Do we need to maintain Records of Internal Supplier Evaluation per 7.4.1?

[samsung]

ISO 9001 clause 7.4.1 stipulates:

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

Now company 'A' receives supplies of its major raw material from its captive mines and produces a product which company 'B' receives for further processing. 'A' is the parent unit of company 'B'. No transaction of payment whatsoever is made between the two.

Does the requirement for keeping supplier evaluation record still apply to both the organizations? Both the organizations are certified to ISO 9001.

 

[ScottK]

ISO 9001 clause 7.4.1 stipulates:


Now company 'A' receives supplies of it's major raw material from its captive mines and produces a product which company 'B' receives for further processing. 'A' is the parent unit of company 'B'. No transaction of payment whatsoever is made between the two.

Does the requirement for keeping supplier evaluation record still applies to both the organization. Both the organizations are certified to ISO 9001.

I've seen guidances that say a "supplier" is something outside of the organization's QMS.
Othewise registrars could have a hey day writing up lack of controls on internal suppliers.

 

[Duke Okes]

ISO 9001 clause 7.4.1 stipulates:
Now company 'A' receives supplies of it's major raw material from its captive mines and produces a product which company 'B' receives for further processing. 'A' is the parent unit of company 'B'. No transaction of payment whatsoever is made between the two.
Does the requirement for keeping supplier evaluation record still applies to both the organization. Both the organizations are certified to ISO 9001.

The criteria may be that it is mandated by HQ, and the evaluation indicate that it is still mandated. That would cover.

 

[SteelMaiden]

The criteria may be that it is mandated by HQ, and the evaluation indicate that it is still mandated. That would cover.

I've had to do this, but I always made sure that if we were receiving sub-par quality, service or delivery that I recorded the problem and let the "supplier" know.

 

[AndyN]

I'd question why, if one is the HQ and the other simply a plant, why there were two registrations! If B supplies other customers, then B is a supplier to A, as well, independent of if they get paid. They still 'supply' raw materials. Another way of looking at it is if A can get the materials from somewhere else. The fact is, A has to protect itself from B's poor quality and how do they do that other than to feedback as if B is a supplier.

It has nothing to do with CBs having a 'heyday'...maybe there are controls lacking! It's not unusual, in my experience to tolerate sub-par quality because 'no money changed hands'. Yeah, right!

 

[Duke Okes]

Note that while there may not be any direct exchange of cash for invoice, there is likely to be an internal accounting transfer between the two organizations.

 

[arios]

Refer to the attached posted ISO interpretations, in particular the one with reference # 046 which relates to clause 7.4.1. and their related records

http://www.tc176.org/pdf/PostedInterpretationsTableAug16_06.pdf

 

[samsung]

Note that while there may not be any direct exchange of cash for invoice, there is likely to be an internal accounting transfer between the two organizations.

Yes, the internal transfer is duly accounted for. Company 'B' is located off site & registered separately.

 

[samsung]

Refer to the attached posted ISO interpretations, in particular the one with reference # 046 which relates to clause 7.4.1. and their related records

http://www.tc176.org/pdf/PostedInterpretationsTableAug16_06.pdf

According to RFI 046, records of supplier evaluation are required whereas per RFI 042, it's a sort of 'purchasing' even though no monetary transaction is made between the two parties.

Still I can't conclude if any of the two or both the organizations need to maintain records of supplier evaluation?

ISO 9000:2005 has the following definition:

3.3.6
supplier
organization (3.3.1) or person that provides a product (3.4.2)
EXAMPLE Producer, distributor, retailer or vendor of a product, or provider of a service or information.
NOTE 1 A supplier can be internal or external to the organization.
NOTE 2 In a contractual situation, a supplier is sometimes called “contractor”.

 

[samsung]

RFI 042 says 'Yes' to the following query:

Do the requirements of Clause 7.4, Purchasing, also apply to products that are acquired without any payment being made?

But sometimes it seems unreasonable to apply the requirements in respect of certain freely available 'prodcuts' such as air (ambient) which forms part of 'input' for various processes & equipments such as fans and furnaces. How can one consider 'supplier' evaluation in such cases?