slightly "cooler" today, but yes, I would much rather be here than in the snow.
34 degrees Celsius is warmer than 68 degrees Fahrenheit
34?C = 93.200?F (I could loosen my necktie!)

In my town in northern Illinois, close to the Wisconsin border,
Feb 4, 2014 7:29 AM
As reported at: Libertyville HS
Temp
11.6?F
(11.6 degree Fahrenheit = -11.3333333 degree Celsius -- that's BELOW ZERO CELSIUS -- note the minus sign!)

The telephone is a wonderful tool -- USE IT! Take a look at this old post of mine where I describe the process from the supplier's point of view, but there's ample evidence it works from the customer's end as well:
By-the-by: producing the first article (according to aerospace standards) is a big expense in a machine shop. It has to be done on the very equipment, using the same tooling and programming as for production. Nobody in this day and age is going to the expense of producing a first article (versus a prototype) and keeping the machinery on standby until the FAI is approved without a contract - it just doesn't make economic sense in a contract machining environment.
Instead of sitting down to quote the part, we turned traditional contract machining marketing methods upside down. We picked up the phone and called the customer with questions like:

Do you currently use this part?
How many do you use a year?
Do you currently make it yourself or buy it?
Why are you seeking a quote?
(If the chooch said anything remotely resembling, "Just checking the market." We replied, "Sorry, we only deal with folks who need the product. No quote. Goodbye!")

If it was an existing part, the one answer we wanted to hear was that they were unhappy with their current supply, either for price or quality. We then went into our concurrent engineering mode and asked them to elaborate. If it was a quality problem, we asked them to send us samples of the nonconforming parts with their inspection sheets so we could "diagnose" the problems. Our whole stance was to position ourselves as "partner" first, before WE ever quoted.

If price was the issue, we'd ask, "How much do you need to buy it for?" Then we said, "That might be doable. If not, we'll tell you straight out that it isn't. If we suggested some design changes which would make it less expensive to manufacture, but still have same fit and function, would you be able to work with that? Are there mating parts which would be affected? Can you send us the assembly drawing and the drawings for the mating parts so we can look at that as part of our analysis?"

Usually, by the time we were finished with the introductory give and take, we had several phone calls, talked to design engineers and manufacturing managers. Soon, the problem of "price" was the furthest thing from the mind of anybody at the prospect's organization. We were busy establishing ourselves as the "go to" folks.

If it was a new part, never made before, we asked about potential real use (we didn't quote a blind spread of quantities and price breaks.) We asked about mating parts, end use, etc. Finally we asked the big question, "What do you think you need to buy this for to be able to have a marketable product yourself?" Then we went into our pitch, "That might be doable . . ."

If we spent as much as an hour qualifying a prospect, it was much more cost efficient than sending quotes out on the fax like oysters spawning in the ocean. We had names, extension numbers and "rapport" established. We would call up before we sent out a formal quote with the oral one, telling the recipient to go to his fax machine and pick it up, stay on the line and then tell us if it came through clearly. Our quotes NEVER got lost in the shuffle. We asked for a target date when he would have the answer and the order. We followed up, eager to help if there was a glitch at their end.

By our third year, our regular customers would call us first, ask if we had time to look at a drawing, then send it over by fax while WE waited for it to arrive. Often, they said, (before we went into our interrogation):

We currently use this part.
We use ____ thousand a year.
We've been buying it from John Doe, tell us if we're getting a good deal or not. We currently pay $_____.
We're asking you to look at it - if you can come close on the price, we'd rather deal with a known quantity like you. Sometimes these guys act like they don't need us as a customer.
What more do you need to know?

Sometimes, just sometimes, the plan works! Our plan was for our customers to think of us as partners with whom they could share confidential information. It worked because we never betrayed the confidence. Many times, we'd tell them they were already getting a good deal. If the quality was a minor problem, we'd offer to consult with their current supplier to help him overcome the obstacle to good quality. Our pitch to the "competitor" would be that we were partners with them in satisfying the customer. A happy, satisfied customer was easier for everyone to deal with. We sometimes used these "competitors" to outsource some of our overflow once we got their quality systems up to snuff. Our point was, "If you have similar machines, you should be able to do similar work. Let us help you tackle the quality and service issues."

This was probably way more than you needed to know, but I am passionate about running a business smoothly and profitably. In my mind the strategies involved in Business Management Systems and Quality Management Systems are interchangeable. They all revolve around making yourself indispensible to your customers.

If there are still contract machining companies out there who do fly "on spec," they probably need to read and think about the method I used in MY contract machining company to get a contract.
 
Top Bottom