Production location change by supplier without info to customer

[Pawel Zelazowski]

Dear All,

I would like to consider a hypothetical situation where a supplier changed their production location a few years ago without informing or seeking approval from the customer. The customer discovers this situation during a scheduled audit, despite the supplier refusing any visits for many years. The invitation was to the tier 2 production plant, which is a completely external company not listed in the customer's Approved Supplier List (ASL). All PPAP documentation is assigned to the 'Production place: tier 1 location'.

How should the purchasing team react to a situation like this with the supplier?"

 

[Sidney Vianna]

Sounds like an auditor training examination question.

 

[Randy]

Yep sure does.

 

[Ed Panek]

I see a bigger question first; how did refusing to be audited for years get resolved in their QMS? A memo? If you can tolerate refusing to be audited but have an issue with moving production that's weird.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Dear All,

I would like to consider a hypothetical situation where a supplier changed their production location a few years ago without informing or seeking approval from the customer. The customer discovers this situation during a scheduled audit, despite the supplier refusing any visits for many years. The invitation was to the tier 2 production plant, which is a completely external company not listed in the customer's Approved Supplier List (ASL). All PPAP documentation is assigned to the 'Production place: tier 1 location'.

How should the purchasing team react to a situation like this with the supplier?"

What standard is involved here?

 

[Golfman25]

How should the purchasing team react? Ask for a 5% price reduction.

 

[Pawel Zelazowski]

What standard is involved here?

Change management -> machine/ process (technology) / production place.
General IATF 8.5.6.1

 

[Pawel Zelazowski]

How should the purchasing team react? Ask for a 5% price reduction.

Good one, but not possible. Current company is only one in this type of technology and any requests from our site can be easily rejected - "don't want to pay, don't get parts".

 

[Pawel Zelazowski]

I see a bigger question first; how did refusing to be audited for years get resolved in their QMS? A memo? If you can tolerate refusing to be audited but have an issue with moving production that's weird.

This I can't explain. I assume my company did not make any issue for audit refusing for last decade in reason on no alternative having. I know it's not a explanation - but no other have. Main issue is how to handle this issue right now, when "first" contact was performed (by me), and there is a response from supplier (they agree for audit on tier2).

 

[Enghabashy]

The following points could be considered :

*The 1st contract with the company signed as tire 1, now it's tire 2 ; it's deviated from contract conditions; any change should be communicated before with the OEM as the condition of any contract ;

**CSR of OEM should be considered as part of conditions

***The 1st PPAP with tire 1 also , now if the new situation is initially acceptable the new PPAP & new plant approval with process audit by OEM could be conducted

**** the risks of the new supply chain including the previous received orders should be submitted for reassessment ; including the external approval needed from the new original of tire 1 ;

***** if the OEM regulation can accept the new situation , the prices could be affected accordingly ; the risk assessment could cover the tracing of previous batches in the market; including customers feedback ; field failure & recall if the results are not satisfied

***** The following Req. should be considered :

****** 8.5.6.1 Control of changes supplemental /The organization shall have a documented process to control and react to changes that impact product realization. The effects of any change, including -- ,or any supplier, shall be assessed; --- including those made at suppliers,

• The organization shall maintain process effectiveness, including periodic re-evaluation relative to risk, to incorporate any changes made during process approval, control plan maintenance (--etc.,
• These requirements should apply to on-site supplier activities, as applicable

. 8.3.6.1 Design and development changes supplemental/The organization shall evaluate all design changes after initial product approval, including those proposed *by the organization or its suppliers, for potential impact on fit,----

• for 8.4.2.1 Type and extent of control /The process shall include the criteria and actions to escalate or reduce the types and extent of controls and development activities based on supplier performance and assessment of product, material, or service risks.

3- for 8.4.2.3 Supplier quality management system development certification to ISO 9001 with compliance to other customer-defined QMS requirements (such as Minimum Automotive Quality Management System Requirements for Sub-Tier Suppliers [MAQMSR] or equivalent) through second-party audits;
4- for 8.4.3.1 Information for external providers supplemental/the organization require the suppliers to cascade all applicable requirements down the supply chain to the point of manufacture.
Another ref./ guide :Minimum Automotive Quality Management System Requirements for Sub-Tier Suppliers(MAQMSR)