Latest customer standards - Actively search for and implement new customer standards?

[Hermann - 2011]

Where does it say that I, as a supplier, have to actively search for and implement new customer standards? Is this wishful thinking on the part of an auditor?
If the customer writes to me and tells me that he has revised something and it is available to download from their website, ok, I can do a contract review etc. but I have come across revised standards when surfing websites which I did not know about.

 

[Wes Bucey]

Where does it say that I, as a supplier, have to actively search for and implement new customer standards? Is this wishful thinking on the part of an auditor?
If the customer writes to me and tells me that he has revised something and it is available to download from their website, ok, I can do a contract review etc. but I have come across revised standards when surfing websites which I did not know about.

Ah, yes! Some customers can be very rude and play "GOTCHA" with obscure and after-the-fact customer requirements (such as adhering to a Standard published on an obscure website.)

You are on the right track, in my opinion, when you mention "contract review." It seems to me there are many occasions when a supplier can make a condition of accepting a purchase order from a customer that "this purchase order contains ALL requirements, which may not be changed or amended without renegotiating the order." It is the responsibility of the purchaser to make all its requirements available to a supplier and to especially call attention to "deal breaker" clauses buried in fine print in faded ink in the boilerplate on the back of a preprinted purchase order form. It is also the responsibility of the supplier to protect itself against predatory buyers by making sure it reads and understands all the fine print as part of its contract review.

In fairness, some buyers are themselves ignorant of critical requirements when making purchases because they neglected to ask their engineers the right questions. This ignorance can result in some severe rump bites for a supplier who gets caught in the switches. When this happens, negotiate to the best of your ability.

There is a whole class of customers (automotive) which seems to take special delight in making life hard for suppliers. A good supplier knows this in advance and protects itself accordingly. This torture by the automotive OEM's extends to the 3rd party auditors who (wrongly) fancy themselves as agents for the OEM and don't explain to an auditee supplier that it is important to stay abreast of customer requirements (even before entering into a purchase contract with an OEM) to help in planning for capital expenditures for equipment and employee training.

 

[The Taz!]

Wes,

Let us not forget the ISO/TS smoke and mirrors disclaimer disclaimer. . .

7.2.1 b) requirements not stated by the customer but necessary for specified or intended use, where known. . .

1st you have to use the ouija board to try and figure out what the darned thing is used for. . if not specified . . some customer will not divulge that info

2nd you have to use the to search around for what standards or specifications may apply. . to the unknown thing

Just playing the devil's advocate here. . .

 

[Sebastian]

Where does it say that I, as a supplier, have to actively search for and implement new customer standards? Is this wishful thinking on the part of an auditor?
If the customer writes to me and tells me that he has revised something and it is available to download from their website, ok, I can do a contract review etc. but I have come across revised standards when surfing websites which I did not know about.

I know one example, when cerification audit started one day after new issue of Ford CSR apeared on www.iaob.org.
The problem - it was audited Ford supplier and auditor found it.
Who is thinking about iaob, when auditor is knocking on the door?

 

[sal881vw]

Where does it say that I, as a supplier, have to actively search for and implement new customer standards? Is this wishful thinking on the part of an auditor?

Maybe this reference will shed some light.........I shall qoute form ISO 9004:2000 (E) Quality management systems-guidlines for performance improvement,clause 7.2 Processes related to interested parties.
Management should ensure that the organization has defined mutually acceptable processes for communicating effectively and efficiently with its customers and other related parties. The organisation should implement and maintain such processes to ensure adequate understanding of the needs and expectations of its interested parties and for transition into requirements for the organization. These requirements should include identification and review of relevant information and should actively involve customers and other interested parties. Examples of relevant process information include
requirements of the customer or other interested parties,
market research including sector and end user,
contract requirements,
competitor analysis,
benchmarking, and
processes due to statutory or regulatory requirements
The organization should have a full understanding of the process requirements of the customer or other interested.....................

 

[Wes Bucey]

Maybe this reference will shed some light.........I shall qoute form ISO 9004:2000 (E) Quality management systems-guidlines for performance improvement,clause 7.2 Processes related to interested parties.
Management should ensure that the organization has defined mutually acceptable processes for communicating effectively and efficiently with its customers and other related parties. The organisation should implement and maintain such processes to ensure adequate understanding of the needs and expectations of its interested parties and for transition into requirements for the organization. These requirements should include identification and review of relevant information and should actively involve customers and other interested parties. Examples of relevant process information include
requirements of the customer or other interested parties,
market research including sector and end user,
contract requirements,
competitor analysis,
benchmarking, and
processes due to statutory or regulatory requirements
The organization should have a full understanding of the process requirements of the customer or other interested.....................

Yep. This is all too true. That said, don't fall into an "analysis paralysis" trap here. A supplier has to take into consideration how HIS PRODUCT meshes with customer's needs and requirements. Some suppliers have relatively simple products (fasteners, stampings, etc.) while others have complicated products which may be objects of Standards and Regulations by governmental authorities in addition to customer specified requirements (carburetors, catalytic convertors, etc.)

A supplier keeps his sanity by keeping everything in proper perspective.

 

[Mustang]

Ugh

Some of our customers actually have stated in their manual something to this effect: "it is the responsibility of the supplier to ensure that they are using the latest version of this manual"... but they don't notify us when a new one is released. Guess I shouldn't have slept through "Mind Reading 101" in college...

 

[The Taz!]

Some of our customers actually have stated in their manual something to this effect: "it is the responsibility of the supplier to ensure that they are using the latest version of this manual"... but they don't notify us when a new one is released. Guess I shouldn't have slept through "Mind Reading 101" in college...

And let me guess. . . your copy is uncontrolled right?

 

[Mustang]

of course

The next statement usually reads: "Printed copies of this manual are uncontrolled"... :truce:

 

[Wes Bucey]

Controlled versus uncontrolled

The next statement usually reads: "Printed copies of this manual are uncontrolled"... :truce:

Despite the aggravation, there is a logical response to the "pull" method of controlled documentation (versus "push" where the document author or his organization take responsibility for seeing the pertinent parties have copies of the latest version and that obsolete versions are withdrawn.)

The logical response is to simply check for most recent update of customer requirements and make it part of the contract with a customer that no updates or changes after the date of the contract shall apply unless customer gives notice, renegotiates the contract (revisions usually entail more cost), and pays for completed work or work in process (prior to the notice to change to new version) which no longer meet updated customer requirements.

The reason customers abuse suppliers is because suppliers let themselves be abused.

A change in customer requirements or Standards should be treated as any other change order - the entity that makes the changes pays for the change.

(Just try going to an auto dealer and telling him you want leather seats instead of cloth on the car you ordered last month with no increase in price. If a dealer won't let his customer get away with that, why should the supplier of seats let the OEM get away with an upgrade or any change with no increase in price?)