Company A had a proliferation of spreadsheets carrying information about quotations and orders. Essentially, everyone did their own thing, with the best of intentions. However, there are two problems with this situation:
- There is the cost incurred in everyone entering data into their own spreadsheets, and
- There is a good chance that there will be disparities. These occur because of either keying-in errors or timing differences. Say an order is received but it is slightly different to that which was quoted; if all the spreadsheets aren't updated at the same time, then which ones contain the correct data?
Company B are an engineering company. They used the systems set up in their quality management system, used with the SSS INTACT system, to track the incidence and costs of both internal problems and customer complaints. They were able, for litte cost, to analyse the cause and costs of these and determine actions to prevent recurrence. They achieved both cost savings and improved customer relations because of the reduction in issues which could be the cause of a customer complaint.
Company C are another engineering company. Without a formal calibration system, they ran the risk that the measuring equipment they were using might be incorrect. This was a high-risk situation, with the potential for incorrect products being shipped to clients resulting in high costs of replacement and gaining a poor reputation.
Company C decided to buy appropriate calibrated slip gauges (they did not need a full set) and set up a simple calibration programme, with records for each measuring device. Apart from the initial cost for the slip gauges, the on-going cost is low and so the cost of calibration is little when compared with the risk of using uncalibrated measuring devices.
See more about ISO 9001 systems support from SSS
See more about INTACT