Interesting Discussion How to Deal with Suppliers Who Refuse to Complete our ISO Survey?

[dubrizo]

@QC Geek,

Most organizations classify suppliers based on commodity, criticality, spend, safety, risk, etc.

The way I look at is is this: how does what you (vendor) supply impact or potentially effect my (customer) end product?

Using your example: a copy machine, most of the time, is not directly impacting product quality. There are always exceptions to this. Whereas a machine tool has the ability to greatly impact your end product, yield, etc.

 

[optomist1]

note to self.....remember this when the next source selection committee convenes/asks for input....cooperative nature is of great value when working with suppliers. Most firms maintain a supplier matrix....used to evaluate each, and used to compile future bidders list for source packages

 

[QC_geek]

There is a difference. The copy machine is not used to produce product.

A copy machine could be used to print manuals. If the manual has an error, for whatever reason; it's the responsibility of the provider to ensure compliance and not the people they buy from.

My point being, the "supplier" of a product needs to ensure compliance of what THEY build or provide in service.

 

[QC_geek]

@QC Geek,

Most organizations classify suppliers based on commodity, criticality, spend, safety, risk, etc.

The way I look at is is this: how does what you (vendor) supply impact or potentially effect my (customer) end product?

Using your example: a copy machine, most of the time, is not directly impacting product quality. There are always exceptions to this. Whereas a machine tool has the ability to greatly impact your end product, yield, etc.

YES, if the machine is used improperly it can produce a bad output...but just as a car supplier is NOT responsible for how you drive...we are not responsible for how YOU use the equipment.

Once our equipment is installed and signed off...it's theirs to do as they please and completely out of our ability to effect.

Should the equipment fail somehow, it's THEIR responsibility to again verify compliance to their customer.

 

[Al Rosen]

A copy machine could be used to print manuals. If the manual has an error, for whatever reason; it's the responsibility of the provider to ensure compliance and not the people they buy from.

My point being, the "supplier" of a product needs to ensure compliance of what THEY build or provide in service.

And as part of that process they evaluate the relative risk and plan appropriately.

 

[Al Rosen]

YES, if the machine is used improperly it can produce a bad output...but just as a car supplier is NOT responsible for how you drive...we are not responsible for how YOU use the equipment.

Once our equipment is installed and signed off...it's theirs to do as they please and completely out of our ability to effect.

Should the equipment fail somehow, it's THEIR responsibility to again verify compliance to their customer.

When you buy an automobile, you consider the manufacturer's reliability history.

 

[QC_geek]

And as part of that process they evaluate the relative risk and plan appropriately.

OK...so how does that make an equipment supplier part of that equation? They determine whatever RISK via their process...again completely out of our ability to effect change.

BTW...we manage suppliers without the use of a "Survey" and we have thousands.

Product that is used in our equipment is constantly monitored, but we have never (in 16 years doing this) included ANY equipment purchase we've made (and we have hundreds).

The entire point in having an AVL and requesting this information from "Suppliers" is to ensure congruity of product you are typically sampling and you don't need surprises when something shows up and now stops production or worse causes a problem for our customer.

These surveys all focus on ensuring they can rely on that continued congruity...my equipment is singular, not ongoing; subject to improper use...doesn't require a license.

ISO needs a better definition...it's too vague.

 

[Al Rosen]

OK...so how does that make an equipment supplier part of that equation? They determine whatever RISK via their process...again completely out of our ability to effect change.

For example, the customer may want to know that if they need service you will be there in the future. If you don't like filling out the survey don't.

 

[Illek]

Our office equipment vendor is listed as a service provider for repairs we may need and value for service. We have to evaluate services as well as products now but depending on the risk profile of the service we don't request questionnaires from all service providers. Besides that I know we will not get back questionnaires we send out so if we don't get one it just may increase their risk. It doesn't mean the service provider won't ever be used again.

 

[Wes Bucey]

There is a difference. The copy machine is not used to produce product.

Actually, engineers and designers use copiers and printers to produce their work product for distribution as well as computers and (in many cases) fax machines. The quibble is not about the supplier's product, but about ANY change in that product which "may" affect the operation or product of the buyer (form, fit, function, price, training to use, etc.) Every product is unique in the effect a change may have on the buyer's product or operation. Once that is made clear to the supplier, he may be more cooperative. It also means each query to the supplier should be unique - no "one size fits all" questionnaires!