ISO 9001 Clause 7.4.1 Supplier Rating System - Seeking simple system example

[Al Dyer]

Barb,

If you e-mail me I will send you a supplier Rating Form that has worked well for us.

ASD...

------------------
Al Dyer
Mngt. Rep.
[email protected]

 

[David Mullins]

1. Al, guess what, me too please!

2. The best supplier rating system is based on the value of kick-backs. If you don't get any, they are clearly an unsatisfactory supplier.

3. The toughy is, can you automate the supplier rating system, or are you stuck with a manual type. If manual, I'd suggest one of the many variations based on the 1-5 system. I'll pull a sample and post it tomorrow.

------------------

 

[Al Dyer]

David,

A copy is on its way. I agree with you that cost factors need to be taken into consideration for a total supplier system. We are currently working on revising our system to reflect this and yet keep it simple.

We are currently looking into updating our data bases to reflect cost and comminucation.

Give me a yell if you have a problem with the e-mail attachment or if you would like to see the other documents we use for supplier quality systems.

ASD...

------------------
Al Dyer
Mngt. Rep.
[email protected]

 

[Vash Stampede]

Hi Al,
Two weeks ago our External Auditors that they found a strong observation that might create a major issue on our purchasing. And they found out that we are using the same form in evaluating our suppliers.
In view of this we have to generate a form.
Would it be possible to get a copy of the form you were telling? I am also interested in receiving a copy.

Thanks in advance.
Vash Stampede
[email protected]

 

[Greg Mack]

Hi all,

We use a system whereby we provide a number from 1-4 (4=Excellent, 3=Good, etc). These are then rated in four categories.
We also compliment this by using any evidence of supplier meetings (minutes) and Corrective Actions.

Our suppliers are assessed according to a frequency assessed by their importance to our business. For example, Level 1 are assessed every six months and are considered to pose a considerable input to our processes and therefore affect our performance to our customers. Level 2's are assessed annually and have a moderate affect on our processes. Level 3's have little or no affect on the output from our processes and are assessed every two years. (These may include Stationery suppliers for example)

We find this easy to use and keeps it all simple. Suppliers are rated first (Level 1, 2, or 3) and then the Supplier Assessment log indicates all details of assessments and frequencies.

 

[Trakman]

Back to the original topic for a minute...

We categorize suppliers as: Level 1 for custom, and level 2 for off-the-shelf products.

We evaluate suppliers based on evidence that WE feel is important;
are they meeting our needs?
do they deliver on time?
have we had a good experience with them?
do they resolve CAR's issued by us to them in reasonable time?
are their products unique such that we must continue using them regardless of their performance?
do they provide good value for the money in terms of product and service?
does their product generate customer complaints?

Meeting your needs is very specific to each business. Only you can determine what you need. (don't let an auditor tell you any different!) Therefore in evaluating your suppliers, tailor the evaluation to your needs. If you need ISO registered suppliers, then so be it!

Beware ( ! ) that supplier review must occur at your defined intervals, and you need to stick to them.

Honestly folks, go easy on yourselves ( ) don't hog tie purchasing with space-age evaluations, but, be sure to meet the needs of your company.

Keep being Inventive.
Trakman.

 

[Marc]

And of course for those 'small' companies, one client system is REAL simple: http://Elsmar.com/pdf_files/ - Look for sup_eval.pdf

Do remember - Your evaluation system should be appropriate for your company and what you purchase. I even warn all clients that I have to be evalluated and on their Approved Supplier List. One registrar required the company to explain how they evaluated and rated me.

 

[energy]

Marc,
This is not meant to sound flip, but my answer would be "The same way I evaluated and rated you, Mr. Registrar." How you chose a consultant is a tricky thing to address. You are paying for a service that just does consulting work. The actual acceptance and implementing your consultant's recommendations is the company's responsibility. How a registrar can even question the selection of a consultant you choose to assist you in your business, is to me, "beyond his scope". If I didn't use consultants at all, there's nothing for the auditor to question, in that respect. Sounds to me like an opinion again.

energy

 

[Marc]

I understand your point. However, every company that has employed me has had some selection criteria so it has never been an issue. Most explained to the registrar that they contacted 2 companies I had worked with in their registration projects, they cited this web site, they cited my resume, they cited price -- and that was about it.

In the most recent registration audit - what, a week ago - the registrar required proof of their rating (evaluating) them (the registrar) and out came the comparison sheet (which we all know has been in the pd_files directory for several years -- of course those buying my Implementatrion Guide get the actual Excel spreadsheets instead of the pdf file I 'give away' -- plug, plug...) and that was pretty much it.

I even print on each invoice "ISO 9001 and QS-9000 require that Cayman Business Systems rated and on your Approved Supplier List".

Do remember, you do not have to have a single rating system - particularly smaller suppliers.

I think we both know if you are going to hire a consultant firm, you are going to use some criteria - even if it's just a name (e.g. "We chose Anderson Consulting because of their world wide reputation".) That may sound like a lame excuse for hiring a company (just by name) but it's done every day. The key is "...defined criteria..."

Above I said:
-> One registrar required the company to explain

That's not exactly true. Almost all have asked.

I agree with Trakman and the others who responded - Keep It Simple.

 

[Wings]

Hi all, just wanted to know do i need to evaluate all suppliers. i read with interest that consultant also must be rated.
Currently i am only managing those who are affecting the quality of the products, such as raw material, subcon, secondary process parties, etc. Those like one time purchase of equipment was not rated. am i correct?