First let me say what a great resource this is and commend everyone who donates their time and knowledge.

My company is in the beginning stages of seeking TS certification, but we are having difficulty identifying who our customers really are and whose customer specific requirements we need to meet.

For a little background, the parts we make are essentially catalogue parts. These parts are sold through distributors who sell them to many different industries, including automotive. Some of these distributors sell to OEM's and to Tier I organizations (ex. Delphi), which is how we started this journey in the first place. In our case Delphi has told their distributor that the parts they supply need to come from TS certified companies, which includes our parts among others.

Some here have the opinion that we need to be addressing the customer specific requirements for Delphi (as an example) since the distributor doesn't manufacture parts they just "distribute" them and therefore can't be held to those requirements or "certified".

My opinion is that it states in the specification that the supplier is responsible for part quality even if they outsource, and since the distributor is the one actually supplying the parts they are responsible to meet any Delphi requirements passed down to them. Consequently I think we should be contacting our distributors who may supply the auto industry and inquiring if they have any specific requirements above TS certification.

Another reason for my line of thought is that Delphi has the COVISINT system for their suppliers and they won't allow us access, however they do have the distributor set-up and using the system.

I am very interested to hear others opinions and/or experiences with this type of situation.

Thanks,
Charles

PS if you happen to agree that the distributor is our customer I would appreciate any tips/dos/don'ts in composing the letter asking for any additional requirements.

It has been a while since I was in an automotive situation (it was still "QS" then) but we were a third tier situation at that time. We considered our customer to be the one paying the bills, and they were usually the ones requiring that we be certified also. Therefore, we counted on our customer to supply us with all the requirements that we needed. We occasionally had to send out letters to the customers that were not good about spelling out requirements laying out the fact that we needed their input to ensure that product would meet requirements and since we were QS certified, we relied upon them to pass all requirements that might affect product performance/conformance to us. Usually, we had little trouble getting the information once our customers knew we were serious about providing good product, fit for their use.

Nobody likes to have GM, Ford, or Daimler/Chrysler come down on them for something that was not made clear at the beginning, so make sure that the customer's requirements are documented and any communications that you have attempted to get these requirements are available, recorded.

It may be advisable to separate two distinct issues: the first is the need to have a QMS that will ensure and assure your products are fit for purpose. That is that they will satisy the needs of the end user, since you make parts that would become incorporated into a motor vehicle.
The second is to address the needs of your immediate customer - the distributor.
When you put together your QMS keep those two in mind. If your parts are not fit for purpose, that fact will soon come down through the OEMs supply chain to you. And, in that case, you certainly have not addressed the needs of your customer (whether stated or implied).

A good starting point to consider in addition to the foregoing is "who specifies the features and characteristics etc" for your parts. If you develop the spec based on your own in house R&D and the customer accepts your spec, you had better make sure the spec reflects the end users' needs and how the parts may be used, abused and misused. Else, you could face serious legal problems in the event of accident or loss. If you are merely a manufacturer of parts against your customers' own spec, that is a different matter. Even so, that would then affect the scope of activities needed under TS (as you would not then be a "designer".)

With armies of attornies surrounding us nowadays and a society that has a propensity to litigate to make a fast buck, it may be prudent to consider all organizations in your customer delivery chain as "the customer" and to consolidate their total needs in formulating your QMS. Perhaps, then, you might ask your top management and legal department for some advice based on this real world situation. Their policy could, then, answer your question suitable for your company's needs, risks and business model.

If you get a P.O. form the distributer, then that is your customer. Why get into TS16949 if you are not required by your customer. Look at ISO9001:2000 only if you feel you must be certified to something. That is the first step. What is your customer telling you?

...the parts we make are essentially catalogue parts. These parts are sold through distributors who sell them to many different industries, including automotive...
Welcome to the cove, Charles. Took you a while to make your first post, eh? :bigwave:

What exactly are your products?

ralphsulser, good catch on the why go ts? that is an excellent point that companies need to think about. I know that even back in the QS days, we told our customers that we would get certified to ISO before we went QS. Our explanation of learning how to walk before we tried to run satisfied even our highest level customers as long as we kept them informed.

In our case Delphi has told their distributor that the parts they supply need to come from TS certified companies, which includes our parts among others.
That's why I wanted to know what they make exactly. When I think of catalog parts, I think stuff like socket head cap screws or endmills.

Don't you have to make car parts to be TS?

Thanks for the welcome.

The product we make is Cable Ties. We basically design and produce product for the shelf. When we do production runs it is to re-fill the wharehouse, not for a specific customer. Some of these products have been adopted for the auto industry. One of the bigger automotive applications is for wiring harnesses, either holding them together or holding them in place.

We are already ISO 9001:2000 and QS-9000 certified. The reason for the TS is twofold. One, we have been told by Delphi, through our distributor, that we need to be TS certified. Two, we have a small position with an OEM (again through a distributor) currently with the potential of bigger future business if we get certified.

Because we have a well established QMS currently, with the two certifications above, I'm not necessarily concerned with some of the fitness of use and whether we can supply good product issues. My real concern is that throughout the TS spec the term "Customer Specific Requirements" is mentioned regularly along with the need to meet those requirements. This will have a big impact as we move forward trying to analyze our current system and what we need to add to become TS certified.

The way I am interpreting this is if I say that Delphi is my customer that opens me up to some very specific requirements above and beyond TS as laid out in their supplier manual that I have to address in my new/updated QMS. If I say that the distributor (who pays me for my product) is my customer, then I am open to their requirements (if there are any) instead. Now I do understand that the distributor could simply say their requirements are that you meet the requirements as laid out by Delphi, then my question is nullified and I will have to meet the "tougher" requirements.

Based on your description, I don't see how you can be able to register to TS16949:
Your products could just as easily be used on wire harnesses for aerospace or refrigeration systems.

I am under the impression ONLY organizations which manufacture automotive products may register to TS. (From ISO/TS 16949:2002 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE CQI-7 37 Issue: 01 Dated: 6/03)
6.0 REGISTRATION PROCESS
Page 37

6.0 REGISTRATION PROCESS
Page 37
Note 5
Only sites that manufacture automotive
products are eligible for registration. Stand
alone support sites such as design,
purchasing, warehousing, distribution, etc.,
where no products are manufactured are not
eligible for registration. These sites can only
be listed as support functions on the
manufacturing site certificate.

If you manufacture thread used to sew seating materials and carpets (regardless of whether they are in homes, offices, aircraft, or automobiles), does that make you an automotive manufacturer?

If you get a P.O. form the distributer, then that is your customer. Why get into TS16949 if you are not required by your customer. Look at ISO9001:2000 only if you feel you must be certified to something. That is the first step. What is your customer telling you?

Great advice Ralph.
Wallace

2 things are truly clear in the case:
1- Your company is manufaturing products and finally get used by a auto OEM;
2- Your company in one hoop of the chain of auto parts supply. no matter how many tiers of distributor out there.
that's why you can be certified to TS.
then how to tell the cust. spec. of your company?
in my standpoint, just ask your customer. so the following situation would be: Is there any chance that your customer(distributor) said " nothing"?
my answer to the question is NO.

an

IMHO your customer is the company who gives you the order and pays the bill. Delphi can WANT you to be certified to TS all they like but they will have to accept your refusal to do so. There is no requirement for you to be TS certified other than by a customer specific requirement. If your customer is a distributor, Delphi cannot require them to be certified either because distributors are not eligible for TS. If Delphi is putting pressure on your company to become TS certified, it is because of ignorance on their part. As part of the automotive chain your responsibility is to be registered to ISO 9001:2000 with a goal of being compliant to TS. There is a vast difference between compliance and certification to TS.

IMO customers who push TS certification down the supply chain like they did QS are condemning TS to the same fate as QS. TS is a specialized QMS which works great for tier 1 suppliers but the further down the supply chain it goes, the more ridiculous some of the requirements get. It may be fine for one of the Big 3 to micro-manage a supplier who only supplies them but even mighty GM isn't going to get Jimmy's Hardware to certify to TS for a can of paint every other week. Maybe if the customer was the government and they were paying $30,000 a gallon .........

Dave

Yeah,
An STA would definately rule in favour of ISO 9001 as the sole standard of compliance. That would be good enough.
Wallace.

2 things are truly clear in the case:
1- Your company is manufaturing products and finally get used by a auto OEM;
2- Your company in one hoop of the chain of auto parts supply. no matter how many tiers of distributor out there.
that's why you can be certified to TS.
then how to tell the cust. spec. of your company?
in my standpoint, just ask your customer. so the following situation would be: Is there any chance that your customer(distributor) said " nothing"?
my answer to the question is NO.

an

I think Jackson Kan's post pretty much sums up our situation. I also agree with Dave that this shouldn't necessarily be shoved down the supply chain, we are already ISO 9001:2000 certified and that should be good enough. However I'm sure we've all experienced how these things work, he who has the big stick makes the rules :whip: .

I also think there is some misunderstanding in our management ranks. One of the other reasons we want this certification is to increase future business possibilities, eventhough we will probably always deal throught distributors and never design specifically for the automotive industry.

Thanks for all the input and food for thought.

Charles

I agree with what Jackson Kan said. You are eligible to be certified. Whether you choose to be is a strategic decision your company has to make. Once you go for it, the customer-specific requirements are those of your direct customer(s). If they contractually ask you to comply with the Delphi requirements, then you have to. If they don't, you comply with only the requirements imposed by the distributor(s).

One more point, Charles - registrar audits for TS 16949 will only look at processes/product lines that result in OEM product in vehicles. You will need to know from your customer(s) what products will end up.

You mentioned writing a letter requesting customer specific requirements from the distributor. Here's an example of what you might consider including in the letter:

Dear XXXX

In order to achieve certification to the TS 16949, we are required to comply with automotive customer-specific requirements in addition to the requirements of the standard. TS 16949 states,

"This Technical Specification, coupled with applicable customer-specific requirements, defines the fundamental quality management system requirements for those subscribing to this document."

In order to comply with this requirement, we are inquiring about the existence of any automotive customer-specific requirements required for your products. Althought TS 16949 does not require that OEM requirements be passed by distributors to thier suppliers, some choose to do so. If you choose to pass down requirements from your customers, you must provide current copies of these requirements, and you must keep us informed of updates as they are revised.

In addition, we are required to know which of the parts we provide to you are destined for the automotive OEM market. Your prompt response with with customer-specific requirements (if any) and a list of part numbers is greatly appreciated to assist us in our certification efforts.

Best regards,

XXXX


This is just a rough cut at it, and you may choose to use completely different wordking, but make sure they know that passing down OEM CSR's is optional, and may be inconvenient for them.

I hope this helps.

howste, you bring up a good point about knowing what parts go where. That is one of the things we will have issues with going forward. Currently we identify the parts that go to automotive by the PPAP's we have sent out when requested by the distributors for their customer. There are several holes in this method, but its what we have to work with for now.

Thanks for the letter, :thanx: its sounds very good and its a great starting place for me to work from.

Drop all this senseless, profit sapping, bureaucratic nonsense…

Your Customers are the people who give you money to supply your products.

Simple!!!

But I guess this one of the reasons why the automotive industries can turn $700 of raw materials into $20,000 that you have to keep taking back to the dealer because ‘we’ are more concerned about building our ivory towers as opposed to giving Customers things they want.

This one is a real poser. A strict view of TS2 clause 1.1 would say that, if these cable ties end up on a vehicle, then yes you are an automotive supplier and should be at least compliant with TS and applicable customer-specific requirements. You customer, by definition, is the one receiving your products. Is your customer (the distributor) requiring you to comply with TS2 and Delphi's CSRs?

Your logic is sound concerning outsourcing. In this scenario, looking at the distributor as the organization, Delphi as the customer and you as the supplier, the distributor has outsourced manufacturing (as well as packaging, labeling and design?). As manufacturing is certainly a process that affects product conformity with requirements, according to TS2 4.1 and 4.1.1 the distributor must ensure control over your processes and is responsible for conformity to customer requirements. The burning question at this point is, how is/will the distributor choose to do this?

On the other hand, shipping through a distributor means you have no control over which of your parts go to Delphi and which ones go to Ace Hardware (a situation I've been in). Unless you start playing games with grades and part numbers ($$$).

I'm not familiar with Delphi's CSR, but I note that the OEM CSRs are FINALLY dealing with the concept of "small supplers", which can also refer to "small" in terms of low volume relative to automotive. There are all kinds of provisions for second-party audits and other means of verifying compliance to applicable QMS requirements for "small suppliers". Perhaps this can be helpful.

If I were in your shoes I would contact the IAOB, describe your situation in great and gruesome detail, and ask them for an interpretation on this matter. Better yet, the distributor and Delphi should do this, as they are the ones driving the bus at this point. That's what the IAOB is there for.

"As manufacturing is certainly a process that affects product conformity with requirements,..."

Why are we making this so complicated and bureaucratic.

An analogy, off the top of my head, anyone remember the episode of the Simpson’s when Homer is promoted to a senior position, the first thing he does is give free sachets of mayonnaise to workers, everyone is over the moon and happy in their work and productivity goes up, therefore affecting 'manufacturing' and ‘conformity with requirements’ (I challenge anyone to disagree with the statement that a contented worker positively affects quality!).

Do we now therefore have to ensure that our condiment suppliers are registered via this bureaucratic nonsense, or should we let commonsense prevail.....