Supplier Development - Cited for 'no evidence of subcontractor development'

[barbt]

In a recent audit, we were cited for ' no evidence of subcontractor development using the TE suppliment as the fundamental quality system requirement.'

We require our suppliers to be ISO 9k2k minimun, but are at a loss as to how to develop them to the TE supplement. We are currently at QS9000:TE , and this is one of the requirements.

Does anyone have a suggestion for me? I have looked through many of the older threads for hints on supplier development, but could use a bit of direction on this one.

thanks,
barbt

 

[D.Scott]

I was going to try to answer this but I am not knowledgable on the TE suppliment.

In QS-9000, the requirement is ISO9001:2000 as a minimum with development toward compliance to QS as a goal. There is no requirement to develop a supplier to TE. Is this a seperate requirement of the TE suppliment? If so, is it development toward compliance? The way you have it written up, it makes it seem TE must be the fundamental system requirement and not ISO 9k2k.

To document development for QS/TS, a simple matrix showing the areas needing development with dates the supplier is compliant can serve as documentation. Add this to an analysis of development need for the suppliers and it should be enough.

Dave

 

[Oriondad]

Best Guess

We are a supplier that was attempting to get TE registered and switched to ISO as we found that TE was not 100% applicable to our business.

But, first I must ask.

TE is obsolete in 1 year. Why would you NOW want to force an ISO registered supplier to strive toward a standard that is going to be obsolete, with NO replacement in the forseeable future. TS is NOT applicable to TE companies. We switched for that very reason.

It seems your auditor is being somewhat unrealistic. Your suppliers certainly will not want to move in that direction. Seems you could dispute that finding.

 

[Ron Rompen]

Subcontractor development does not mean (IMHO) driving them towards registration to QS or TS. It is the ongoing path of Continuous Improvement which you have to help them develop.

Do you work with your suppliers in an effort to reduce costs, improve performance or delivery, or cut down lead times?

Do they work with you at APQP, to modify their processes (if appropriate) to help you achieve the final part?

Do you audit them (product and process) on a regular basis, and what followup is done after the audit?

That is supplier/subcontractor development. Having the piece of paper saying that you are registered to XYZ:1984 is only a start...even if they were the first of their class to be registered, and set the benchmark for all other companies of that type, you STILL have to help them develop and become better.

 

[Randy Stewart]

Ron, I have to agree with your question of timing. TS does have some TE language in it but doesn't cover a lot.

Barb,
Look at the suppliers that ONLY provide products and services that directly impact your TE operations. Example: If you buy bearings they usually provide a chart of operating envelops, etc.
The main thing is to establish and document what you expect of your TE suppliers. Things like Mean Time Between Failures of parts supplied, etc. Some information will be posted on their websites, some found in company/product brochures.
I would wager that you already have most of it in place, your auditor probably didn't see the verbiage that they needed to feel comfortable that you understood the suppliers impact.

 

[barbt]

TE obsolete in one year

We are a supplier that was attempting to get TE registered and switched to ISO as we found that TE was not 100% applicable to our business.

But, first I must ask.

TE is obsolete in 1 year. Why would you NOW want to force an ISO registered supplier to strive toward a standard that is going to be obsolete, with NO replacement in the forseeable future. TS is NOT applicable to TE companies. We switched for that very reason.

Thank you, you are absolutely correct! For reasons of our own, we decided to stay with QS9000:TE to the bitter end, but we are transitioning to ISO 9k2k in the next 12 months.

In the meantime we had this minor CAR to deal with. The TE supplement specifically addresses Reliability and Maintainability . Therefore, the comment about measuring R&M related metrics etc from subcontracted items, and working with suppliers on continuous improvements projects fits this picture.

I really appreciate the help -now I just have to make it work so that we get some value, and the auditor is satisfied.!!

 

[Randy Stewart]

R&M scares a lot of people but it shouldn't. You are not required to push an R&M program on your suppliers so look at and document what is important to your system. The R&M should be applied to their supplied parts or services. MTBF & MTTR are both part of the R&M program. Reliability = Mean Time Between Failures, Maintainability = Mean Time To Repair.

Some the issues will be in your APQP or Feasibility Review.

Please, never change your operations to appease an auditor. Your company is in business to make money, not pay an auditor.

 

[The Taz!]

Please, never change your operations to appease an auditor. Your company is in business to make money, not pay an auditor.

Bravo Randy!!!

Too many auditors forget that if they drive a company to extinction, they lose a client! There are too many "anal" auditors out there (Especially the independent contract type) that feel they just have to find something to write up just to prove their worth. These are the ones that keep a couple of the more anal, obscure and disguised requirements in their back pocket to pull out when the system is pretty good and they have nothing to write down as a finding.