Next week, 9/27/04, begins our TL 9000 Registration Audit. I've been involved in this project since February of 2003. Efforts to achieve TL 9000 registration at our organization began 2 years prior to that.

It has been a slow process but I have learned a great deal about our organization and the implementation of a QMS in general. While TL registration was underway we also managed to migrate from ISO 9002:1994 to ISO 9001:2000.

The TL registration audit will last 2 weeks. We are registering 5 sites. The external auditor will visit 3. I work at HQ and its audit lasts 5 days. One other site is a 3 day audit and the third site is a 2 day audit. Two sites will not get visited but will have their internal audit records audited by our registrar.

Once the audit cycle is completed and we are awarded TL 9000 registration, we will be one of only 13 other organizations worldwide registered to our Product Category (TL requires the registration scope to include a product category). Last time I checked there were only a little over 500 organizations worldwide registered to TL 9000.

I had a hard time finding information on the web regarding specifics about TL 9000 registration. Currently there is only one "sanctioned" organization providing any public training for TL (including auditor training). I intend to post the results of our TL registration throughout the next 2 weeks or so. I hope to provide some information for others seeking TL 9000 registration.

Jaime

Jaime,
I will be interested in your feedback. Sometime in the future we will go for TL9000 for our site. Two of our other sites are TL9000 registered. Iam also TL9000 certified Lead auditor.

What are you covering in TL9000: Hardware-Software-Service- Combination of these? Since you mentioned that there are only 12 organizations across world registered to your product category, do you have enough data in the QUEST Forum Site for Benchmarking? This will be a challenge.

If you are covering Software in your registration, you have some pretty good requirements in that category. ;)

Thanks for letting us know. Good luck with your TL9000 registration efforts.

Regards,
Govind.

We are manufacturing and supplying Copper Cathodes (LME Grade) and CCR (Continious Cast Rods) to our customers. CCR are mainly used to draw wires and further used for Telecommunication Industries.

My request is to guide me that Can we go for TL - 9000 for CCR Plant.

I searched QUEST Forum also but could not get clue.

Regards,

Manoj

What are you covering in TL9000: Hardware-Software-Service- Combination of these? Since you mentioned that there are only 12 organizations across world registered to your product category, do you have enough data in the QUEST Forum Site for Benchmarking? This will be a challenge.
...
Regards,
Govind.
Govind,

We are registering to Service (V) only.

I went back and double checked the product category we are registering (7.7) and there are now 15 organizations registered.

Getting data from QuEST means paying $10K per year to be a QuEST member. We cannot justify that expenditure. I asked around for benchmarking data here in The Cove and elsewhere. I have had no luck getting it. Not even our customers that requested we seek TL registration will give us benchmarking data and they are QuEST members themselves. Maybe there is none.

I went through the Xcel auditor training earlier this year. I understand there is now a new lead auditor requirement. All I know is I have a certificate saying I passed the TL 9000 auditor class and it has a QuEST Forum seal on it so I am legal :)

I've decide to post a summary of each day of our audit to this thread. Lord knows that I could have used something like it.

Jaime

We are manufacturing and supplying Copper Cathodes (LME Grade) and CCR (Continious Cast Rods) to our customers. CCR are mainly used to draw wires and further used for Telecommunication Industries.

My request is to guide me that Can we go for TL - 9000 for CCR Plant.

I searched QUEST Forum also but could not get clue.

Regards,

Manoj
Manoj,

TL 9000 registration requires that you choose a product category from a table of categories published by QuEST. You can go to the QuEST Site and search for the latest product category table.

I am not familiar with the product you mentioned so I cannot help you determine your product category.

Getting started on TL 9000 was challenging for us. There is not much out there in the area of training. QuEST works with only one organization to provide training. When I first tried to attend a course it was canceled twice because they did not have enough participants. I eventually got to take the training course.

I noticed you are in India so it may be difficult for you to find training.

Go to this link and search for a registered organization close to you or associated with you:
http://tl9000rrs.org/QuEST/basicSearch.jsp
Maybe that would be a good place for you to get started.

Jaime

It is the last business day before the registration audit begins on Monday.

I have closed all the CARs that can be closed prior to the audit. I distributed the audit plan submitted by the external auditor (a detailed plan I must admit). I have arranged for a conference room to conduct the opening meeting and a separate work area for the external auditor to use throughout the week. There is no need for spcecial safety equipment for the external auditor (thank goodness).

Several folks came by my desk to ask how they could be prepared for the audit. Among these folks were 2 vice presidents, several managers and our organization's president. It is encouraging to see folks recognize the importance of this addition to our QMS.

I have gathered what I feel I will need to be prepared when the external auditor arrives Monday morning:
- TL 9000 Requirements Handbook.
- Printed copy of our quality manual.
- Records of our measurement submissions to QuEST. We are only required to submit the common TL measurements due to the nature of our registration. They are:
On-time delivery
Number of problems report
Problem report fix response time
Overdue problem report fix response time

- Internal audit reports for sites that will not be visited by the external auditor but included in the registration scope. Our registrar will use these reports to audit those sites not visited by the external auditor.
- A legal pad.

I have no plans for this weekend except watch The Discovery Channel.

Jaime

The audit began with a great opening meeting. Our external auditor (EA) explained in detail the scope of the audit. EA detailed how his job is to audit the system and not the performance of the staff. He also explained the differences between a major and minor nonconformance. This has confused many in the past.

Something new from our registrar is that it now requires proof of root cause analysis to be submitted with each corrective action. EA explained how a form will be supplied for us to fill out regarding root cause analysis. I was pleased to hear this as many times our staff fill out CARs with "trained employee" as a corrective action and no root cause analysis. It will definitely help us to dig deep when determining why sometimes things go haywire.

This is definitely a process oriented audit. We began with clause 7.1 and are working our way through through the rest of clause 7 (product realization). This is good for me as this first involves the real work that goes on over here. EA will be interviewing sales staff and production staff for the first couple of days.

I did come across a small surprise. TL clause 7.1.C.3 - Disaster Recovery states that the "organization" is to have measures in place to ensure business continuity. I thought this meant the place where I work should have some sort of disaster recovery plan. EA interpreted it to mean "measures to ensure the business continuity of the CUSTOMER." This is a real downfall of TL. Since TL was originally written with the Bell companies in mind (SBC, Verizon, etc.), much of the wording was refers to the customer as the organization. The TL standard is written from the customer's perspective rather than the organization's (anyone seeking registration) perspective. There really is a need for QuEST to update all the wording in TL 9000 to be consistent with ISO 9K2K wording and definitions. Fortunately we have measures in place to ensure our own business continuity and offer related services to our customers. So, we were covered either way.

At the end of the end of the day the EA and I had a recap of the day's findings and thus far there have been zero nonconformances. The EA did explain he wanted to research a couple of findings that may end up as observations. His concern is that we may be able to exclude a couple of clauses due to the nature of our business. We are a wholesale distributor.

Altogether it is proving to be a pleasant experience. Ooops! Did I mean that?:o

I am out of here for today. I am going to the gym to exercise and then I'm headed home to watch American Choppers on The Discovery Channel.

Jaime

I did come across a small surprise. TL clause 7.1.C.3 - Disaster Recovery states that the "organization" is to have measures in place to ensure business continuity. I thought this meant the place where I work should have some sort of disaster recovery plan. EA interpreted it to mean "measures to ensure the business continuity of the CUSTOMER." This is a real downfall of TL. Since TL was originally written with the Bell companies in mind (SBC, Verizon, etc.), much of the wording was refers to the customer as the organization. The TL standard is written from the customer's perspective rather than the organization's (anyone seeking registration) perspective. There really is a need for QuEST to update all the wording in TL 9000 to be consistent with ISO 9K2K wording and definitions. Fortunately we have measures in place to ensure our own business continuity and offer related services to our customers. So, we were covered either way.Jaime

Jaime,
ISO 9000 series is the foundation for TL9000 standards. TL9000 cannot have separate definition for “organization”. It is same as ISO 9000, Organization means your “organization”. Not SBC, or Bell or Verizon.

TL clause 7.1.C.3 – It is your organization that should have disaster recovery plan in place. Your interpretation is correct. Of course , your plan to recover from the disaster ensures continuity of business with your customers.
Ref: The TL9000 Guide for Auditors, Mark Kempf, ASQ Press, Page: 32,116 The author surprisingly has referred to your own question and clarified as “your organization” and not Customer’s.

I have problem with your wording: "measures to ensure the business continuity of the CUSTOMER." Your customer may or may not continue their business after the disaster due to other reasons. However, the context here is, you were able to recover from the disaster and prove your readiness and availability to continue with the business with your customers. I would rather prefer "measures to ensure the business continuity with the CUSTOMER." Semantics??

Regards,
Govind.

Govind's interpretation seems much more logical to me than your understanding and relating of what the auditor said.

First, foremost, and always, the business of the organization (the one which pays you) is to stay in business and be profitable.

Disaster recovery may include provision to help customer continue doing business during your organization's disaster recovery.

When I was a contract manufacturer of machined products, we had multiple recovery plans, including, but not limited to:

offsite storage of one or two months requirements of products for customers
contingent space which could be rented on month to month lease if our own premises were unusable,
lease or borrowing of identical machine tools or machine tool time at other machine shops
backup or alternate supplies of raw materials and tooling
offsite storage of duplicate records including computer programs for machine tools
replacement and training of employees
business interruption insurance
We made all this preparedness part of our sales pitch and were able to charge a higher price for that "insurance and assurance" we gave the customer.

Above all, you have to make an economic case and justification for the cost of disaster preparedness. Without a disaster, we were able to "instantly" ramp up and advance delivery (from inventory) or ramp up production (by implementing contingency plans for space, machinery, and personnel.) Above all, we created a "brand awareness" of super-competence. In ten years, we never missed a delivery date. (We never promised something beyond our capability or capacity. We refused to be "bullied" into making a promised date we couldn't keep. Our pitch was similar to Ron Popeil's for his rotisserie cooker - "set it [the date] and forget it.")

We gave customer proactive notices that production was on target, that shipment was made from our dock, often even that shipment was received on his dock before the customer's internal process could tell him the shipment had arrived. All this attention to detail reinforced the concept we WERE prepared for any contingency.

TL clause 7.1.C.3 – It is your organization that should have disaster recovery plan in place. Your interpretation is correct. Of course , your plan to recover from the disaster ensures continuity of business with your customers.
Ref: The TL9000 Guide for Auditors, Mark Kempf, ASQ Press, Page: 32. The author surprisingly has referred to your own question and clarified as “your organization” and not Customer’s.

I have problem with your wording: "measures to ensure the business continuity of the CUSTOMER."...
Govind.
Govind,

Thanks for your reply and the reference to the interpretation of 7.1.C.3.

Without going too deep into this subject, my interpretation is consistent with yours and Kempf's. Again, the problem here is that QuEST did not completely upgrade its requirements' wording as the TL standard has evolved.

We, my employer, has in place plans to recover from an event that could hinder the continuity of business. It is my understanding that the Bells wanted to purchase material in a consistent and reliable manner, thus the existence of TL 9000. It only makes sense that the Bells ensure their suppliers will continue to provide material always.

Now, for the EA's interpretation. He wanted to know how we would ensure that our customers, the Bells, would be able to recover from a disaster with our help. That was what he asked for. It helped that we have customers in Florida and Alabama. We have made considerable efforts to help them recover from the last 4 hurricanes. We had plenty of advance warning about the hurricanes so that also helped. Without an actual disastrous event, a disaster recovery plan is quite academic. I know one can conduct drills and the like but after all, the plan is designed to undo the unexpected (this past 4 hurricanes were not exactly "unexpected"). That can be very difficult.

What it boils down to is that we were able to satisfy the EA. I realize that is the game we must play to achieve registration and comply with customer's requirements. However, we do have measures to satisfy the ACTUAL INTENT of 7.1.C.3 of TL 9000. So, I am not worried.

Jaime

We made all this preparedness part of our sales pitch and were able to charge a higher price for that "insurance and assurance" we gave the customer.

Wes,

I hear you! We also have chosen to market and brand our abilities to help our customers recover from a disaster (their disaster and/or ours). After all, our customers are the guys that provide the needed infrastructure damaged during a disaster.

Thanks for your input. This is the kind of information I wish I had available when we began this TL 9000 implementation.

Let's just say I am quite encouraged by how our registration audit is going thus far. I did not even come in early to work this morning (day 2 of the audit).

Today the EA will audit more of the product realization processes and then he will be auditng the HR group. HR's audit will be interesting for me as this is a rather esoteric area in our organization. We are a privately owned firm so there are times when some processes are hidden from many even though they are in place and work well.

Jaime

Day 2 of the audit is going as well as day 1. Today our EA audited our calibration processes, nonconforming product processes and purchasing.

Thus far he has identified a couple of areas where our procedures are not completely consistent with how processes are carried out. We are complying to the TL requirements but our documented procedures have some gaps. All along some aspects of our processes are so obvious to us that even a review of a documented procedure did not find these gaps. Once we discussed the EA's concern I was able to identify the same shortcomings in our documented procedure. How may of you have found that your procedures, even though thorough, are somewhat ambiguous to an outsider?

During the calibration process, 7.6, a discussion developed as to its need in our organization. The EA's interpretation of 7.6 is that it is in place for controlling devices that measure the compliance to the requirements of the product. We are a re-seller so the stuff we buy already complies to the customers' requirements from the manufacturer. We are solely a staging point in the supply chain.

Along the same lines, our EA was concerned that we needed some form of compliance validation to customers' specifications (features of the products we re-sell). Our product is a service, the delivery of material. We take our customers' specifications (this includes manufacturer), bring the material to stock and then re-sell it. We warehouse and deliver whatever the customer aks for.

It has helped a great deal that our EA understands our business and our way of doing business. TL imposes requirements regarding the planning within the organization. This can be challenging to demonstrate within a private organization and it has helped that our EA understands how we market our product.

I am anticipating 2 minor conconformances out of today's audit results. I'll know tomorrow after our EA has had time to put his audit notes together. He and I discussed the possible nonconformances at the end of the day today.

Jaime

We found an issue today that had surfaced during our pre-assessment. 7.2.3.C.2 requires that we have a procedure for assigning problem severity based on the TL 9000 definitions of a problem and its severity. By nature of our scope registration and product category, the problem reports we track cannot be assigned a severity. The product category we fit does not have problem reports with a severity associated wit it. So, how can we assign severity to a problem that has no severity associated with it?

Without making this a long discussion, our EA feels that we should be able to assign severity to a customer reported problem. We can ask the customer how severe is the problem they are reporting and then match it to a TL defined severity.

This deal about customer-reported problems is another shortcoming of TL. TL has 2 handbooks for their requirements. One of these handbooks is for the measurement requirements. The other handbook is for system requirements. There are times that the measurement requirements do not always agree with the system requirements. Our case above is an example.

I believe we will get a nonconformance for this.

This all stems from the definition that TL gives to a customer reported problem. Here is part of the definition:
An inherent characteristic of a problem report is the expectation by the customer that the organization will investigate the issue and provide necessary correction action for the identified problem, defective product or process.

What do you all make of this? Does this leave too much latitude as to what a "customer-reported problem" is?

After much discussion, our EA did agree that there is ambiguity within the TL system and measurement requirements. I am glad I don't have his job.

Customer Satisfaction - UGGH! Here is a quote from the EA, "How does the customer feel about your organization?" The kicker is that he claims that we have to solicit this type of input. He means that any customer supplied information (report cards, balanced scorecard, etc.) to support their "feelings" about our organization does not count. He wants to see information WE solicited. I'll leave this one alone 'cause I am sure there is plenty of this type of stuff here in The Cove already.

We have 2 minor nonconformances thus far from days 1 and 2. One is for some ambiguous wording in our nonconforming product procedure and the second is for lack of records kept duirng evaluation of a new supplier (vendor). Both easily fixed.

I am anticipating 3 nonconformances from today.

Jaime

....We have 2 minor nonconformances thus far from days 1 and 2. One is for some ambiguous wording in our nonconforming product procedure and the second is for lack of records kept duirng evaluation of a new supplier (vendor). Both easily fixed....Jaime
Jaime,
Usually External auditor will not allow to fix (Correct?) the non-conformance during the audit. The reason is audit is based only on a sample. There could be many other instances with similar issues present in the organization. Hence, they will ask you to look wider across the system, identify root cause, prepare corrective and preventive action plan and mail within 30 days of the audit.

Feel free to correct me if I understood your statement differently.
Regards,
Govind.

Note: Thanks for your enthusiasm in sharing your experience. I usually get tired after a long day of registrar audit or customer audit. You seem to hold a lot of energy to update us before leaving home. I appreciate your sincerity. :applause:

Feel free to correct me if I understood your statement differently.
Regards,
Govind.

Govind,

Thanks for your comments.

I meant to imply that correcting the nonconformance regarding our nonconforming product procedure would be easy to resolve once the audit is over. I do not intend to resolve anything while the audit is still in progress. I really do want the EA to find the stuff we have missed during our internal audit cycle. These external audits require a huge investment on our part and I want us to get our money's worth. I just have to learn to get over that "stupid" feeling I get when the EA hands me a nonconformace report.

I decided to share my audit experience for my own benefit as well as other Covers. I am giving myself a chance to review the audit after the fact. There is a lot that does not get included in the registrar's audit report.

These external audits can be a little too much to deal with. Today, the 3rd day, is the first day I really wanted it to be over. The next 2 days won't be too bad. All we have left is continual improvement, measurement of processes and the TL measurement submissions.

Jaime

We found an issue today that had surfaced during our pre-assessment. 7.2.3.C.2 requires that we have a procedure for assigning problem severity based on the TL 9000 definitions of a problem and its severity. By nature of our scope registration and product category, the problem reports we track cannot be assigned a severity. The product category we fit does not have problem reports with a severity associated wit it. So, how can we assign severity to a problem that has no severity associated with it?

I have been thinking about this and I now realize I was way off! I really missed this one altogether. I was concentrating on the measurements all along and did not stop to think that the system requirements do define a problem report, whether or not its severity has to be reported in our submissions.

I am glad I only have today and tomorrow before the EA travels to our other sites being audited. I am still pleased with how things are going.

Jaime

Day 3 yielded 5 minor nonconformances. All of them are basically the same. Our documented procedures are ambiguous to the EA even though our processes clearly meet the requirements. Basically, our EA feels we need to refine the wording in our procedures. I can live with that.

I felt it was understood all parties involved in the audit would set aside time to be interviewed by the EA. Well, it has not quite worked out that way. We have had to change the audit plan around to allow for some folks not being available when they should have been. Fortunatly the EA has been flexible throughout the audit.

I am finding that our internal audit reports need to evolve with each audit cycle. There are some items that would aid the EA in determining the effectiveness of our internal audits that don't get included in our audit reports. We have a form for our audit reports that has not changed in a long time.

We did the TL measurements today. We have no data for the customer's expected resolution timeframe. Often our customers jut want a problem fixed and don't specify a resolution time. TL requires that each organization submit a measurement for the time it took to resolve each customer reported problem in comparison to the amount of time the customer specified.

Now for another kicker. We have to compare our measurements against the TL 9000 benchmarks. In order to get this benchmark data an organization has to be a QuEST Forum member ($10,000 per year). Why would our orgnization want to join QuEST when we are not TL registered yet? This is a chicken and egg thing I guess. What it boils down to is the EA expects us to compare our performance against the TL benchmark but we cannot get that data. In lieu of benchmark data I used the on-time delivery rate that our customers' contracts call for. The EA claimed that does not show we have to improve. So, he explained that we could use a goal that is higher than our running average on-time delivery rate. The intent is to show we are trying to improve on-time delivery. What if we are already at 100% on-time delivery? BTW, we are not at 100%. This is the actual wording from the measurements handbook:
Compare internal measurements to the available industry statistics and take steps to improve products and practices as appropriate.

I don't see where it says it has to be QuEST's statistics. Even if it were. I cannot get those statistics even after I tried to find them. It surely would help if thre was a way we could get industry benchmark data for comparison purposes.

Nevertheless, things are going well.

I am expecting 3 more nonconformances from today. This may seem alarming all these nonconformances. The thing is they are all minor. Even so, once we submit a corrective action for each we will get registered. We did not expect to be perfect. I was anticipating at least 10 nonconformances. I am in the ballpark.

Already we have scheduled the closing meeting for tomorrow at 10:30 AM. This will be a great opportunity for the EA to emphasize a lot of what I have been preaching for a year. He then goes on to 2 other of our sites. The audit won't be complete until he audits these 2 other sites. Thier processes are just like ours so he may not find anything else once he gets there. But then again, he could.

Jaime

Jaime - thank you so much for sharing your experience. Sounds like you have done a great job!

The audit is over, at least at my site. The EA has to visit 2 other sites next week. I don't expect any surprises from the 2 other sites since they are distribution centers and they follow the same processes here at HQ. There is also a DC at HQ so the EA did get to audit the DC processes already.

Here is the rundown. Thus far we have 2 observations, 0 major nonconformances and 14 minor nonconformances. 6 of the 14 NCRs are for basically the same thing, procedural ambiguity. The EA found 6 of our demented... I mean documented procedures where the wording of the procedure does not exactly match the process. However, the processes do meet the requirements of the required procedures. So all I need to do is tweak the documented procedures' wording. If I had been the EA I would have issued one NCR against 4.2.2 b and cite the 6 instances as evidence. It would have saved on paperwork. But, I'll take as many of these kind of NCRs as any EA is willing to issue.

The remainder of the nonconformances dealt with the TL measurements and how we are analyzing them. The one I am really concerned with I have discussed already. We were issued an NCR because clause 3.5.3 of the TL measurements handbook requires that we compare infernal... I mean internal measurements to the available industry statistics. Today, after the EA finished his audit, I learned from the TL 9000 measurements repository administrator at UTD that this data (available industry statistics) is only available ONCE an organization is registered. BTW, this data has only been available as of 7/17/04. I have been searching for it for one year. I am curious to learn how our registrar will deal with this twist of events.

We had a very constructive closing meeting. I was encouraged that we are on our way to getting our registration. We have 90 days to resolve the NCRs. TM at our orgaization is comitted to getting the registration and leveraging the benefits of an enahced QMS due to TL 9000. I am very thankful about that.

This is my first registration audit. I had a pretty good idea of what to expect after our ISO 9001:2000 migration audit and a pre-assessment for this registration audit. However, 5 days is a long time to be in a conference room reviewing a QMS with an EA, even if the company paid for my lunch each day :).

Thanks to ALL of the Cove members that have contributed in any form to this most excellent forum. Without your help and experiences it would be even more challenging for some of us to get our jobs done. I hope I have been able to contribute something to any one seeking TL 9000 registration or help with their QMS.

I'm headed back to my regular life now. Thank God it is Friday. I am going to the gym to work out some frustrations. There better be something good on The Discovery Channel tonight.

Jaime

I hope I have been able to contribute something to any one seeking TL 9000 registration or help with their QMS...
...There better be something good on The Discovery Channel tonight.
You most definitely have; I learned a few things myself about TL from you over the last few days and I do not work in that industry.

I hope there's something good on TDC for you too, you've worked hard, enjoy!!

I hope there's something good on TDC for you too, you've worked hard, enjoy!!

Cari,

I watched a documentary about Burt Rutan's race for the X Prize, SpaceShipOne. A group of 20 individuals have now put a civilian in space. An amazing acomplishment. I believe this week they will go for the second of 2 required flights into space within a specified timeframe in order to win the $10M X Prize and bragging rights to the first non-government endeavor to successfully fly a manned craft to space and return the crew back to Earth. Very inspiring TV! I am now ready to start working on some CARs.

Jaime

I noticed your comments regarding membership in Quest in order to do data comparison. If you intend to compare your metrics to those in the UTD (University of Texas @ Dallas) repository, yes, it will cost $10K to join Quest. HOWEVER, to view the data as a non-member the cost is $20K for one Quarter; $40K for semi-annual viewing; and, $60K for annual access.
Pay me now or pay me later !

I am with a Telecommunications repair company that is TL-9000 registered and an original Quest member. Our customers are anybody who's anybody in Telecom.

These numbers are from the quality manager in charge of our metric reporting.

Good Luck,
Glenn

I noticed your comments regarding membership in Quest in order to do data comparison. If you intend to compare your metrics to those in the UTD (University of Texas @ Dallas) repository, yes, it will cost $10K to join Quest. HOWEVER, to view the data as a non-member the cost is $20K for one Quarter; $40K for semi-annual viewing; and, $60K for annual access.
Pay me now or pay me later !

I am with a Telecommunications repair company that is TL-9000 registered and an original Quest member. Our customers are anybody who's anybody in Telecom.

These numbers are from the quality manager in charge of our metric reporting.

Good Luck,
Glenn
Glenn,

Thanks for your post.

I discovered that UTD is making industry trend data available for non QuEST members. Here is the catch. The data is for the prior year, it is only for the organization's registered product categories, it is only the industry average for the data the organization has submitted and it is only available once the organization is TL registered. This makes it virually impossible to benchmark TL measurements without a registration or QuEST membership or a hefty cash reserve. And with only the average (no high, low or other information) available for the product category submissions, comparison is not to the whole industry but only to those organizations that have submitted data in the same product category. Not even the common measurements are industry-wide. All measurements are only product category specific.

Nevertheless, our EA downgraded our NCR for not having benchmarked to QuEST trends to an observation when I provided him with the evidence mentioned above.

Jaime

Today the EA visited one of our field locations. Processes there are the same as HQ but to a much smaller scale. He finished much earlier than I anticipated. He issued a couple of minor NCRs for procedural ambiguity. Same song different verse.

I have began to issue CARs for the NCRs in our QMS. I don't want to get too far ahead of the EA since the audit won't be complete until the end of this week (10/8).

One thing that was pointed out to me by a colleague also seeking TL registration is that the TL certificate will not say how many NCRs were issued during the registration audit. This is not an excuse to overlook having a tight QMS but it helps to not get too uptight about the whole affair. Besides, with 90 days to resolve all NCRs it won't be a problem getting it all done.

Thanks to all that have added to this thread. If only one other soul seeking TL registration ends up getting some help out of all of this I will be pleased.

It would be great if any that have read this far and are already TL registered could add some insight as to the added benefits their TL 9000 registration has realized.

Jaime

Thank you jaimezepeda for your shared experience.

I have a couple of questions regarding the TL 9000 system.

- How did you organize your measurement system? Are you using a software tool to collect, compute and report your measurements? Do your clients control this system?

- Are you using a software tool to raise and manage the CARs, PARs, and follow-up of your internal audits, or is it a paper work?

Does anyone has experience with TL 7.2.2 S,V ?

thank you

Thank you jaimezepeda for your shared experience.

I have a couple of questions regarding the TL 9000 system.

- How did you organize your measurement system? Are you using a software tool to collect, compute and report your measurements? Do your clients control this system?

- Are you using a software tool to raise and manage the CARs, PARs, and follow-up of your internal audits, or is it a paper work?

Does anyone has experience with TL 7.2.2 S,V ?

thank you
xtbob,

- Our measurement system is not fully automated yet. Some of the data is readily found in our ERP and QMS systems. Because of our registration scope we are only required to submit the TL common measurements: NPR (number of problems report), FRT (problem fix response time), OFR (overdue problem fix response time) and OTD (on-time delivery). We tried to have our customers provide data but they did not. We have our sales staff collect whatever data our ERP and QMS systems do not already have. All organizations seeking TL registration must report the TL common measurements. That is why they call them "common measurements." The total number of mesurements submitted is dependent on the organization's product category registration.

- We have an internal application that supports our QMS so internal audits, records, procedures, CARs, PARs and follow up are taken care of by our QMS. We have been ISO 9K registered for years so that helped a great deal.

- TL 7.2.2 S,V - We are seeking a services (V) registration only so I cannot address the requirements for a software (S) registration. There are no TL adders (extra requirements beyond 9001:2000) to 7.2.2 even though there are 2 notes. Each of the 2 notes only has a "should" which means that your process does not have to adhere strictly to the note as long as your methods meet the intent of the "should". There is no TL specific "shall" for 7.2.2. This TL clause is not much different than the ISO 9001:2000 requirement for 7.2.2. The organization needs to review sales orders/contracts/etc. prior to acceptance from the customer. You need to make sure you understand exactly what the customer wants you to do. An organization can exclude 7.2.2 if the exclusion does not affect the quality of the organization's product. I cannot think of an organization that would exclude 7.2.2 as this is how a business determines what the customer wants. Maybe others can provide an example of an organization that would exclude 7.2.2.

I hope this helped.

Jaime

sorry Jaime, if it was not clearly,
I talked about 7.2.2 product registration option which is 'software development services', not the 7.2.2 subclause of the Requirements handbook.

- So, I understand that an auditor search for evidences and records of all applicable processes and developed activities, as specified by TL handbooks.

thank you
Bogdan

sorry Jaime, if it was not clearly,
I talked about 7.2.2 product registration option which is 'software development services', not the 7.2.2 subclause of the Requirements handbook.

- So, I understand that an auditor search for evidences and records of all applicable processes and developed activities, as specified by TL handbooks.

thank you
Bogdan
Bogdan,

Product category 7.2.2 is Software Development Service. I believe this would apply to an organization that develops and/or tests software for the Bell companies. I have no experience with this. An organization can register more than one product category.

I am hoping that others will eventually find The Cove and can add to the TL discussions. There is little available information out there on TL.

I see you are in Romania. Have you been able to find much help regarding TL where you work?

QuEST recently had their annual best practices conference. In the past
QuEST (http://questforum.asq.org/index.html) has posted their Power Point presentations from the best practices conference to their web site.

What specifically about product category 7.2.2 did you need to know?

Jaime

I think there are a few international companies that have resources and perform a state of the art implementation of the quality management system, including TL 9000 management.
What we are doing is to implement TL requirements to attain certification, we are also ISO 9001:2000 certified since 2001, but to obtain a ISO 9000 certificate is quite simple, all you have to do is to pay it. :)

I try to change this conception and to implement a practical quality system but our resources and money are limited. At this moment I'm the only person to handle with quality management, including TL certification, from an organization with 200 software engineers.

However, I'll continue to implement TL 7.2.2 S,V requirements, and then I will search for BS7799 and CMMI.

to obtain a ISO 9000 certificate is quite simple, all you have to do is to pay it. :)
Are you a customer of the 40 day wonder QMS implementation? :D
40 Day QMS Implementation (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=1815)

I try to change this conception and to implement a practical quality system but our resources and money are limited. At this moment I'm the only person to handle with quality management, including TL certification, from an organization with 200 software engineers.

However, I'll continue to implement TL 7.2.2 S,V requirements, and then I will search for BS7799 and CMMI.
I am the only one doing the TL implementation where I work.

Software development nantively leads to very structured processes. It is likely you already meet many of the TL adders. Since you are already ISO 9001:2000 registered a TL implementation would be simplified.

You would need to meet all the TL adders for software (S) and services (V) if you wish to register product category under 7.2.2 S,V. Note that you may be able to register to S only. If you register to V and register product category 7.2.2 you would have to register to S and V. There are some 80 TL adders when added together (H - hardware, S - software and V - services).

What is your ISO registration scope?

As far as I know, QuEST only recognizes Excel (http://www.excel-world.co.uk/index.html) as provider for training. Any auditor training has to come from Excel. Most registrars require an internal audit cycle prior to registration. So someone in your organization would have to be Excel trained for TL internal audits. Excel has offices throughout Europe in the UK and Hungary. Excel also has a presence in the USA.

Jaime

I know about Excel.There is also SAM.

I have a plenty of information about TL, but I'm looking for practical aspects of the quality system implementation: how to write documentaion set properly? to use or not a software tool for documentation management (including forms, templates, records)? how to readily implement the measurement system ? how to implement and maintain the quality documentation set, since I'm constrained to use both english and romanian languages? ...

thank you

This was a very interesting thread to read through. We were registered to TL 9000 in May, and like you I had a hard time finding any specific information online. We are registered to product category 7.1 Installation, and 7.5 Customer Support. We provide installation, integration and commissioning services to equipment manufacturers. We had a non-conformance regarding the problem severity levels as well. Like you I thought we didn't need to as we didn't have to have the severity levels in our metrics. It was an easily fixable problem.

This was a very interesting thread to read through. We were registered to TL 9000 in May, and like you I had a hard time finding any specific information online. We are registered to product category 7.1 Installation, and 7.5 Customer Support. We provide installation, integration and commissioning services to equipment manufacturers. We had a non-conformance regarding the problem severity levels as well. Like you I thought we didn't need to as we didn't have to have the severity levels in our metrics. It was an easily fixable problem.
NatashaD

Thanks for your post.

I am hoping to collect some more information like this for any others seeking TL registration to use. Who knows, maybe QuEST will update the requirements handbooks so there is more consistency between the measurements and the system requirements.

We have one more site for the EA to visit and then we need to submit our corrective actions for the NCRs found during the audit.

Jaime

I know about Excel.There is also SAM.

I have a plenty of information about TL, but I'm looking for practical aspects of the quality system implementation: how to write documentaion set properly? to use or not a software tool for documentation management (including forms, templates, records)? how to readily implement the measurement system ? how to implement and maintain the quality documentation set, since I'm constrained to use both english and romanian languages? ...

thank you
I see.

- Your documentation set can be the same as your ISO documentation set. The reason why is because TL builds on top of ISO. In essence, TL is just ISO with a lot more stuff added on afterwards. There is already a requirement in ISO for documentation. The same applies for TL. Wherever the TL standard calls for a documented procedure you need to have a document in your QMS. If you are ISO compliant, you already have a documentation system.

- There may be some posts within The Cove regarding the use of a software tool for document management. Again, use what you have already in place for your ISO compliant QMS.

- The measurement system depends on your product category registration. QuEST publishes a table that describes all the possible product categories. Each product category has a required set of measurements. All TL registered organizations must report the common mesaurements I have outlined in an earlier post (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=89831&postcount=26 ). We re not fully automated yet on measurements but have all the required data to make the submissions to UTD (University of Texas at Dallas) (http://tl9000rrs.org/QuEST/index.jsp), the TL 9000 data repository. UTD has documentation for the submission process. You will need to pay a yearly fee to UTD in order to make a submission. TL 9000 registration requires that one submission of 3 consecutive months (any 3 consecutive months) be made successfully to UTD.

- I am not sure if I understand your last question. Do you mean that you need help in maintaining a document set in both Romanian and English languages? Or, do you mean that you find it difficult to communicate in English since you are Romanian? Your English is better than most Americans by the way.

The key to getting started is a gap analysis of your QMS to the TL 9000 standard. We have to comply to some 40 extra requirements in order to meet the TL requirements. Your TL implementation will be different.

It seems to me that most of what you need is help with the implementation of a QMS in general. There is a documentation systems forum with The Cove:Documenation Systems Forum (http://elsmar.com/Forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16) . This may be a good place for you to find some of your answers.

I plan to keep updating this thread until our TL 9000 certificate is hung on our walls at HQ. Keep coming back and maybe you'll find some help here later.

Jaime

Our second site's audit was finished today. We had an NCR that I am not comfortable with.

TL 5.5.3.C.1 states " The organization shall inform employees of its quality performance and the level of customer satisfaction."

We have done these. However, not all employees recognize we have done it. I lerned that from one of my internal audits. The EA feels we are not complying since some employees don't recognize that we have done this. I have plenty of evidence to show we have done it. I have had many employees recognize it. I guess the rotten apple does spoil the barrel :bonk: .

Any takes on this anyone?

I am done for today. I have issued CARs for last week and am preparing for those issued this week.

Jaime

Are you using a paper based system for CARs, PARs and their follow up?
How does interact the employees with these quality processes?

- Yes, it was about managing one set of documents in both English in Romanian, or to have two sets, one for each language, which either is unusual to implement.

Are you using a paper based system for CARs, PARs and their follow up?
How does interact the employees with these quality processes?

- Yes, it was about managing one set of documents in both English in Romanian, or to have two sets, one for each language, which either is unusual to implement.
xtbob,

Our documentation system is maintained online and is available to all employees. Virtually all employees have been assigned a computer and those that have not can use their supervisor's computer when needed. We have no paper documents for our QMS.

An online documentation system can be developed using nothing more than HTML documents published to your corporate intranet. Or, you could develop your documents in a word processing application like Microsoft Word and publish them to your corporate network. Your organization's computer folks can help with this.

You'll find that keeping the documents online allows for easy access to the most current revision of each document. However, your documentation system needs to fit your organization. For example, where is your company's policy manual (a document that describes the accepted and expected busness practices from employees) or training manual? Use what you already have at your orgnization.

Maintaining 2 sets of documents would be challenging. Maybe you can keep a master set of documents in one language and then have a selected few documents from that set translated to the second language.

I believe the answer to your questions will rely on how you have implemented your existing ISO compliant QMS.

Jaime

is it a simple web system, or a complex one using tracking and control of documents (an integrate workflow) ? does it include DCRs(document change request) ?

is it a simple web system, or a complex one using tracking and control of documents (an integrate workflow) ? does it include DCRs(document change request) ?
xtbob,

Some of the system is a simple HTML page on our intranet. Some of it is rather complex and has workflow and change request logic built in. All of it is accessible to employees. This suits our organization well. However, if we needed to change it that would be OK.

Jaime

I've issued CARs for all the NCRs found thus far. I did manage to persuade the EA to downgrade one NCR to an observation (benchmarking our TL measurments) and another NCR the auditor threw out after I provided evidence we were indeed meeting the requirement (a calibration issue).

It is interesting to note that the NCRs issued because of not meeting a TL requirement only deal with our measurements. All other NCRs are for not meeting ISO requirements. I guess this is because we had a different EA for our last external ISO audit :D. Fortunately, there are not that many TL auditors out there so our next external audit cycle will be conducted by the same EA carrying out this registration audit.

So, the EA needs to visit only one more site. That site's audit will last 2 days.

Jaime

Due to the nature of our organization, the EA did not need as much time at our field locations as he anticipated. By the end of day 9 he had all the information and evidence he needed to complete his audit.

I am waiting for the EA's final report. We will be conducting a phone conference for the actual closing meeting since the audit is not complete unitl he audits all sites involved.

I have issued CARs for all NCRs found. Already the EA and I have agreed on the resolution for one of them.

It helped a great deal to have had a pre-assessment prior to the registration audit. The pre-assessment gave me a heads up on how this EA operates and how he plans to work with us. The registration audit has helped to bring out some issues that we as an organization have been too close to in the past to look at with a fresh set of eyes.

Even though the site visits are over the registation audit won't be finished until we get our certificate. There is still work to be done by resolving the NCRs. Once we finish them we will have added value to our processes and our customers' satisfaction.

Jaime

HI Everyone,

My name is Mark Kempf, and I'm the author of the TL 9000 Guide for Auditors. I must tell you, Jaime, you external auditor was WAY off base in regards to his interpretation of the Disaster Recovery clause. This is indeed a requirement to ensure that YOU, the Organization, has the ability to recover from an event that takes you out of service. Most often, I see business continuity plans used, which are perfectly acceptable, provided the plan provides the rigor needed to ensure that customer committments are met.

There are simply not enough truly experienced TL registrar assessors.

Let me know if I can be of further help.

Best,
mark

HI Everyone,

My name is Mark Kempf, ........business continuity plans ...........
Best,
mark

Hello,

BCP is part of the ISMS (BS 7799-2 information security certification), and Disaster Recovery is a part of the Business Continuity Plan.

However, in TL 9000 context, the "organization’s ability to recreate and service the product throughout its life cycle" could be wrong interpreted as business continuity.

'Risk management' at the organizational level is a principal approach for enabling business continuity, but is not a requirement of TL 9000. The only link of TL to risk management is '7.3.1.C.1 Project Plan' clause, where risk management and contingency plans (e.g., technical, cost and schedules) should be included in the 'Project Plan'.

Regards,
Bogdan

There are simply not enough truly experienced TL registrar assessors.Do you know - or how can we find out - how many people are 'certified' (or whatever you want to call it) to do TL 9000 audits (internationally, regional, or what ever data is available)? Is there a listing of 'certified' auditors anywhere? Who certifies the auditors?

Marc, I don't know if there is a list publicly available of qualified TL-9000 auditors, but there is information about the Accreditation Bodies and Certification Bodies, as well, related documents here. (http://www.questforum.org/tl9000/tl_r-abs.htm)

HI Everyone,

My name is Mark Kempf, and I'm the author of the TL 9000 Guide for Auditors. I must tell you, Jaime, you external auditor was WAY off base in regards to his interpretation of the Disaster Recovery clause. This is indeed a requirement to ensure that YOU, the Organization, has the ability to recover from an event that takes you out of service. Most often, I see business continuity plans used, which are perfectly acceptable, provided the plan provides the rigor needed to ensure that customer committments are met.

There are simply not enough truly experienced TL registrar assessors.

Let me know if I can be of further help.

Best,
mark

Mark,

Thanks for your reply.

I had a talk with our external auditor not long ago and he mentioned that when he went to the TL 9000 auditor training course that is how it was taught to his class. I attended the same course later on and we were taught otherwise. So, it may have been our auditor's instructor's misinterpretation all along.

Nevertheless, our auditor now recognizes what is meant by Disaster Recovery 7.1.C.3 in the TL 9000 requirements.

Thanks for your clarification Mark.

Now, if only QuEST would recognize that not all TL 9000 registrants can become QuEST members and release the elusive TL Benchmarking Data it would avoid even more confusion during the TL registration process.

Jaime

I have been meaning to update this thread.

Here is the latest:

All NCRs have been resolved.
All required corrective actions have been approved.
All required root cause analysis has been approved.
External auditor has submitted recommendation for registration.
Our registrar is currently reviewing the registration audit results.
A certificate coordinator from our registrar will call when registration is complete (I was told today it would be a couple of weeks).
Our bills are all paid up with our registrar (very important).

We were given 90 days to resolve the NCRs issued by the external auditor. We met that deadline with one week to spare.

Once our shiny new TL 9000 certificate is hanging on the wall at HQ I'll celebrate.

Jaime

Do you know - or how can we find out - how many people are 'certified' (or whatever you want to call it) to do TL 9000 audits (internationally, regional, or what ever data is available)? Is there a listing of 'certified' auditors anywhere? Who certifies the auditors?
To be a 'certified' TL 9000 auditor one must pass the QuEST (http://questforum.asq.org/) sanctioned TL 9000 auditor course and take another test online.

I am not sure if there is an official list of 'certified' TL 9000 auditors. I have taken the auditor's course myself but not the test online. The online test requirement was only issued recently.

Jaime

We are manufacturing and supplying Copper Cathodes (LME Grade) and CCR (Continious Cast Rods) to our customers. CCR are mainly used to draw wires and further used for Telecommunication Industries.

My request is to guide me that Can we go for TL - 9000 for CCR Plant.

I searched QUEST Forum also but could not get clue.

Regards,

Manoj
I believe the closest match is:
8.3 Cable Assemblies - Internal and/or external connectorized metallic or fiber optic cable
assemblies

I believe the closest match is:
8.3 Cable Assemblies - Internal and/or external connectorized metallic or fiber optic cable
assemblies
In response to
We are manufacturing and supplying Copper Cathodes (LME Grade) and CCR (Continious Cast Rods) to our customers. CCR are mainly used to draw wires and further used for Telecommunication Industries.

My request is to guide me that Can we go for TL - 9000 for CCR Plant.
You can limit the scope of your TL 9000 registration to the processes involving the CCR manufacturing. It would be wise to have your registrar schedule a pre-assessment so you can identify those areas suitable for registration.

Jaime

:topic:
Jaime,
Seattle Conference seem to cover TL9000 in 2 or 3 sessions 1.5 hour each by TL9000 SME. Are you attending the conference?
Regards,
Govind.

:topic:
Jaime,
Seattle Conference seem to cover TL9000 in 2 or 3 sessions 1.5 hour each by TL9000 SME. Are you attending the conference?
Regards,
Govind.
Govind,

I currently do not have plans to attend the Seattle Conference.

Jaime

Hi Jaime,

My company is a software development company, we intend to seek the TL9000 registration, could you please tell us a way to achieve it.

Thank you very much,
Quan Nguyen

This attachment was sent to me by e-mail.

My company is ready for software registration 7.2.2 - S, V software services.

I have defined the TL adders to the ISO quality manual, the new procedures, work instructions, forms, guidelines, etc.

We are working also to align this documentation system with BS 7799 information security and CMMI - SW level 3 requirements.

Regards,
Bogdan

Marc -----> This attachment was sent to me by e-mail.

I started to send attachments to Marc so that it could be posted for Forum Members. Since I can not attach the documents by myself.

I wasn't sure what the idea was... I was guessing. I forgot you have trouble with attachments.

Hi Jaime,

My company is a software development company, we intend to seek the TL9000 registration, could you please tell us a way to achieve it.

Thank you very much,
Quan Nguyen
Quan,

I am not familiar with the processes involved in a software development organization. If your organization is already registered to ISO 9001:2000 you could begin with a gap analysis. TL 9000 is basically a set of 80 or so extra requirements to the ISO 9001:2000 standard.

Could you please give some detail regarding your organization's Quality Management System (QMS) if you have one established already.

Jaime

HI Everyone,

Mark Kempf here, author of "The TL 9000 Guide for Auditors". I'll be attending the Seattle conference. Although I'm not speaking I will be in attendance, as I am Chair of the ASQ Quality Audit Division (QAD). If you would like to meet and talk with me, just go to the QAD display booth, and I'll be happy to discuss any matter(s) regarding TL 9000.


Stay Well,
mark