Supplier Corrective Actions - EFFECTIVE corrective actions on CAR's

[Al Cohen]

Vendor CA's

Just wondering how you guys get vendors to reply with EFFECTIVE corrective actions on CAR's (Most of our vendors are not QS/TS compliant).I am fed up with banging my head against a wall constantly chasing up CA's from vendors - they just do not seem to understand what is being asked from them. I do not have enough time to visit/phone every vendor, every time a Non comformance occurs. Any ideas?

Cheers



Al

 

[Mike S.]

One idea: If they don't seem to understand what you want, show them with an example. Develop an example of what you want to see and send it to them, tell them this is what it should contain. Don't mandate the exact form they should use, but give examples of what content you want to see.

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

And why...

I agree with Mike. And one more thing: They need to understand why they should do it... That's essential.

/Claes

 

[energy]

Pretty Good Responses, so far.

My problem isn't so much with the content. Maybe I'm too easy. The SCAR form has four three lined sections;
1. Observation (I fill that out)
2. Cause of discrepancy
3. Reason this discrepancy escaped your inspection
4. What changes have been made to prevent recurrence

Some of them do appear to have been completed with minimal effort. However, repeat discrepancies are hard to minimize.

After a short period of time, having not received a response at all, I simply go to Purchasing and ask them to request the completed SCAR the next time they solicate a quote from that Supplier. They get the message. Some Suppliers think that these SCARS will just go away if they ignore them. Not! Also, I do not issue a lot of them. They are usually based on the severity, such as causing us major discomfort in assembly or potentially missing a shipping date. I know that I detest being nickel and dimed by an overbearing Customer with nothing to do but issue SCAR's for what I consider a minor infraction. As discussed in other threads, there are those who disagree with me. But, that's why we're here!

 

[Mike S.]

I agree with Energy on not issuing SCAR's on minor stuff. Usually in the case of a minor issue, I will send an E-mail to the QM at the company notifying them of the minor issue and asking them to look into it while telling them I am not issuing a formal SCAR at this time but rather I'm giving them a "heads-up" -- sort of an "observation".

I also agree with the idea of having Purchasing request a past-due SCAR with the next RFQ. That really does get attention without needing to yell. It is subtle and effective.

 

[Mike S.]

By the way...Nice to see you back, Energy.

 

[energy]

Thanks Mike

Your e-mail to the QM is a good idea. Mine are entered in the database and are on file. But, how would the QM know? We usually go through Purchasing, and we know how that goes. It's definitely something I will consider for future snafus. It would also be verification that some action was taken besides documenting it. See, you can teach an old dog new tricks!

 

[M Greenaway]

Al

The answers already given are pretty sound. Dont fall into the documentation trap of chasing corrective actions on every occurence just for the record.

If the problems were real I would imagine that you would cease to use the supplier - hence your own corrective action would kick in.

If the problems dont have any great impact then dont request the suppliers corrective action.

It is extremely difficult to get suppliers to respond to these problems, particularly where they do not operate formal a formal QMS. I would just document your own actions taken, such as advising the supplier of the problem, and close the SCAR on that (bearing in mind again the impact of the problem).