I did not know where to generate this thread. Reasoned that I ran into this situation during the follow-up of a Nonconformance Report (NCR) - a kind of spot audit. There were a number of issues dealing with our procurement, engineering, and inspection processes, but the Materials Manager and Purchasing Manager think that I am not being reasonable with the procurement issues. [In reality all the managers think that I am unreasonable concerning this procurement and inspection activity!] The PO was to a particular supplier (Name - Address in Dallas, TX) , it had multiple line items, and "Certs Required" at the end of the PO. The packing slip was headed with the Conglomerate (Name - Address in Victoria BC) and a source (Name - Address in Rogers, AR). The packing list indicated that a Certification of Inspection would be with the product, and a Certification of Compliance for Material. We only received a Material Certification with the product and it had a different name than that on the PO or Packing Slip in Rogers, AR. To top it off - the product Name/Number and Description is not the same on all three documents.
My points are:
1) just stating "Certs Required" is not specific enough - as evidenced by the packing list listing two types - but only received a Material Certification.
2) Who is the Supplier of the product - The Conglomerate or the entity where the PO goes, or the entity where the product comes from, or the entity where the Material Certification comes from (ALL Different Names and addresses)?
How would an ISO-9001 registration auditor handle this confusion?
Thanks,
Doug
My points are:
1) just stating "Certs Required" is not specific enough - as evidenced by the packing list listing two types - but only received a Material Certification.
2) Who is the Supplier of the product - The Conglomerate or the entity where the PO goes, or the entity where the product comes from, or the entity where the Material Certification comes from (ALL Different Names and addresses)?
How would an ISO-9001 registration auditor handle this confusion?
Thanks,
Doug
I hope this never applies to any of you, but I was witness in the early 90's to a supplier who Xeroxed a 4 year old material cert time after time and shipped it as documentation with EVERY batch of 12L14 steel he sent out, regardless of where he had obtained the 12L14 stock he used for the order. When I questioned the practice, he replied, "Hey, man! 12L14 is 12L14 and those jerks in receiving only look to see there is a cert. So what if I used an Inland Steel cert when the actual steel came from a broker who got it as an overstock from a Brazilian mill?"