QRIP Training
John Deere Worldwide Supply
Management & Logistics
Quality Rating Impact Policy (QRIP)
•Development of the Policy
• Enterprise team representing all Divisions.
• Goal to commonize how we handle rejects.
• Develop consistent, enterprise approach.
• Encourage suppliers to be pro-active, take responsibility for their
quality.
2
| QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP – Policy Description
1.0 In order to encourage suppliers to be open and honest about problems incurred with non-conforming, or
“suspected” non-conforming material, the following policy is effective with the approval date of this
procedure. John Deere reserves the right to waive this policy should the supplier repeatedly abuse this
privilege.
A supplier’s Achieving Excellence quality PPM rating can be positively impacted if a supplier proactively
contacts the [Supplier Quality Organization] about a known or “suspected” quality problem. The following
conditions must be met. The supplier:
1.1 Contacts [Supplier Quality Organization], prior to the point of use (defined as being within John Deere.
If notification is not received prior to point of use, see section 2. If improperly labeled parts see section 4.
1.2 Conducts the investigation, sorting or reclaim personally, or through a qualified third party.
1.3 Reports the results of the investigation, sorting or reclaim, to the [John Deere TQE], or his
representative prior to leaving the [John Deere unit]
1.4 Provide an acceptable corrective action in writing, in a timely manner (per section 5 of JDWW SQP-01),
to ensure that the defect cannot occur again in the future. (*Ref: JDS-G223 section 5.12)
1.5 The appropriate [John Deere TQE], is the sole judge of timeliness and acceptability of the corrective
action.
1.6 This policy does not relieve the supplier of any financial, commercial, or material responsibilities.
1.7 Once disposition of nonconformance is complete, the CQE is responsible for any PPM adjustments
requested by supplier.
Quality Rating Impact:
If the above criteria are met, (0) zero pieces will be rejected against the supplier’s quality rating regardless
of the number of non-conforming parts found, returned, or reworked.
NOTE: Adjustments to Achieving Excellence numbers can only occur with (60) sixty days from the original
date of reject (applies to section 1.0 and 2.0).
3
| QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP – Policy Description cont.
2.0 If John Deere discovers non-conforming pieces, and the supplier responds per sections 1.2 through 1.6,
only the material actually found non-conforming will be counted against the supplier’s quality rating. Note:
Reclaimed parts will be counted against the supplier’s quality rating. Only the exact amount of nonconforming material will be recorded if the supplier’s response is timely.
3.0 If the supplier and the [John Deere unit] find it necessary to return a defective lot of material for
sorting, the entire quantity returned will be initially considered as non-conforming and will count against
that supplier’s quality rating. The supplier can request adjustment to these figures by reporting results of
the sort and complying with sections 1.2, 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6.
4.0 If mismarked/mislabeled containers or incorrectly packaged containers are shipped to Deere with a
wrong part number or wrong parts in box or are packaged incorrectly, all parts will be counted against the
supplier as (1) one piece and (1) one occurrence if a supplier ensures the part packaging or labeling is
corrected by a method acceptable to the John Deere Tactical Quality Engineer (TQE). The TQE may request
corrective action at the time of the reject (NCCA). The John Deere TQE reserves the right to count all pieces
as non-conforming if issues of mislabeling/packaging are chronic or poorly handled.
5.0 If containers that are shipped to Deere with a box containing 2 or more different part numbers, they will
be counted against supplier as the total number of incorrect part numbers that affect line production. This
number will be at least (1) one non-conforming piece and the total number may or may not be equal to the
total number of incorrect parts in the box. Only that number of parts that affected line production should be
counted against the supplier’s quality rating. Deere may request corrective action at the time of the reject
(NCCA), in compliance with sections 1.4 and 1.5. Deere reserves the right to count all pieces as nonconforming if issues of mixed part shipments are chronic or poorly handled.
6.0 If non-conforming parts are shipped to Deere, but are still able to be used on the manufacturing line,
they will be counted against the supplier’s quality rating as follows: If the supplier provides a deviation for
parts to be used “as-is”, only the parts that affected line production should be counted as non-conforming
parts. Deere may request corrective action at the time of the reject (NCCA), in compliance with sections 1.4
and 1.5. Deere reserves the right to count all pieces as non-conforming if issues of deviation-requiring
shipments are chronic or poorly handled.
4
| QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP Training
Case Studies / Policy Explanation
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
The supplier calls his Supply
Management Specialist/Quality
Engineer and tells him / her that
they discovered they had a problem
with their parts. They would like to
come in and inspect the inventory of
their parts. After inspection they find
20 parts which were bad and need
to be returned. No defects were
found on tractors.
Answer:
0pcs
Interpretation: This case applies
section 1 and addresses the
original intent of the Quality
Rating Impact Policy, to
encourage a supplier to notify us
in advance of a problem, sort
and purge the system of
defective components.
The only case where defects
would be counted against the
supplier is if defective parts were
placed on tractors.
6
| QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
We discover a problem with
parts on the line in one box of
parts. The box is set aside and
the supplier comes in and sorts
parts. 20 parts are found bad
and the supplier takes the bad
parts with an ESA.
7
| QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
20pcs
Interpretation: This case applies
to section 2 of the QRIP. A
defective lot is found at the point
of use, the lot is sorted and
actual quantity of defects is
charged against the supplier.
(Supplier sorts, but could not
repair the parts).
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
We have 5 parts that are found
bad on the assembly line and
are put in the reject area. The
supplier comes in and sorts
parts. The supplier finds 30
additional non-conforming parts
out of 500 inspected. All 35
parts are reworked and are
returned to inventory.
Production was not affected.
8
| QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
5pcs
Interpretation: In this case the
supplier was able to rework the
parts and not interrupt
production, we would charge
them with the initial 5.
The intent is to encourage
support for production and give
an incentive for the supplier to
sort and rework the parts.
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
150 parts are shipped in under
the wrong part number. We
find the error when we go to
install the parts.
They are re-ID'd or returned,
inventory is adjusted, and
accounting adjusted if
necessary.
Production is not affected.
9
| QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
1pc.
Interpretation: The quantity
rejected against the supplier can
be reduced to 1pc, only after an
acceptable corrective action is
received.
It is important to remember that
the Module Specialist reserves
the right to waive the QRIP if a
supplier repeatedly commits
errors.
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
A component (1pc) fails and
causes a tractor to be written
up with a non-conformance.
The part is repaired by the
supplier or by our repair
person. It is not removed, nor
sent back to the supplier.
Answer:
1pc
Interpretation: In many
instances it is more economical
to just fix the defect on the
tractor and not remove it for the
supplier to see.
It is best if we can document the
defect with digital photos, but in
these cases the nonconformance should still stand.
10 | QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
A problem part is found on the
line by Deere. The supplier is
unable to come to our factory
to sort parts. We sort through
600 parts taking one person 4
hours to sort parts. 300 parts
are defective and will be
returned to the supplier.
Answer:
300pcs.
Interpretation: All defective
parts found during sorts
conducted by us will be charged
(+ hours) to the supplier.
They must be proactive and
supply the sorting manpower or
schedule a qualified 3rd party to
conduct the sort / repair.
In this case all of the defective
parts found at point of use would
be counted.
11 | QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
A load of 50 rusty, excessively
oily, or excessively dirty parts is
found by Deere on the line.
The load was received in the
last month and has not been
stored in an abnormal location.
We washed and used the parts.
*This assumes there is nothing
to indicate a problem caused by
transportation or Deere.
12 | QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
50pcs.
Interpretation: Defective parts
that we had to rework, wash,
repaint, etc, would be charged
against the supplier, plus the
time to repair.
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
A mixed load of parts is found
on the line. There are 2000
parts in the container, the
supplier sorts and finds that
there are 150 of a similar part
mixed in with this load.
13 | QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
150pcs.
Interpretation: Mixed parts
should be considered as a
defective part…
These parts were not fit for use,
the incorrect quantity should be
charged against the supplier.
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
A Supplier finds 50 defective
parts at his location and calls
the Supply Management
Specialist/Quality Engineer and
asks for a deviation. The
deviation is granted prior to
shipment of the parts, but parts
are rejected on the shop floor
when received.
*The deviation authorizes the
supplier to ship parts.
14 | QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
0pcs.
Interpretation: Parts approved
under deviation are not to be
counted against a given
supplier's PPM's.
Deviation = Fit for use approval
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
A defective part is found on the
line at Deere, the supplier is
notified and comes to our
factory and sorts 100 parts at
the line and 500 parts in
inventory. The supplier finds
10 defective pieces at the line,
50 defects in inventory.
None of these can be repaired.
Production is not interrupted.
15 | QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
10pcs
Interpretation: In this case, the
true intention of the policy is to
charge the supplier with the
actual % or qty. of defective
parts.
The correct # of rejected parts is
the quantity found at the point
of use on the line…
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
Deere finds a defective part
prior to point of use, the
supplier arrives, finds all 1500
parts in the lot are defective,
but each can be easily repaired.
The supplier repairs the parts in
house and places all of the
parts back into production,
without interrupting production.
16 | QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
1pc.
Interpretation: If the parts have
not yet reached the point of use,
we want to encourage the
supplier to come in and fix the
parts rather than return them.
The correct quantity of defects
to charge the supplier is
intended to be the Module
Specialist’s call, the initial NC
can stand, but some rejects
should go against the supplier's
PPM. Parts found at point of use
should count if production
affected
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
A lot of defective parts is
discovered on our floor, the
supplier visits, sorts and
determines that all of the parts,
500 at the line and 2000 in
inventory, are defective and
can not be repaired.
The supplier brings replacement
parts, and swaps the
inventories without interrupting
production.
17 | QRIP Policy Training |
Answer:
500pcs.
Interpretation: In some cases
the supplier may opt to swap the
defective material. If the
supplier has provided the
appropriate response to our
initial defect situation, they are
allowed to swap material to
prevent production from being
interrupted.
In these cases, it is appropriate
to charge the supplier with the
number of parts that were at
point of use (on the line)
QRIP Policy Explanation – Case Studies
We find a load of bad parts and
reject 200 pieces back to a
supplier for additional testing.
The supplier completes the
inspection and says that they
found there were only 50 bad
pieces out of the 200 rejected.
Answer:
50pcs.
Interpretation: This case applies
to section 3 of the QRIP and is
intended to address situations
where the supplier can not sort
or determine pass / fail
conditions at the Deere facility,
such as those that require
dedicated test equipment.
Note: This is the most
unacceptable way to address a
defect and should be used
sparingly.
18 | QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP Training
Policy Intentions
QRIP Intentions
•The Policy is intended to:
• Encourage suppliers to be proactive.
• Suppliers made more accountable for their defects.
• Emphasis is on root cause analysis / corrective action.
• It is a Consistent, fair, enterprise approach!
20 | QRIP Policy Training |
QRIP Intentions
•How can we improve Supplier Quality?
• Ensure defect investigations are accurate and fair.
• Investigate the level of contamination, where was defect found?
• Encourage the suppliers to support production
• Encourage supplier to contain, then correct.
• Emphasize effective root cause analysis / prevention of defects.
• Be tough on the Supplier’s Corrective Action Reports.
• Does the action prevent the defect from occurring again?
• Could the defect occur on a sister part, same feature, if so fix it too!
•The QRIP Policy is a privilege not a right. Don’t let it be abused
21 | QRIP Policy Training |