Vendor service quality

[Paul Rollins <psroll@domain.elided>]

Kim Boydell wrote
"...I realize that I
should have inspected the parts when they arrived so that the wrong set
of
springs were not installed, ..."

I don't agree, although most of us may have grown up with this idea. We,
the customers should not be the Quality Control Department for the
suppliers. This was the attitude of the U.S. auto companies for many
years -- " if you can find the defects we may fix them, but it's your
problem, not ours." Then, the Japaneses competition started using ideas
of Demming, Juran, Crosby, et al, and screwed the cars together right in
the first place. They called it "Quality." Customers found they liked
this. It saved the customers time and aggravation, and even money. The
car companies found it saved them money, too, because doing it right the
first time is cheaper than doing it wrong and still having to pay to fix
it. It even got the quality companies more business. It was a "win-win."
Unfortunately some of our suppliers still haven't figured this out.  The
vendor controls the quality of the service, not the customer. Errors in
the service should not cost the customer one penny, lira, pfennig,
centime, or anything else. We should help supplies understand this
simple concept. We should be consistent in holding them completely
responsible for all the costs to us for their errors. It shouldn't
matter if we have had the parts for a day, week, month or a year. If
they did it wrong it is still wrong after any length of time.

Unless we insist on quality service, we won't get it.

Paul Rollins
Vancouver, WA, USA

------------------------------