Ideas for getting rid of vendors? 2

[mechengdude]

Anyone have any good ideas or comical stories for getting rid of a vendor...?... here’s what I mean:

As an Engineering group, we have no significant pull on what vendor is used for fabricated parts. As long as the vendor has a price acceptable to Purchasing and the parts are made to print then we don’t have any say so.

The issue is that the vendor never makes anything without asking an inordinate amount of questions including requests that he should really do because they are Manufacturing Engineering issues. Also, the workmanship is relatively poor. So bottom line Engineering expends effort so this vendor can make parts that it doesn't have to for any other vendor (ie) the part really ends up costing the company more and the quality is iffy.

 

[kchayfie]

Our clients (UK water authorities) usually have framework suppliers for their usual items of equipment (pumps, valves, chemical dosing equipment, etc). We do the design for new treatment works or refurbish old ones or whatever but we are expected to use framework suppliers and the terms and conditions they have negotiated with our clients. Even though that has been the industry standard way of doing business for several years now, we still get new suppliers coming in, paying for a free lunch for us while we sit and listen to their sales pitch. When they get to the "Any Questions?" bit the first question is "what frameworks are you on?" If the answer is "Huh?", well then see ya fellas and thanks for the lunch!

 

[KENAT]

Well, in a perfect world you'd just need to document some of the instances and let the relevant manager know and it would get fixed, but from the fact you're asking the questions I assume it's not a perfect world.

It still may be worth trying to keep track of the instances, especially any record of time/cost in volved so at least you have evidence.

Our place is also stuck on certain suppliers and any suggestions to change for what ever reason (typically to save money) don't go down well (my manger managed to upset the VP of operations by going down this route, bad idea).

In this instance having evidence isn't a good thing.

I'll be interested in any ideas anyone has.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[MikeHalloran]

Maybe the vendor is really the Big Boss's son- in- law, working out of his garage, so you don't want to kick up a fuss.

Yes, you should keep records sufficient to reconstruct the associated costs, but don't _do_ anything with the records unless the vendor becomes an issue for some other reason.

It would be sufficient to just keep a record of what you spoke about, what was said by whom, and how long it took. One way is to keep a chron file of what you do each day, or a file for each project. If you use NotePad for this, <F5> gives you a handy time stamp. I would suggest you do something like that anyway, for a lot of other reasons.

You probably get a lot of calls from or about this vendor, asking you to approve 'minor' deviations from the print. The calls will continue, and the quality will not improve, so long as you continue approving deviations.

For a new part, you should review the print, to make sure that it's unambiguous and reasonable, and maybe even review it with a vendor or two in pursuit of opportunities to make the part better or cheaper. After that, your standard response should be 'make it to the print'.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[csd72]

mechengdude,

I am afraid that your situation is not an uncommon one - what do we know, we are just the only ones that actually understand what the vendor does!

A similar attitude in a different situation - we had a project that we were losing money on, but the sales and marketing people negotiated a new contract at the same rate without consulting any of the engineers who worked on the project!

You need to find out the individual who is in charge of this contract in purchasing and make them aware of it. This may be a violation of a clause in the contract, something purchasing do understand.

csd

 

[BJC]

It must depend on what your doing.
I find some vendors very helpful. I see a new product in a magazine and usually don't have time to read the artical in great detail. The vendor come's in and I ask him to tell mell all about it and not to make it longer than will fit on a 3x 5 card. I find them to be a good source of information and sometimes even lunch.

 

[MadMango]

As MikeHalloran states, the problem will continue as long as you continue to approve deviations. Reject what is not to specification, simple. If needed, add some GD&T to your prints to make it clear that the specifications are important.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[KENAT]

As a follow up to points MadMango & Mike H make.

Before you start throwing stones be double sure your drawings are clear and unambiguous, up to the relevant industry standards, have tolerances driven by function of the part etc.

This is something we've had to do here, most drawings were not of a high quality so the vendors (machine shops) had to frequently contact Engineers for clarification etc. We've taken steps to improve drawings including GD&T training, introducing industry & company drawing standards and a drawing check process.

Reviewing with a vendor can be useful too. In theory I'd think vendors should review the drawings and ask any questions before they accept the job so this should get done by default but in practice it doesn't always seem to work and doing it in advance can save time.

Assuming your documentation is in a good state the approach of not approving deviations can be an effective one. However, be prepared for the flack when you're not approving deviations starts hitting schedules etc. The management solution might not be to change vendors but to change engineers!

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[UDP10]

I think most are missing the point of the thread: ideas for getting rid of vendors.

When my office moved over two years ago, we decided not to tell the "bad" vendors. Its been humorous to see even two years later the vendors still show up at the wrong office. Especially when they're toting a factory rep... "You didn't know your client moved? Two years ago?" A wake-up call for some reps.

 

[PEDARRIN2]

A rep that doesn't at least call ahead to let you know they are coming is either not a very good rep or reps a not very good company.

 

[PSE]

Invoice the vendor for your engineering support time. Who knows, they might actually pay it . When money gets affected, things tend to happen. I agree with MikeHalloran that it is worth potentially checking into any unique relationships before playing with dropping a supplier (or making it so they are wanting to drop you as a customer).

 

[epoisses]

I am a vendor

"When my office moved over two years ago, we decided not to tell the "bad" vendors." .... excuse me if I laugh. Apart from this not being very assertive to say the least, this is even against your own interest. If you think a vendor is bad, you should tell him to change this or that, otherwise you will eventually end up with only one qualified vendor and you don't want that. You will want as many vendors to choose from as possible.

I NEVER quote for anything before asking the engineers a bunch of questions, because the request for quotation is often incomplete or half-baked (I am talking about my own customers, not your company which I guess is in a different business). It is in the customer's own interest to receive a quotation as detailed as possible and as much adapted to their requirements as possible, to avoid surprises at a later stage. Of course one of the other objectives of calling the engineers is getting them excited about expensive options, but the main objective remains giving the customer precisely what he wants.

 

[ajack1]

I agree with epoisses, but then again I would, as I also am a vendor.

There is nothing worse from a vendors point of view than receiving incomplete or ambiguous information. Believe it or not we do try to offer exactly what a company wants within a budget and time scale, which is how we stay in business. This is made more difficult if you do not have all the information you require.

What might be a better question for the OP is how does my company stay in business when we do not give vendors all the information they require and engineering has no input on quality?

As for the comment "When my office moved over two years ago, we decided not to tell the "bad" vendors." That is beyond belief, are companies that are so badly run really still in business?

Anyway back to the original question, you get rid of a vendor you are not happy with in exactly the same way as you would deal with a bank, insurance company or any other service you are not happy with. You could try moving home and not telling them, but a professional approach will give better results.

 

[btrueblood]

Mike and Kenat both give good advice.

I get my fair share of questions on drawings, for both dumb and good reasons; but I'll always pick up the phone for a vendor making my parts. But, the vendors we use also know I don't buy scrap - if the parts aren't to print, they go back.

Mike had a posting on this site a few days ago about a vendor asking for a list of "critical features", i.e. the features that they were going to actually inspect. I gave his reply verbatim "all the features are critical". If a vendor calls asking for relief from a tolerance, and I can justify giving it to him, I want something in exchange: a favor down the road, a price reduction, a schedule push.

 

[gerhardl]

Having been both a vendor (I am now), and an engineer describing technical details for offers, and a consultant -selecting among offers, I have follwed this string with great interest.

Some of the most negative angeled viewpoints of vendors have been presented by obviously technical experienced engineers, who know their branch and products very well, and where products may have none or slow improvement or change over time.

And true enough, we meet pushing vendors every one of us almost every day.

(For telephone approach from 'vendors' I usally say no at once in business, or ask them come back 18.th July next year. Only the possible good come back at date. If private, I either put the phone silently down and let them talk, or ask for telephone number and adress back as I tell them I have a very interesting product I am sure they will want to know better.....)

Back to business: There are many technical fields and product areas where even 'simple products' are not so simple after all. (Look for instance into valve forum)

If we want to be good engineers in our separate fields, we cannot all know everything for surrounding or attached areas or products. We have to use expertice. Lifetime learning is in other strings described as the engineers task.

And this is the point: a longterm oriented, surviving vendor in a though market will have all the expertice and product knowledge you are looking for, and know about the latest product and market development. This is also where you will be adviced on and offered both products cheapest in price, and more important, products giving the best value over lifetime, and the reason why.

If you still are in doubt: have two good vendors in tow.

Rephrasing the original question is necessary: How to get rid of the bad and work with the good vendor!

 

[KENAT]

It seems that anyone who considers themselves a vendor is taking a completely different angle from the rest of us.

Looking at the OP:

It appears he is talking about external companies making stuff to his drawings (I'm assuming dude = he).

I don't believe he's talking about buying off the shelf widgets out of the cataloge from the "ACME Widget Co" or having widgets designed for him by "Custom Widgets R us".

I will admit my first thought was that he was talking about machine shops and the like but 'fabricated' covers more than just that.

It also sounds like Engineering has little to no say in who makes the parts and no formal channel for giving feedback to purchasing etc.

This is not about the overly keen widget maker who phones/turns up unanounced up every week.

While the vendor has/is a problem, to my mind the main problem is the fact that the OPs purchasing makes the decision without taking into account Engineerings input.

So the crux of the problem, when another department (specifically purchasing in this case) is causing both you/your department extra uneccessary work and affecting the quality of the end product what can/should you do, especially when that department isn't very cooperative?



KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[mechengdude]

Kenat has gotten the post back on track to what I was originally driving at. Some others have hit some key points as well.

A little more information and some comments about some of the posts in response:
1. assume the prints we supply are "good" how do I know, other vendors make the part to print without question.
2. In a perfect world i would say "make it to print; or be gone you pesky vendor". Unfortunately I live in the world that has a lot more gray area.
3. Comments about the bosses son being the vendor weren't right on the mark but there is some "old boy network" stuff keeping the vendor from being completely dumped

 

[MikeHalloran]

Please understand, when I get a call about a print, I _do_ review the print. If there's a problem with the print, I fix it. If there's a problem with the vendor, I'll try to help with that, too, because breaking in new vendors is expensive.

I've found that some vendors who are fully capable of first- class work will send you second- class work. Maybe they sub it out to other shops; maybe they give it to their apprentices, or to rent-a-bums, whatever. If you accept it. they will keep doing it, and profiting from it.

That's distinct from the occasional big oops. A good shop will call before shipping something like that, and I will try to work out a compromise if possible, once.

I don't mind the calls about tolerances being looser than they've ever seen before. I like designs that are robust that way.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[csd72]

mechengdude,

Sounds like you need to be a bit tighter with your quality and service specifications. If there is something they should be doing and arent then this should be written down in black and white so that you have a definate reason to reject their submission.

You spend too much time redesigning -dont. If something needs more engineering to work, throw it back at the vendor for redesign and copy in the person in purchasing person responsible for the vendor.

csd

 

[RDK]

Write your technical specifications in such a manner that you get what you want.

It is not the fault of the purchasing department if you cannot accurately describe in technically precise and accurate terms what you really want.





Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com