Poor quality costs even more
HERA Industry Development General Manager Nick Inskip (left) Quality has a cost and a value and buying solely on cost can mean that the quality you think you are getting may not be there. The recent asbestos issues with the locomotives imported from China by KiwiRail highlights the danger where quality is compromised. While much was made of the fact that it was a subcontractor to the main supplier who used the offending coating, nothing can take away from the fact that it is KiwiRail’s supplier’s responsibility to ensure that their supplier provides a conforming product. How do they do this? They assess their supplier’s processes and systems. The first of which might be to look at how they translate the requirements detailed in their customers order into an output. This raises questions about what it was that was on the locomotive suppliers order to the sub-contractor. Did they pass on KiwiRail’s requirement for no asbestos, or not? If not then the fault isn’t with the sub-contractor. Which poses another question, would a different material supplied by the sub-contractor have cost more and is that why the asbestos coating was used? The more worrying concern is if the coating was such a quality failure, what about the rest of the locomotive? Do we now have to test bolts to make sure they are the right tensile strength and galvanising to make sure there is no antimony present? So as a company and as a country purchasing offshore, you really need to price on the quality risk. From the KiwiRail example even if your offshore supplier has a quality system and it is certified, that does not mean it actually works to the level we would expect in New Zealand. In which case as a purchaser you need to check […]