Forthcoming changes to quality standards will place a greater emphasis on risk management. Mark James of Loading / Unloading Equipment manufacturer Thorworld Industries advises the supply chain implications for companies
Recently, I took a call from company that had detected a gap in its business continuity planning. Quite rightly, the customer realised that, in the event of an emergency – such as a fire in the loading area or a vital piece of unloading equipment failing – they would need a contingency in place to maintain their supply chain responsibilities.
It isn’t often that companies show such foresight – but that might be about to change. The forthcoming changes to ISO 9001:2015 Quality Management Systems are set to make risk-based thinking a much more explicit consideration.
While not yet binding, the Draft International Standard has already been issued for comments; pending redrafts, the final release is planned for September 2015. In its current form, the standard includes a section on ‘Quality Management System and its Processes,’ which demands that: “the organization shall determine the risks and opportunities and plan and implement appropriate actions.”
Furthermore, under the section ‘Customer Focus,’ the draft advises that: “Top management shall ensure that the risks and opportunities that can affect conformity of products and services and the ability to enhance customer satisfaction are determined and addressed.”
Crucially, this is likely to include an efficient supply chain, given that any substantial downtime in the receipt of supplies, or distribution of goods, would adversely affect customer satisfaction. After all, there is no point doing everything to make a product of the right quality, only to be unable to supply the customer on time because a loading bay is out of service or demand is outstripping capacity.
In practical terms, this means that the kind of business continuity planning outlined by the company I spoke to, will likely become commonplace.
In the event of a loading bay failure, the avoidance of downtime is best achieved using one of two methods. Either the company keep an alternative loading method in situ, or they ensure that they have rapid access to a solution at short notice.
The first method – the ‘just in case’ option – would involve having an alternative method such as a yardramp permanently on rental. The second method would require only a short-term rental to cover the duration of the breakdown, or a busy period such as Christmas when additional loading is required. Hired equipment can invariably be available within days.
While both methods will inevitably incur cost, both are also likely to be cheaper than paying fees should carriers be forced to wait until faulty equipment is repaired, or any fines imposed by customers if delivery deadlines are missed.
Another obvious method of risk avoidance is to implement regular servicing and inspection of equipment. All reputable loading bay equipment manufacturers should offer a programme of Planned Preventative Maintenance (PPM), with tailored packages to suit specific requirements such as working environment and frequency of use. Simply by having PPM in place, a company will be more likely to meet the criteria of the revised ISO 9001:2015 guidelines.
Other risks are harder to determine – even as an experienced loading equipment supplier, too, sometimes we learn something new; all it takes is a specific customer request to reveal a wider industry problem.
On one such occasion last year, a customer explained that they were spending significant amounts of money on third party unloading services, because their own facilities were not compatible with rigid freight containers that brought essential components into the UK. The third party was required to de-stuff these containers and transfer the contents onto a curtain-sided vehicle for the final part of the journey.
Clearly, this was an inefficient system. As the use of a standalone yardramp was not suitable in this particular application, we were able to devise a solution using a loading ramp and platform combination that permitted the original containers to be brought direct to the site for unloading. Cost-efficiency was the primary driver on that particular project, yet there is an obvious ‘business continuity’ aspect, too. Relying on third parties presents its own risks – with an extra level of handling, there is obviously more risk of goods being damanged. Similarly, what happens if they suffer downtime or, worse, go out of business?
In short, it is imperative that companies look closer at their supply chain to determine potential risks. Not only is it good business sense – but it might soon make all the difference in proving your quality credentials.
Tel: 01246 260981
John Meale, Managing Director
Email: info@thorworld.co.uk
Comments are closed.