:truce: Dear all
I`m trying to get the ISO TS certificate for my company next december. The company is a centre for sales, service and logistics and delievers electronic components to the OEMs. Due to the norm (the terms from ISO 9000 are valid) a "product" can be either "service", "hardware", "software" or "bulk material". Nevertheless the auditor wants to see a production line. He told me that he contacted the IATF and whatever is written in the norms or specifications the IATF takes "product" as a part which can be mounted into the car.
Unfortunately our customer - one of the Big Three and member of IATF - insists on the ISO TS 16949 certificate. I think, the guys from the purchase department do not know what this means for suppliers like us.

Has anyone of you made similar experiences or can give me some supporting arguments?
I appreciate your help very much!

Thanks in advance and best regards :thanx:

Korni

Nevertheless the auditor wants to see a production line. He told me that he contacted the IATF and whatever is written in the norms or specifications the IATF takes "product" as a part which can be mounted into the car.

Have you asked to see a document where the IATF defines a product as such? Or, if you do not wish to step on the toes of your auditor, perhaps you could contact the IATF yourself?

Good luck and keep us updated on what happens!

It will be interesting to see how this develops.

If you are a service company, then your service IS your product. It sounds like the auditor has taken a very narrow definition here.

Did you address internal as well as external customers? One production area's product (Output) can be another's input. Engineering output (Dwgs, specs, FMEA, etc.) is their product.

I'm having a real hard time with the narrow view here. Sorta makes 3/4 of the TS and ISO standards meaningless.

This Technical Specification is applicable to sites of the organization where customer-specified parts, for production and/or service, are manufactured.
Supporting functions, whether on-site or remote (such as design centres, corporate headquarters and distribution centres), form part of the site audit as they support the site, but cannot obtain stand-alone certification to this
Technical Specification.

I am afraid that he is right

Of course I asked the auditor where this IATF interpretation is written down. He told me somthing about "statements" but stayed cloudy. On the other hand he shares my opinion about this strange interpretation but he fears for consequences if he dosn't follow this. All certification data like audit plan, results, descriptions etc. are to be stored in an IATF database, so IATF can exactly see what's going on. Beyond that IATF can make the audit a wittness audit and that might stand for trouble for the auditor an me. So he doesn't want to risk his neck - and mine!
He promised me to be very "practical" because he understands our situation. He knows that it will be a show and it's allright for him. But too bad about the money...
Let's wait and see. I'm thankfull for every good idea, but I fear I don't have many possibilities.

Korni :bonk:

What about contacting the Customer with this apparently recognized interpretation of the Standard and getting their feedback?

Dear Howard,

at the first look I would agree with you but there is a litle difference:
We are a legal independent company. We buy the parts from another company wich belongs to the same corporate group and we have to pay for the parts. The other company has its own certification and we are not included there. How can we go further on?

Korni

Contacting the customer and call his attention to this point might awake sleeping dogs. We are a small company with only 15 people but turn over 3 million parts a year. If the customers suddenly has the idea to buy the parts directly from the production site whe can close the shop. I don't want to risk that only because of cloudy definitions.

Korni
I don't know what to say.
Clause 3 - There is no note in in TS which says that for TS service does not count but
"customer-specified parts, for production and/or service, are manufactured."

I have no more ideas

sorry

This does not help

Question: Which Organizations can obtain Certification/Registration to ISO/TS 16949:2002?

Answer: Any Organization in the Automotive Supply Chain meeting the criteria below can obtain Certification to ISO/TS 16949:2002


Scope 1.1 General
- This Technical Specification, in conjunction with ISO 9001:2000, defines the quality management system requirements for the design and development, production and, when relevant, installation and service of automotive-related products.
- This Technical Specification is applicable to sites of the organization where production and/or service parts specified by the customer are manufactured.
"Automotive" shall be understood as including the following:
- Cars, Trucks (Light, Medium and Heavy), Buses, Motorcycles
"Automotive" shall be understood to exclude the following:
- Industrial, Agricultural, Off-Highway (Mining, Forestry, Construction, etc.)

3.1.11 "Site"
- Location at which value added manufacturing processes occur.
“Manufacturing”
- Process of making or fabricating:
Production materials
Production or service parts
Assemblies, or
Heat treating, welding, painting, plating, or other finishing services

http://www.iaob.org/faq.html

Based on the information you have provided, IMO, you are not eligible for stand - alone certification. Refer to the "TS2 rules". You must be able to meet all of the requirements of TS2 to be certified. Since you do not manfacture, then you cannot meet all of the requirements. However, your parent site can use the "multiple site certification" process and you can be certified in that fashion.

Korni,

It sounds like you are more of a distributor than a manufacturer, so you would not be eligible for TS. Here is the criteria from the IAOB (http://www.iaob.org/faq.html)

3.1.11 "Site"
- Location at which value added manufacturing processes occur.
“Manufacturing”
- Process of making or fabricating:
Production materials
Production or service parts
Assemblies, or
Heat treating, welding, painting, plating, or other finishing services


If you are not adding value in some way to the parts, you can't be TS certified. Registrars are very strict about this these days.

I would highly recommend you go back to your customer and explain to them that TS does not apply. You are probably right that their purchasing people have no clue about what the different standards mean.

It is possible for you to become certified as a support site to a manufacturing site. So, if you have another location that produces the parts, then ships them you you for sales/distribution, you would be added to their certificate after being audited to the portions of TS that apply to you. Even if you are a different legal entity, as long as there is an affiliation, they should allow it.

Hope this helps,

Tom

Or possibly be certified under one of the manufacturing facilities as the Sales/Customer Service function.

or can give me some supporting arguments?

Hello korni,

ISO/TS 16949:2002(E)

clause 0.3.1 IATF Guidance to ISO/TS 16949:2000
"IATF Guidance to ISO/TS 16949 2000 is a document containing recommended automotive industry practices. ex. illustrations and explantaions and provides assistance in the application to conform to the requirements of this technical specifications.

This IATF Guidance document is not intended for certification or for contractual purposes."


I think you can argue your position...........

Hope I've been of help.

or can give me some supporting arguments?

Hello korni,

ISO/TS 16949:2002(E)

clause 0.3.1 IATF Guidance to ISO/TS 16949:2000
"IATF Guidance to ISO/TS 16949 2000 is a document containing recommended automotive industry practices. ex. illustrations and explantaions and provides assistance in the application to conform to the requirements of this technical specifications.

This IATF Guidance document is not intended for certification or for contractual purposes."


I think you can argue your position...........

Hope I've been of help.This is an interesting thread because it points to a glaring problem with prescribed Registration to third party Standards (ISO, TS, QS, whatever):
The variety of organizations in this world almost guarantees that one or more organizations will NOT FIT in the scope of the Standard, no matter how broadly drawn.
Contacting the customer and call his attention to this point might awake sleeping dogs. We are a small company with only 15 people but turn over 3 million parts a year. If the customers suddenly has the idea to buy the parts directly from the production site whe can close the shop. I don't want to risk that only because of cloudy definitions. As I understand it:
For whatever reason (regulation, tax, insurance, etc.), the associated group of companies to which Korni's company belongs has determined its interests are best served by using Korni's company as a middleman to broker its products (I assume from more than one of the manufacturing entities) to provide a single point of contact with the automotive industry.

If I were a consultant hired to help Korni and his corporate group [I'm available by the way!] resolve the matter, I'd need to know whether the manufacturing entities in Korni's group currently sell direct to the same customers Korni deals with. I can envision a host of scenarios which might resolve the problem, but without inside information, I'd only be shooting birdshot, when an elephant load is needed.