Customer storyAutomotive / Supplier questionnaires
Two plants, one response process at U-Turn
Two manufacturing sites share a response process without mixing up their capabilities. Account managers prepare supplier questionnaires in 6 hours instead of 14.
Inside U-Turn
Supplier questionnaires
- less preparation time
- 57%
- 14 → 6 team hours per questionnaire
- plants in one response process
- 2
- Site-specific evidence kept distinct
- questionnaires in the pilot
- 5
- A six-week evaluation
01 / The starting point
One supplier did not mean identical capabilities
Key accounts & plant quality
Supplier questionnaires
Buyers sent U-Turn one questionnaire, but its two plants had different equipment, inspection procedures, and traceability processes. Each answer had to match the site doing the work.
Account managers started with a group-level response. Quality leads then untangled which statements applied to their plant, adding review rounds for capabilities that were already documented.
About U-Turn
An automotive components supplier responding to OEM and tier-one questionnaires. Account managers coordinate technical input with quality leads at two production sites.
Before
Reuse a group-level statement for either plant
With Savix
Check the source and site behind the statement
Before
Send the full worksheet to both quality teams
With Savix
Assign site-specific questions to the responsible plant
Before
Rebuild company answers for each questionnaire
With Savix
Reuse shared material and review the differences
02 / Working with Savix
Shared drafting, site-specific review
The team selected company information, site capability documents, traceability procedures, and approved supplier Q&A for the pilot.
- STEP 01
Name the site in the reference material
Quality leads checked the site and scope of each document before the account team uploaded it. General company information stayed separate from plant-specific process descriptions.
- STEP 02
Build the questionnaire response
Savix extracted the questions and prepared answers from the selected documents. Account managers used the source quotes to check whether a statement described the proposed production site.
- STEP 03
Have each plant confirm its commitments
Plant quality owners reviewed questions about inspection, traceability, and customer-specific requirements. The account manager resolved differences and exported the reviewed answers into the buyer’s submission process.
What made the difference
A shared response process should make differences between sites easier to see, not hide them
03 / One answer, from source to review
See the difference in an answer
The source sets the limits. The reviewer confirms what the team can commit to.
The buyer asks
Do you provide serial-level traceability for all components?
Company source
Standard production is tracked by batch. Serial-level traceability is available for designated product programs following customer agreement.
Plant B quality procedure · Traceability
Reviewed response
Plant B provides batch-level traceability as standard. Serial-level tracking can be agreed for designated product programs; we will confirm the applicable method for your components before production.
Review owner: Plant B quality lead
04 / The results
Eight fewer hours preparing each questionnaire
Across the five questionnaires, preparation fell from 14 to 6 team hours. Account managers began with a draft and the relevant reference material, so plant quality leads could review their sections without assembling the company response first.
Both sites kept responsibility for their own technical commitments. The account team settled on a sequence it could repeat for each buyer: reuse the shared information, confirm the manufacturing site, and resolve the specific exceptions. That made the handoff between commercial and plant teams easier to manage.
team hours · 5 questionnaires over 6 weeks
How these results were measured
Average research and first-draft effort for five supplier questionnaires in a six-week pilot. Plant engineering validation, production testing, and final buyer formatting are excluded.
Take this into your next response
Keep site identity in the source documents. Reviewers should never have to guess which plant an answer describes.
