Simplifying Supplier Evaluations for hundreds of Suppliers

[Mary2962]

Hello, thank you for taking my question.

We are a small aerospace distributor that basically uses hundreds of suppliers in any given year. Currently, all suppliers with 3 or more shipments are rated in three categories, On time delivery, Quality of Product, and Ease of doing business. These individual scores are weighted and totaled the resulting percentage is turned into a "Quality Rating" (100 -97= Excellent; 96-92 Very Good...and so on). Since we use so many different suppliers, the Quality Rating is cumulative and includes all shipments ever made by that supplier since to do otherwise it might take years for one supplier to accumulate enough shipments to get an accurate evaluation.

At a recent surveillance audit for 9120A, an Opportunity for Improvement was given to simplify our rating system and only use shipments from a supplier occurring in say, the past 6 months in our evaluations. I was told that no one uses cumulative shipments beyond that and that using every shipment ever made by that supplier was not appropriate. I contend, however, that because we sometimes don't use a supplier again for much more than 6 months, it would be very difficult to get an accurate rating on any one supplier.

So, I am confused on how to proceed. The system I use seems to work for us and I hesitate to change it however, given that Opportunity for Improvement I feel that I must at least try.

I would appreciate any thoughts on this issue. Thank you.

 

[qpled]

Good Question!! How often do you have to generate reports on your suppliers? It sounds like you go by the amount per supplier, not any specific time frame. If this is the case you may want to pick a time frame (once a month, once every three months, etc...) to review and report on shipments. For my company (also small with many suppliers) we look at all shipments once a month. We send out reports to our high-volume suppliers to show them how they have done for the past three months (if they are below the minimum percentage for on-time delivery and/or quality they have to report back to us with a corrective action).

 

[Golfman25]

I would suguest that to have a "valid" result you would need to measure at least 20 shipments. Someone who ships two items and makes a mistake on 1, is at 50% which probably isn't reflective of their actual performance. I would stick with what works for you. Good luck.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

At a recent surveillance audit for 9120A, an Opportunity for Improvement was given to simplify our rating system and only use shipments from a supplier occurring in say, the past 6 months in our evaluations.

Sometimes 3rd party auditors can't wait to fill the void with non-sense.

I was told that no one uses cumulative shipments beyond that and that using every shipment ever made by that supplier was not appropriate.

You were told because the auditor probably believes you have no way of contesting his/her assertion. You were told wrong.

So, I am confused on how to proceed.

If I were you, I would simply disregard this OFI. It is opinion; pure and simple. If your auditor behaves like many others, s/he will have forgotten this pearl of wisdom by the time they come back to perform your next audit.

In the unlikely event s/he writes down this OFI in the audit report, and you want to have fun with that, call the CB Technical Manager and ask if s/he agrees with the validity of the OFI. If s/he agrees, ask them to put you in touch with a similar distributor that has a system as the one advised by the auditor. I guarantee you will never hear from them again.

 

[rickpaul01]

It seems like you are just performing busy work in order to "comply" with an arbitrary requirement. Look at which suppliers are causing you problems, and then base your process on the tasks necessary to improve those suppliers.

 

[somashekar]

Hello, thank you for taking my question.

We are a small aerospace distributor that basically uses hundreds of suppliers in any given year. Currently, all suppliers with 3 or more shipments are rated in three categories, On time delivery, Quality of Product, and Ease of doing business. These individual scores are weighted and totaled the resulting percentage is turned into a "Quality Rating" (100 -97= Excellent; 96-92 Very Good...and so on). Since we use so many different suppliers, the Quality Rating is cumulative and includes all shipments ever made by that supplier since to do otherwise it might take years for one supplier to accumulate enough shipments to get an accurate evaluation.

At a recent surveillance audit for 9120A, an Opportunity for Improvement was given to simplify our rating system and only use shipments from a supplier occurring in say, the past 6 months in our evaluations. I was told that no one uses cumulative shipments beyond that and that using every shipment ever made by that supplier was not appropriate. I contend, however, that because we sometimes don't use a supplier again for much more than 6 months, it would be very difficult to get an accurate rating on any one supplier.

So, I am confused on how to proceed. The system I use seems to work for us and I hesitate to change it however, given that Opportunity for Improvement I feel that I must at least try.

I would appreciate any thoughts on this issue. Thank you.

Hi Mary.
I am sure you read what Sidney said in post #4.
You need to evaluate / re-evaluate to keep your QMS performance well and good. You need to determine such criteria that will help you to do so.
Seems you have got into rating and some routine calculations of numbers.
If you had one bad delivery, you need to re-evaluate the supplier why timely delivery is not maintained, if your criteria is to have timely delivery and zero tolerance. Likewise what are your other criteria?
If you have not made purchase from a supplier for the past 1 year, perhaps you may have a criteria to re-evaluate before purchasing if he is still good to make you quality delivery of your volumes in time and at your agreed costs. Again another criteria.
Who ever told you that you need to score them / rate them ...
If your focus is on rating, you may end up with damages faced and you are seeing numbers later, rather than deciding to take actions and improve supplier or evaluate new supplier.
Think about it.
Your purpose of supplier evaluation / re-evaluation is to help your QMS performance mainly and not about telling later to suppliers how good / bad you feel they are.

 

[GStough]

I agree with Sidney and Soma regarding the OFI. As I understand it, an OFI does not require action, only that you consider it and determine if action needs to be taken, and document the decision with an explanation why no action was taken. If your current system works for you and your company, and is compliant, then you may not need to take any further action. Just be sure to document the fact that you considered it and the decision/justification for not taking action.

Too many times I've been involved in unnecessary actions based on an auditor's suggestion stemming from an OFI, all for the sake of satisfying an auditor's preference.