#1
AS9100 Rev. C 8.5.2 Corrective Action: A documented procedures shall be established... b) determining the cause of nonconformities, and g) flowing down corrective action requirements to a supplier when it is determined that the supplier is responsible...

I have seen a trend where the customer sends out a SCAR (often with incomplete or erroneous information), and during the process of root cause analysis, I find the root cause to be the customer's fault.

Example: Customer orders a part with the part designation 'XX' on their PO (no Revision). 'XX' only exists on rev. A, for on rev. B they obsoleted that configuration. Our acknowledgement states order for Rev. A.

Customer receives the part and inspects to Rev. B. Finds the shipment nonconforming. Sends a SCAR before doing any sort of internal investigation.

I read the requirements of AS9100 (or at least the intent), as the NCR originating party must b) determine the cause, THEN g) IF the supplier is part of the root cause, SCAR the supplier.

The trend seems to be to send the SCAR first. I have often determined the root cause to be a customer error, then have to fight to get the NCR voided (and our supplier rating revised).

It would be really nice if the CB's out there would recognize and correct this behavior!

To add to this, again I mentioned the SCAR's with incomplete information. I notice that once we send our product out to the Aerospace world (distributors and primes), lot containment is often lost. Again, CB's, look at the NCR reports being sent to the suppliers. If they do not have traceability information, please issue an NCR!

Too much time is being wasted chasing phantoms that should have been found by the complaining party!

I would love to hear some input on this.

Thanks,
Eric
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#2
Re: Corrective Action responsibility

It would be really nice if the CB's out there would recognize and correct this behavior!

I would love to hear some input on this.
Firstly, the "infringing" customer would have to be certified to a QMS standard and you would have to know who their CB is.

Secondly, you would have to provide the feedback to your customer's CB about the dysfunction at your customer. Now, doing that does not come risk free. Your customer might not appreciate the fact that you have complained to their CB about their QMS. So, tread carefully.

Thirdly, you have to realize that AS9100 expectations in terms of satisfaction typically flow downhill, from customers to suppliers. The ISO 9000 principle of mutually beneficial relationships does not exist in the ISO 9001 nor AS9100 standard.

Coming back to what YOU can do, can your order review process be more robust and flag the problem BEFORE the order is accepted, like the standard requires?
 
#3
Re: Corrective Action responsibility

Hi,

Wow, fast response.

Firstly, the "infringing" customer would have to be certified to a QMS standard
All parties described are AS9100 companies. I have no interest in tattling. This is a job the CB's need to do as part of being the 'process owner'. :)

Your customer might not appreciate the fact that you have complained to their CB about their QMS. So, tread carefully.
Tread not at all. I have not named my customer in this thread, nor will I. I guess I am interested in seeing if others have observed this phenomenon.

Thirdly, you have to realize that AS9100 expectations in terms of satisfaction typically flow downhill, from customers to suppliers.
During recent audits, we were written up for not being current on customer quality requirements (docs the customers provide, revision controlled). It was explained to me that it is our responsibility to 'seek' these requirements, and that 'flow down' wasn't a requirement that is enforced, more the "seek upstream", so not unlike your last comment:

Coming back to what YOU can do, can your order review process be more robust and flag the problem BEFORE the order is accepted, like the standard requires?
In the example I cited, our customer choose NOT to use revisions on their purchase orders (so, CB where is the write up on "Configuration Management"?), and then accepted our acknowledgement WITH the revision OTHER than what they claimed they wanted AFTER order completion. Not sure what I can do with my process to make it more robust....

[JOKE]"This job would be easy if it were not for customers, suppliers, auditors, and co-workers."[/END JOKE]
 

Top Bottom