How is the in-coming quality department viewed by internal support processes

[WALLACE]

In view of the continual improvement aspect of the ISO 9001 standard and 9004 benchmark; how is the in-coming quality department viewed by internal support processes and vendor supply representatives.
This department does seem to be an anomaly regarding actual validity. If suppliers are conforming to supply specs and contracts, the in-coming quality department may be seen as a mere step back to checking out the suppliers capabilities of certifying parts control.
Hey, I know there's more to it than this thread aludes to, just trying to get some response and feedback.
Wallace.

 

[mvsmani]

In a P-D-C-A cycle,

The receiving department can be taken as 'C'.

Where as others like prevention plan and all others as 'P'

The implementation of the planned arrangements, ie vendor processing as 'D'

Based on the feedback from Receiving the C/P actions taken as 'A'

as per the ISO9001 angle the receiving can be taken as clause 8.

ie monitoring the results.

The only thing is wise use of Receiving Inspection. ie it should be used to monitor the performance of suppliers, just not work as extension of supplier final inspection and 100% seggrgation etc.

 

[WALLACE]

The only thing is wise use of Receiving Inspection. ie it should be used to monitor the performance of suppliers, just not work as extension of supplier final inspection and 100% seggrgation etc.

Your right,
The problem with in-coming quality departments though (For the most part) are; they tend to fall back to the days of full inspection of in-coming materials.
Being realistic, it's clear the in-coming quality dept, is indeed an integral part of the quality system. Well it is at my location "that's for sure".
The very existence of the (Very busy) in-coming quality department at my location, indicates the failures of suppliers to validate their PDCA processes regarding certified parts control. I see it every day, supplied parts that are either incomplete (In supplied #'s), outwith spec or damaged when received at a work station.
Many gaps of course yet, it does seem that an in-coming quality department is essential in this real world.
Wallace.

 

[cncmarine]

Wallace, it sounds more like a problem in your purchasing area.

Rec. Inspection is outdated. The only time that it is allowed in any of my systems is when the customer pays for it.


May I suggest developing a Supplier Certification System.

 

[WALLACE]

Wallace, it sounds more like a problem in your purchasing area.Rec. Inspection is outdated. The only time that it is allowed in any of my systems is when the customer pays for it.May I suggest developing a Supplier Certification System.

cncmarine,
Thanks for the feedback to this thread.
My location is a Ford production assmbly plant. The reason I started this thread is to, draw out the realities relating to in-coming, controlled and contractural quality specs.
A supplier certification system is in place "Q1". Here's the stark reality, for all of the excellent systems that are in place to control quality variables relating to (In this case) supplied quality, there's more "out of control" measures than acceptable levels of supplied quality.
The in-coming quality department (As a whole) by nature of its existence, fire fights and police suppliers on a full time basis.
Suppiers obviously pay for verified NC's yet, IMO FWIW, the dog is just chasing his tail most of the time.
Yeah, it's frustrating to say the least. My involvement isn't with in-coming quality yet, I do often cross paths with suppliers who are either useless to the nth degree or are too small to handle the demands of Q1.
Wallace.

 

[cncmarine]

Having spent many years in a Tier two system, I would have to agree with you. (regarding CA's)

The overall PPAP system is a solid system. But the problem is with resources of tier two and tier three.

But I will say in defense of those vendors is the "big threes" constant 5% cost reduction program.

In summary...you get what you pay for

 

[WALLACE]

But I will say in defense of those vendors is the "big threes" constant 5% cost reduction program.In summary...you get what you pay for

Yeah,
The 5% is almost anathema!!
I totally agree, you do indeed get what you pay for.
Wallace.

 

[Caster]

Confirms what I thought

cncmarine,
Thanks for the feedback to this thread.
My location is a Ford production assmbly plant. The reason I started this thread is to, draw out the realities relating to in-coming, controlled and contractural quality specs.
A supplier certification system is in place "Q1". Here's the stark reality, for all of the excellent systems that are in place to control quality variables relating to (In this case) supplied quality, there's more "out of control" measures than acceptable levels of supplied quality.
The in-coming quality department (As a whole) by nature of its existence, fire fights and police suppliers on a full time basis.
Suppiers obviously pay for verified NC's yet, IMO FWIW, the dog is just chasing his tail most of the time.
Yeah, it's frustrating to say the least. My involvement isn't with in-coming quality yet, I do often cross paths with suppliers who are either useless to the nth degree or are too small to handle the demands of Q1.
Wallace.

Wallace

We are working hard to be Q1 certified. As you say it is a fine system. If we did most of it, you should see very few problems from us as a supplier.

But as you say, many suppliers are Q1 certified but are still "useless to the nth degree".

I wonder how they ever passed the Q1 assessment in the first place. I suspect that their price was so low that your own procurement people forced them on you over protest from the Q1 folks. Now you have to deal with the result, while purchasing enjoys their bonus for meeting cost reduction targets.

On my cynical days, I think QS/TS/Q1 and so on were just a way for purchasing to put the pesky upstarts from Quality back in their place and go back to what they know best - buying on price instead of cost.

Caster

 

[WALLACE]

Well,
I guess certifying to any system has its good and not so good aspects.
Q1 while being a decent system of supplier certification has, with all systems, gaps that have to be assessed and closed.
Dr Deming would have been all over the Q1 certification process, and the STA's, well that's another thread.
Wallace.