Customer Requirements - AS9120B Audit Finding

[QualityStandardsGirl]

I created a form to use to document Contract Review prior to acceptance, using a Cross Functional Team to perform it.

I will pass this information on to my supervisor!!

 

[doctall41]

I will pass this information on to my supervisor!!

see attached. View attachment QMS-823-F01 Contract Review Rev 01 11-10-17.xlsx

 

[AndyN]

see attached. View attachment 20198

Is this checklist used at quoting or when an order is received, or both?

 

[doctall41]

Is this checklist used at quoting or when an order is received, or both?

We use it when an order is received

 

[AndyN]

We use it when an order is received

As a professional sales person, I'm really worried that many of these questions are being asked when you have an order in your hand! Aren't the same things asked when quoting?

 

[doctall41]

As a professional sales person, I'm really worried that many of these questions are being asked when you have an order in your hand! Aren't the same things asked when quoting?

Yes, we have people involved in the estimating process who have this same expertise. We just don't use the form for that part of the process. We probably should, but don't. The questions are getting asked and answered, but not documented on a form.

 

[AndyN]

Yes, we have people involved in the estimating process who have this same expertise. We just don't use the form for that part of the process. We probably should, but don't. The questions are getting asked and answered, but not documented on a form.

Might I suggest that you formalize the use at the RFQ stage? THAT's your record! Your auditor is not understanding that it's NOT "Contract Review" any more. That's the waaaay old standard which, as we know, had to be changed to "Review of Requirements, blah, blah, blah"... for many reasons.

In practical terms, it's too late to be answering "no" to many of those items once the contract has been awarded to you. ISO now recognizes that and the terminology was changed.

 

[doctall41]

Might I suggest that you formalize the use at the RFQ stage? THAT's your record! Your auditor is not understanding that it's NOT "Contract Review" any more. That's the waaaay old standard which, as we know, had to be changed to "Review of Requirements, blah, blah, blah"... for many reasons.

In practical terms, it's too late to be answering "no" to many of those items once the contract has been awarded to you. ISO now recognizes that and the terminology was changed.

I agree that by the time you receive the contract, it's too late to answer NO to any of the questions. BUT,
AS9100D
8.2.3.1e covers "contract or order requirements differing from those previously expressed";
and later down the page talks again about "ensuring that contract or order requirements differing from those previously defined are resolved"

I think the best method would be to do it during estimating, then follow up upon receipt of contract to see if there are any differences.

Thanks for your input!

 

[AndyN]

I agree that by the time you receive the contract, it's too late to answer NO to any of the questions. BUT,
AS9100D
8.2.3.1e covers "contract or order requirements differing from those previously expressed";
and later down the page talks again about "ensuring that contract or order requirements differing from those previously defined are resolved"

I think the best method would be to do it during estimating, then follow up upon receipt of contract to see if there are any differences.

Thanks for your input!

Correct, and that was added, because the revision of the part print, quantity or delivery requirements might change. That's the place to catch those and resolve them. You may find that a tweak to your (excellent) form, which identifies the items reviewed at quoting and those at order entry with a sign off is a much more effective method. It burns me when CB auditors make throw away comments (like in the OP's case), when often, organizations have a perfectly good system in place... and they didn't see it that way and you don't have to create anything extra!

 

[doctall41]

Correct, and that was added, because the revision of the part print, quantity or delivery requirements might change. That's the place to catch those and resolve them. You may find that a tweak to your (excellent) form, which identifies the items reviewed at quoting and those at order entry with a sign off is a much more effective method.

Andy, after reading your comments and giving it some thought apart from the CB auditor and her comments, I see where you are exactly right. I should be using a revision of this form during the RFQ process, then follow up upon receipt of order with final review. Thanks for opening my eyes. Doctall41