1、JEDEC STANDARD Guidelines for Supplier Performance Rating JEP146A (Revision of JEP146, June 2003) JANUARY 2009 (Reaffirmed: MAY 2014)JEDEC SOLID STATE TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION NOTICE JEDEC standards and publications contain material that has been prepared, reviewed, and approved through the JEDEC Boar
2、d of Directors level and subsequently reviewed and approved by the JEDEC legal counsel. JEDEC standards and publications are designed to serve the public interest through eliminating misunderstandings between manufacturers and purchasers, facilitating interchangeability and improvement of products,
3、and assisting the purchaser in selecting and obtaining with minimum delay the proper product for use by those other than JEDEC members, whether the standard is to be used either domestically or internationally. JEDEC standards and publications are adopted without regard to whether or not their adopt
4、ion may involve patents or articles, materials, or processes. By such action JEDEC does not assume any liability to any patent owner, nor does it assume any obligation whatever to parties adopting the JEDEC standards or publications. The information included in JEDEC standards and publications repre
5、sents a sound approach to product specification and application, principally from the solid state device manufacturer viewpoint. Within the JEDEC organization there are procedures whereby a JEDEC standard or publication may be further processed and ultimately become an ANSI standard. No claims to be
6、 in conformance with this standard may be made unless all requirements stated in the standard are met. Inquiries, comments, and suggestions relative to the content of this JEDEC standard or publication should be addressed to JEDEC at the address below, or call (703) 907-7559 or www.jedec.org Publish
7、ed by JEDEC Solid State Technology Association 2009 3103 North 10th Street Suite 240 South Arlington, VA 22201-2107 This document may be downloaded free of charge; however JEDEC retains the copyright on this material. By downloading this file the individual agrees not to charge for or resell the res
8、ulting material. PRICE: Please refer to the current Catalog of JEDEC Engineering Standards and Publications online at http:/www.jedec.org/Catalog/catalog.cfm Printed in the U.S.A. All rights reserved PLEASE! DONT VIOLATE THE LAW! This document is copyrighted by JEDEC and may not be reproduced withou
9、t permission. Organizations may obtain permission to reproduce a limited number of copies through entering into a license agreement. For information, contact: JEDEC Solid State Technology Association 3103 North 10th Street Suite 240 South Arlington, VA 22201-2107 or call (703) 907-7559 JEDEC Publica
10、tion No. 146A -i- GUIDELINES FOR SUPPLIER PERFORMANCE RATING Introduction Manufacturing operations often require the use of suppliers and subcontractors for materials, piece parts, manufacturing, test, and finish operations. Semiconductor suppliers are using semiconductor fabrication, package assemb
11、ly, test, and finish subcontractors. Users of semiconductor products are relying on PCB (Printed Circuit Board) fabrication subcontractors and PCB assembly subcontractors for these operations as well as reliance on distributors of electronic components for inventory management and stock room functio
12、ns. With the increasing reliance on second or third parties to assist in the manufacture of goods, there exists a need to measure and rate suppliers based on consistent criteria that can be measured. There is also a need for suppliers to be measured uniformly by their customer base so that suppliers
13、 who market to a broad base of customers can understand the data presented and translate that understanding into meaningful preventive or corrective actions. This document provides a vehicle to accomplish the task of measuring suppliers in a consistent manner. JEDEC Publication No. 146A -ii- JEDEC P
14、ublication No. 146A Page 1 GUIDELINES FOR SUPPLIER PERFORMANCE RATING (From JEDEC Board Ballot JCB-08-59, formulated under the cognizance of the JC-14.4 Subcommittee on Quality Processes and Methods.) 1 Scope The intent of this document is to establish guidelines and provide examples by which custom
15、ers can measure their suppliers based on mutually agreed upon objective criteria. These results can then be used to improve communications between customers and suppliers. The document applies to supplier / customer interfaces. Subcontractors used by suppliers are not addressed separately but are in
16、cluded in the rating of the supplier. 2 Reference Documents ISO 9000 3 Terms and definitions corrective action request: A formal request from a customer to a supplier requiring an investigation into the root cause of a specific problem and the steps taken to prevent recurrence. delivery and lead tim
17、e rating: An assessment of the metrics established to evaluate delivery of product. metric: A quantitative measure of an activity, results, and/or reaction. quality rating: An assessment of the metrics established to evaluate the quality. service rating: An assessment of the metrics established to e
18、valuate the suppliers commitment to servicing the customer. subcontractor: An individual or business firm contracting to perform part or all of anothers contract. supplier: An individual or business firm that provides goods or services to another. JEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 2 3 Terms and defini
19、tions (contd) supplier performance rating: An assessment of the metrics established to evaluate a suppliers performance. supplier report card: A document that conveys to a supplier an evaluation of their performance based on criteria as defined by the customer and agreed to by the supplier. NOTE The
20、 report should contain the rating for each item. technology rating: An assessment of the metrics established to evaluate technology attributes. 4 Measurements of Supplier Performance Customers should maintain performance metrics for at least their key suppliers. Items such as quality, reliability, d
21、elivery, technology, and value should be measured. It is recommended that the supplier be included in the discussions on what to measure and how the measurement will be accomplished and reported. JEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 3 5 Procedure a) A rating system should be established that will rank an
22、d differentiate suppliers. All metrics defined may apply to all suppliers rated and ranked together. Metrics should be quantitatively determined and agreed to between supplier and customer. b) A supplier report card should be generated on an agreed upon schedule. It is recommended that this report s
23、hould be issued quarterly. Annex A shows an example of an approach to a supplier report card. c) The customer should assume responsibility for the following: 1) Engage the supplier in meaningful dialogue to set expectations and obtain supplier agreement; 2) Maintain records of the supplier report ca
24、rd; 3) Present and explain the supplier report card to the supplier on an agreed schedule; 4) Discuss each metric in the supplier rating system that falls below expectations with the supplier; 5) Document agreed upon preventative or corrective actions; 6) Issue formal supplier corrective action requ
25、ests (SCAR) if warranted or applicable. It is recommended that such a request accompany the supplier report card in the event the information is mailed to a supplier; 7) Customers should determine the relative importance of each item in the areas of quality, delivery, technology, value, and service
26、if using annex A; 8) Customers should group suppliers into meaningful categories for comparison purposes. For example: Suppliers of memory product compared to other memory suppliers. d) The supplier should assume the following responsibilities: 1) Discuss expectations with the customer. 2) Review an
27、d maintain records of the supplier report card 3) Utilize the feedback of the supplier report card as part of the management review process. 4) Highlight any inaccuracies or concerns with the supplier report card to the customer in a timely manner. 5) Document and communicate to the customer any pre
28、ventative or corrective actions required by the supplier report card or supplier corrective action requests JEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 4 Annex A: Example of a Supplier Rating System Guideline on how to use the rating tables: 1) Define weight of main items (see summary, e.g. quality) 2) Define w
29、eight of sub criterion per item. Define 0-to-100 scale for sub criteria with quantitative measures. 3) Measure performance by using the corresponding measure. In case of qualitative assessment choose rating table at the bottom of the template. 4) Calculate weighted mean rating value per main item 5)
30、 Calculate weighted mean rating value (Totals) Explanation of headers in the rating tables: 1) Description of sub criteria contributing to performance 2) Measure to be used for measuring the performance (column gives some suggestions) 3) Weight of the sub criteria within the main item 4) Value of th
31、e measure 5) Comment to explain the rating in further detail JEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 5 QUALITY Measure * Weight of sub criterion % Supplier perform-ance Comments/GoalsStrengths/ Weaknesses Defects Incoming quality Manufacturing line quality Quality of Quantities, labels, invoices Rejection R
32、ate at Incoming / lot acceptance rate / Average Outgoing Quality with resp. to quantity received Disruptions Frequency of line-downs or inventory purges caused by technical problems (e.g. defects of material). Reliability Field failure rate Timely Reliability data. In fit or ppm Depends on commitmen
33、t Failure Analysis Response time Root cause analysis and corrective actions. Containment and Recovery actions. Cycle time target vs actual Quality of 8D (fulfillment rate according to agreed checklist) Other Traceability Other (per Customer) * Some suggestions are given Weight means rating value in
34、percent value Supplier Performance 100 Excellent 75 good 50 medium 25 Poor 0 Unacceptable QUALITY Ranking vs. Similar Suppliers: # of # suppliers or: 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Worst Average BestJEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 6 Annex A Example of a Supplier Rating System (contd) DELIVERY Measure* Weight o
35、f Sub Criterion % Supplier perfor-mance Comments/GoalsStrengths/ Weaknesses On-time Line items received by commitment date. On time rate Support Meeting lead-time needs. Communication of order status. Measures against customer request Flexibility Response to upsides or delays. Support for end-of-lif
36、e products. Other Product identification (e.g. labeling) Other (per Customer) * Some suggestions are given Weight means rating value in percent value Supplier Performance 100 Excellent 75 good 50 medium 25 Poor 0 Unacceptable QUALITY Ranking vs. Similar Suppliers: # of # suppliers or: 0% 25% 50% 75%
37、 100% Worst Average BestJEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 7 Annex A Example of a Supplier Rating System (contd) TECHNOLOGY Measure Weight of sub criterion % Supplier perfor-mance Comments/GoalsStrengths/ Weaknesses New Technology Alignment with customer roadmap. Communication and knowledge sharing. Pr
38、oduct Development Design involvement and engineering support. Expertise and tools support. Product Release Involvement in short-term schedule. Prototype availability. Continuous Support Share leading-edge concepts Support older technologies. Other (per Customer) Weight means rating value in percent
39、value Supplier Performance 100 Excellent 75 good 50 medium 25 Poor 0 Unacceptable QUALITY Ranking vs. Similar Suppliers: # of # suppliers or: 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Worst Average BestJEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 8 Annex A Example of a Supplier Rating System (contd) VALUE Measure Weight of sub criter
40、ion % Supplier perfor-mance Comments/GoalsStrengths/ Weaknesses Cost Terms and conditions. Pricing accuracy and timeliness. Cooperation Share market information Share pricing trends Environmental Meeting environmental requirements. Coordination in meeting future requirements. Other Social responsibi
41、lity Other (per Customer) Weight means rating value in percent value Supplier Performance 100 Excellent 75 good 50 medium 25 Poor 0 Unacceptable QUALITY Ranking vs. Similar Suppliers: # of # suppliers or: 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Worst Average BestJEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 9 Annex A Example of a Su
42、pplier Rating System (contd) SERVICE Measure Weight of sub criterion % Supplier performance Comments/GoalsStrengths/ Weaknesses Marketing Support Response to quote requests. Product documentation. Flexibility regarding requirements. Product/Process Changes Product or process change notification. Com
43、munication of change details and results. Participation in decisions. Knowledgeable experts/contacts. Communication Easy access Participation in Business Reviews Other (per Customer) Weight means rating value in percent value Supplier Performance 100 Excellent 75 good 50 medium 25 Poor 0 Unacceptabl
44、e QUALITY Ranking vs. Similar Suppliers: # of # suppliers or: 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Worst Average BestJEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 10 Annex A Example of a Supplier Rating System (contd) Summary Main Items Weight* of criterion % Supplier Rating *% QUALITY DELIVERY TECHNOLOGY VALUE SERVICE Totals 100
45、 QUALITY Ranking vs. Similar Suppliers: # of # suppliers or: 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Worst Average BestTop 3 Strengths 1 2 3 Top 3 Weaknesses 1 2 3 Completed by: Position: Phone Number: Date: * weight means rating values JEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 11 Annex B (informative): Difference between JEP146
46、 and JEP146A This table briefly describes most of the changes made to entries that appear in this publication, JEP146A, compared to its predecessor, JEP146 (June 2003). Clause Description of change 1 Scope: has been extended by last two sentences 3 Terms and definitions: definition updated and exten
47、ded 5 Procedure: change of sequence Annex A Example of a Supplier Rating System Guideline and explanation of tables added Introduction of weight Content more detailed JEDEC Publication No. 146A Page 12 Rev. 9/02 Standard Improvement Form JEDEC JEP146A The purpose of this form is to provide the Techn
48、ical Committees of JEDEC with input from the industry regarding usage of the subject standard. Individuals or companies are invited to submit comments to JEDEC. All comments will be collected and dispersed to the appropriate committee(s). If you can provide input, please complete this form and retur
49、n to: JEDEC Attn: Publications Department 3103 North 10th Street Suite 240 South Arlington, VA 22201-2107 Fax: 703.907.7583 or send via email to : juliecjedec.org 1. I recommend changes to the following: Requirement, clause number Test method number Clause number The referenced clause number has proven to be: Unclear Too Rigid In Error Other 2. Recommendations for correction: 3. Other suggestions for document improvement: Submitted by Name: Phone: Company: E-mail:
