Auditor Findings - IATF checklist - Supplier PPAP - Internal Auditor Training

Hi everyone, I need your help and comments.

My questions are:
1. We use process approach to audit our quality system. Of course we have developed our checklist. But our auditor said that we had not all the questions provided by IATF checklist and what's more, we had not covered all the elements in the standard. As for the night shift, we only audited records. He also insisted that we should night shift site audit.
2. We did defined our way to recognize our material supplier. Our auditor insisted that that was not the kind of PPAP and that We need to develop a set of PPAP. What you folks think? Our suppliers are big companies and our purchase amount is small. If we demand them complex PPAP. Perhase they will not do business with us.
3. Internal auditor qualification. We have our internal auditors trained by our consulting company. Our auditor said that the consulting company had not the qualification. But in reality in China Only Plexus has got the qualification from IATF and AIAG. What do you do in your country?

Thanks!

1) You do have to include all of the requirements of the standard in your internal audits, but you don't have to include all of the questions on the IATF checklist. I think your auditor got that requirement confused with the requirements for certification body (registrar) checklists. The "Automotive Certification Scheme for ISO/TS 16949:2002 - Rules for achieving IATF recognition" document says in 2.7:

Certification body checklists shall include all questions contained in the "Checklist to ISO/TS 16949:2002".

Click to expand...

3) Your internal auditors do not have to be trained by Plexus. Their training does have to be done to meet the requirements of appropriate customer-specific requirements though. I believe that Ford still has the most stringent requirements, but they have relaxed quite a bit from what they used to require. If you have Ford, DaimlerChrysler, or GM for customers, check their requirements here http://www.iaob.org/oem_req.html to see what they require.

Sorry - I ran out of time for a more complete answer. I'll try to check back tomorrow....

Thank you.

What I talked about is our pre-audit by BVQI. The female auditor is a part-time auditor for both BVQI Guangzhou and SGS Shanghai. We are afraid that we shall fail in the Certification audit. We included all the requirements in the standard but not all the exact questions in IATF checklist.

As for internal auditor qualification, we did them process approach audit method and CSRs. She doubted our qualifications.

Thank you. I hope we can learn more from you tomorrow. We have a huge market here---TS registration. But our country is a little bit lag behind the world in this aspect for the languange barriers of English.

She is not a professional auditor. I'm not satisfied with SGS's certifying activity.

Yasunari Kuo said:

Hi everyone, I need your help and comments.

My questions are:
1. We use process approach to audit our quality system. Of course we have developed our checklist. But our auditor said that we had not all the questions provided by IATF checklist and what's more, we had not covered all the elements in the standard. As for the night shift, we only audited records. He also insisted that we should night shift site audit.
2. We did defined our way to recognize our material supplier. Our auditor insisted that that was not the kind of PPAP and that We need to develop a set of PPAP. What you folks think? Our suppliers are big companies and our purchase amount is small. If we demand them complex PPAP. Perhase they will do business with us.
3. Internal auditor qualification. We have our internal auditors trained by our consulting company. Our auditor said that the consulting company had not the qualification. But in reality in China Only Plexus has got the qualification from IATF and AIAG. What do you do in your country?

Thanks!

Click to expand...

1- You must address all elements of the specification, on all shifts,at all sites. Refer to the "Quality System Assessment Checklist - Checklist to ISO/TS 16949:2002"and the errata sheet on the AIAG website.

2- You must have a PPAP that shows evidence of conformance to your requirements and the applicable CSR's.

3- Your internal auditors must be trained by auditors that are competent in the requirements of ISO 19011, the automotive approach to process audits and the core tools. If your internal auditors are going to audit your suppliers, then they must show evidence of successful completion of the above.

Note: Plexus is the choice of AIAG, not IATF.

hank-qu said:

She is not a professional auditor. I'm not satisfied with SGS's certifying activity.

Click to expand...

Because of the "automotive certification scheme" and the follow on witness audits all registrars will interpret the specification fairly consistant.
If you have questions concerning the competence of the auditor, discuss them with your registrar.
All auditors for the registrar go through the same training, however letting go of QS and subjectivity is still a problem for some of them.

Thank you, Sam.
One more question:for S,O,D in PFMEA, we had graded them with 1-5. Our products are such simple ones as terminal and pressed case for car audios. Our CB auditor insisted that we should graded them with 1-10 and that we must take into the potential safety problems into account. In reality, our products can not result in safety problems but assembly problems. Is our way acceptable?

Yasunari Kuo said:

Thank you, Sam.
One more question:for S,O,D in PFMEA, we had graded them with 1-5. Our products are such simple ones as terminal and pressed case for car audios. Our CB auditor insisted that we should graded them with 1-10 and that we must take into the potential safety problems into account. In reality, our products can not result in safety problems but assembly problems. Is our way acceptable?

Click to expand...

There is no requirement to rate any particular way. However, since rating on a scale of 1-5 will give much lower RPNs of the 1-10, I would have some evidence that 1-5 rating are acceptable to your customers.

As far as safety, if they can't result in safety problems, then they would score very low. It might be important to show you at least looked at the saftey aspect, even if it not important enought to make it to the FMEA.

Thank you for the quick reply. I do agree with you. But how will we make the auditor agree with us. She is the judge during certicate audit.

Yasunari Kuo said:

Thank you, Sam.
One more question:for S,O,D in PFMEA, we had graded them with 1-5. Our products are such simple ones as terminal and pressed case for car audios. Our CB auditor insisted that we should graded them with 1-10 and that we must take into the potential safety problems into account. In reality, our products can not result in safety problems but assembly problems. Is our way acceptable?

Click to expand...

I'm confused. In the FMEA manual the rating system is defined as 1 -10. Are yoy saying that you only consider 1 - 5 or are you saying that yiou have revised the manual to remove 6 - 10.
If you only consider 1 - 5, that is your choice, then your product does not fall within the 6 - 10 range of concern. If, however, you are revising the manual by excluding the 6 - 10 rating then that would be a concern of the auditor.
It sounds to me as if you may be offering too much information to the auditor. If the auditor asks "Why do you not have any 6 - 1o ratings" don't say "we only rate 1-5, instead say something to the effect "those ratings do not apply to our products".
I may be missing the point here (it wouldn't be the first time).