B
I'd like to bring this thread back to the front of the line for a bit. I handle most client surveys sent to us, which has become substantial as compared to previous years. I'm going to openly admit that I think this process of sending pages of questions with yes/no/na answers is unproductive, does not add any value, and completely misses the target goal of properly assessing a supplier.
I understand that companies must have a system in place to evaluate their suppliers, however, shouldn't this be a combination of evaluating performance, i.e. on time delivery, conformance of products supplied, etc... and ensuring their quality system is on par with requirements.
As suggested in this thread, these surveys are simply a request for information so that a company can assure themselves that their supplier has all applicable quality requirements in place and therefore a "canned" response seems much more reasonable than individually reviewing a multitude of surveys asking similar questions in different ways.
Not only this, but many of the surveys we recieve aren't even applicable to our trade, we are a service company performing destructive materials testing, a majority of the surveys we recieve are targeted at manufacturers, or even maintenance stations (FAA reqs).
In my opinion, the process of requiring companies to send a survey to their suppliers is backwards. The appropriate process should be to require your suppliers provide a detailed summary of their quality system which displays their compliance to required quality standards. A canned response from our company (as a service provider) would be much more detailed and relevant than many of these "canned" surveys we recieve.
On another note, I'm curious what others think...are surveys with open ended questions more likely to be useful than checklists with yes/no/na answers? We recieve both types, typically I prefer the checklist because it can be completed quicker, the open ended questions however (such as "describe how your company handles change control") are much more likely to provide our customer with a better understanding of our quality systems.
That's my
what do others think?
I understand that companies must have a system in place to evaluate their suppliers, however, shouldn't this be a combination of evaluating performance, i.e. on time delivery, conformance of products supplied, etc... and ensuring their quality system is on par with requirements.
As suggested in this thread, these surveys are simply a request for information so that a company can assure themselves that their supplier has all applicable quality requirements in place and therefore a "canned" response seems much more reasonable than individually reviewing a multitude of surveys asking similar questions in different ways.
Not only this, but many of the surveys we recieve aren't even applicable to our trade, we are a service company performing destructive materials testing, a majority of the surveys we recieve are targeted at manufacturers, or even maintenance stations (FAA reqs).
In my opinion, the process of requiring companies to send a survey to their suppliers is backwards. The appropriate process should be to require your suppliers provide a detailed summary of their quality system which displays their compliance to required quality standards. A canned response from our company (as a service provider) would be much more detailed and relevant than many of these "canned" surveys we recieve.
On another note, I'm curious what others think...are surveys with open ended questions more likely to be useful than checklists with yes/no/na answers? We recieve both types, typically I prefer the checklist because it can be completed quicker, the open ended questions however (such as "describe how your company handles change control") are much more likely to provide our customer with a better understanding of our quality systems.
That's my
what do others think?
