Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
articles:supplier_quality_surveys [2020/09/24 15:13] rrandallarticles:supplier_quality_surveys [2023/11/22 14:22] (current) rrandall
Line 16: Line 16:
 You may be thinking that the above appears perfectly fine... until you consider: \\ You may be thinking that the above appears perfectly fine... until you consider: \\
   - The "documented process(s) maintained for the implementation of corrective actions" appear only //slightly// better than if it had been written by a first-grader... with only the most basic understanding of corrective action (at least it wasn't written in crayon). \\   - The "documented process(s) maintained for the implementation of corrective actions" appear only //slightly// better than if it had been written by a first-grader... with only the most basic understanding of corrective action (at least it wasn't written in crayon). \\
-  - The process for "problem analysis and determination of root cause(s)" is limited to the basic "5 Whys"... which might be fine... provided (1) personnel actually understand what the "5 Whys" is and (2) never encounter any //complex// root causes. \\ +  - The process for "problem analysis and determination of root cause(s)" is limited to the basic "5 Whys"... which might be fine... provided (1) personnel actually understand what the "5 Whys" is and (2) never encounter any //complex// cause & effect chains. \\ 
-  - The "controls established to ensure that corrective actions taken are effective" do not involve people capable of "critical thinking".+  - The "controls established to ensure that corrective actions are effective" do not involve people capable of "critical thinking".
  
-The point is that a Supplier Quality Survey can ask all sorts of questions that are, in the end, meaningless.+The point is that a "Supplier Quality Surveycan ask all sorts of questions that are, in the end, meaningless.
  
 So how can you improve this simple form? So how can you improve this simple form?
  
-A great step is to ask questions relating to topics that are (1) of particular concern to the company (and “value-added”), and (2) include “performance-related” questions that reveal more about the supplier. For example, the following 3 questions will provide you more pertinent, and value-added information about a supplier than most 20-page "Supplier Quality Surveys":+A great step is to ask "quality-related" questions relating to topics that are (1) “value-added”, and (2) include “performance-related” data that reveal more about the supplier. For example, the following 3 questions will provide you with much more pertinent, and value-added information about a supplier than most 20-page "Supplier Quality Surveys":
  
 <WRAP center round box 80%> <WRAP center round box 80%>
Line 35: Line 35:
 </WRAP> </WRAP>
  
-Suppose that two manufacturing suppliers met all of the detailed "generic" requirements in a "Supplier Quality Survey". However, upon reviewing the above set of questions, the first supplier reportedly achieves 65% FPY, 5% returns, and 55% OTD, with no meaningful improvement activities planned (only corrective actions). The second supplier reportedly achieves 96% FPY, 1% Returns, and 90% OTD, and they have meaningful improvement activities in-process (e.g., Kaizens, DMAICs). +Suppose that two manufacturing suppliers met all of the detailed "generic" requirements in a "Supplier Quality Survey"... and both are either ISO 9001 or AS9100 certified. However, upon reviewing the above set of questions, the first supplier reportedly achieves 65% FPY, 5% returns, and 55% OTD, with no meaningful improvement activities planned (only corrective actions - which are entirely "reactive"). The second supplier reportedly achieves 96% FPY, 1% Returns, and 90% OTD, and they have meaningful improvement activities in-process (e.g., Kaizens, DMAICs). 
  
-Without having asked the above questions, they would have “appeared” equal, when they clearly are not.+Without having asked the above questions, these two suppliers would have “appeared” equal, when they clearly are not.