Incoming (Receiving) Inspection Procedure - Please Review

[MickyQuality]

Good morning,

I have to write a procedure concerning incoming inspection. I start quality in october 2011 and still studing it in school.
For my internship I am working for a company specialized in electric motors for automotives. We have 3 plants in Europe + the HeadQuarter.

You will find the procedure in attachment (only instructions).

In that procedure PQA means product quality assurance and is related to deliveries which are not subjected to inc. inspection. But an annual audit is required.

NON PQA status is related to deliveries which have to be inspected.
The reference to inspect is chosen each working day and randomly.
The inspection is done by performing a direct confrontation between documentation (test results, production records...) issued by suppliers vs. requirements (control plan).

When an incident happens, the delivery gets or keep its NON PQA status and will get back PQA status after a probationary period without incidents.

I would like to have your opinion about the procedure.
We are working "just in time" so we can not stock deliveries and wait for suppliers documentation. We have to release them to production. I am pretty sure that some suppliers will probaly take more than 1 week to send required documentation.
What can I do to manage this problem?

I hope someone will be kind to answer me, i have already post on a previous topic without answers

Thank you

 

[Stijloor]

A Quick Bump!

Can someone help Micky?

Thank you very much!!

Stijloor.

 

[MickyQuality]

Thanks Stijloor,

Here is what I am thinking about:

-Concerning new references, at the moment of purshasing, require from suppliers for production reports.
-Concerning old references, require from suppliers for production records 1 week before the deliveries.

I am open to any ideas.

 

[Jeff Frost]

You asked for a few pointers so here is my take.

1) It is always best, in a document, to first use the full title and then use the abbreviation. As an example you should use Product Quality Assurance (PQA) and not just PQA because you are assuming that everyone,, including your customer understands what PQA is. PQA could also stand for the following:

• Plug Gage Acceptance
• Process Quality Audit
• Product Quality Audit
• Product Qualification Authority

2) Next you should always describe within the procedure the who, what, when and where of the process. Who will redirect the received parts? What will be the method of selection? When will this sampling occur? And where will it occur?

3) Sampling method must be statistically valid. Is it ok to sample 5 out of a lot of 10 and a lot 1000 parts? How much risk is your organization willing to take with non-valid sampling methods?

Your procedure should lead the reader through the process steps in the proper sequence order with sufficient detail so that all personnel are performing the task the same way.

 

[kgott]

MickyQuality;

Good luck with trying to stop deliveries, you'll become a hit with line management over night, your procedure will get toasted.

Adding power words like "shall" does not add force, power, persuasion anything else. If you must talk in a future sense the word 'will' means the same thing and sounds far less dicatorial.

You'd be far better off to describe how the process actually works and then talk to the people who are responsible for managing the work about adding in any extra requirements that are necessary to meet the requirements of the standards.

What records are generated by the process and who reviews those records?
What corrective action is required to be taken when things go wrong and who is responsible for taking it and who is responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of actions taken.

What job titles are responsible for the various functions in the process.

 

[MickyQuality]

Thank you for your answers,

Jeff Frost, what I have attached only contains the operating methods. Definitions, responsibilities, purpose, scope, references are mentioned in the proper parts of the procedure.

1) abbreviations are defined in § number 1: "definition"
2)The who, the what, the where are present in the process chart flow
Administrative/logistic incoming service is in charge of redirect the received parts as mentioned in the attached file.
3)I agree with you about sampling. Should I just refere to sampling procedure or include it to my incoming reception procedure?

Kgott, the use of "shall" is a requirement from our supplier manual. In our glossary use of the word "shall" indicates mandatory requirements and use of the world "should" indicates recommended requirements.

Our plants are working independently.
At the moment the incoming process is different for each of our plants. We have a plant in China which systematically physically checks each incoming material, in Spain our plant is more close to a dock to stock process for reliable suppliers and checks only risky suppliers. Due to that I have no idea how to do what you said.

 

[ssz102]

Thank you for your answers,

Jeff Frost, what I have attached only contains the operating methods. Definitions, responsibilities, purpose, scope, references are mentioned in the proper parts of the procedure.

1) abbreviations are defined in § number 1: "definition"
2)The who, the what, the where are present in the process chart flow
Administrative/logistic incoming service is in charge of redirect the received parts as mentioned in the attached file.
3)I agree with you about sampling. Should I just refere to sampling procedure or include it to my incoming reception procedure?

Kgott, the use of "shall" is a requirement from our supplier manual. In our glossary use of the word "shall" indicates mandatory requirements and use of the world "should" indicates recommended requirements.

Our plants are working independently.
At the moment the incoming process is different for each of our plants. We have a plant in China which systematically physically checks each incoming material, in Spain our plant is more close to a dock to stock process for reliable suppliers and checks only risky suppliers. Due to that I have no idea how to do what you said.

your company have plant in china? and where, as i staying in china

back to procedure above, you need to define responsible when this problem is occuring; such as
who put forward quality problem and coordinate?
who require vendor improve these nonconformities?
who follow-up this question and verificate effectiveness for these action from supplier?

 

[kgott]

Kgott, the use of "shall" is a requirement from our supplier manual. In our glossary use of the word "shall" indicates mandatory requirements and use of the world "should" indicates recommended requirements.

.

Yes I know, and it also means that in everyone eles's definition also. My point remains, if you describe how the process works so people can follow it then you are describing how a uniform outcome is achieved by those trying to kick goals, at least, most of the time.

Is not such an approach better than setting out a whole lot of thou shalts and taking the big stick to people.

Just becasue it says you shall, (or else!!) does that make it happen? does it make shound more convincing or authoritive, it certainly sounds more dictorial and is that the best way to win the cooperation of the staff and does such language contribute to an environment in which staff will want to try and do their best?