Evaluating Suppliers

1. Turn off Caps Lock so as to avoid annoying anyone, particularly CR4 readers.
2. Monitor the performance of the equipment/service over time, in particular the relationship between reported defects and supplier time to rectify.
3. Accrue data with which to assess the suppliers of equipment/services ready for the next purchase.

The supplier evaluation system is company specific.

The first important part is the supplier evaluation and registration (I think that is already in place) and that is the one that is much more critical than the second part (supplier monitoring and re-assessment).

For all these to work, I assume you have multiple registered suppliers for the same assembly/component/machine else there is no meaningful comparison or assessment.

In our procedure we have the suppliers continuously monitored on three aspects

a) Quality rating

b) Delivery Rating

c) Service rating

For each of these again you have sub-factors (weights) given for the type of deficiency as well as the weights for each of these three.

Eg for us the Q=60%, D= 30% and Service=10%

In Quality also we have sub-factors (eg each rejection the mark is zero, major repairs 0.1 etc)

Since these are applications and industry specific the concept only can be given. The system is to be generated by the process owner(customer) or by consultant.

One of the best ways is to go through failure Risks (RPNs) and allocate marks.

But once a system is developed it must be transparent and objective. As a customer we are not to punish the suppliers but to bring him up to our expectation ie improve him. Unless he knows our expectations, he can not meet them. And equally important he should know his shortcomings (as OEM as well as customers for parts we are, or should be aware of these facts) Often we assume that we are supplying the best, but that is not what customers think. The gap is usually due to absence of a good feed-back mechanism. That area need to be strengthened when ever you generate an assessment system.

It should have a warning. We have an automatic evaluation system. As a supplier falls below a % from earlier grade we have an automatic system generated mail marked to him, with the details. And the supplier is put on watch. If the performance is still not improved, he is de-rated and detailed re-evaluation is resorted to.

The matter is as said, detailed and we have a complete manual (above 100 pages) for this but the gist is as above.

Hi...

I had developed a similar vendor appraisal system at my previous turbine manufacturing facility. Vendor appraisal was carried out on a yearly basis for all qualified vendors. There was a 26 point criteria against which a vendor's performance was evaluated. Apart from the technical points viz quality, timely supply etc there were commercial, contractual and environment concerns listed as well. Vendors whose processes were not environment friendly got negative marks. Vendors who were prone to raise objections or legal hurdles on silly pretexts were given negative marks. Vendor located in a tax subsidy zone got some extra marks on this account. This is a interesting exercise and must be carried out with all fairness and with out any bias.

The Bureau of Indian Standards has published a standard procedure for this purpose.

Anil Tiwari / New Delhi

Thanks for valuable inputs/thoughts to commence formulation of the basic requirements.

I have a form I could send if you pm me your email address, which I used to document a walkthrough audit of a machining vendor. here is a shot of the header.. if interested. 4 pages.

Chris

This comment may be a little late in coming, but perhaps it will be read nonetheless. I work in R&D, and the usual protocol is to issue a spec by which systems are to be designed. Though it is paramount to consider quality and delivery, the submitted sample materials should initially be subjected to lab testing based on certain standards, such as ASTM, etc. This way, inferior suppliers may be weeded out before the program launch and any large, in process snafu possibly avoided. It is far better to avert disaster in the development and pre-manufacturing stages than to wait until you are committed to a customer and end up having to re-source business.

Thanks for listening.