VDA 6.3 - Process Audit - You think you had it bad?

[Pogi_]

I just need some information and related experiences on VDA 6.3 format audit ("victim" and "attacker").

I guess the obvious question is, were you audited on this format?
Why and how did you got out of it?
Did you know anything about it when you got audited on this format?

You can google this VDA 6.3 all you want but, however, (caveat: VDA6.3 is not a dreaded audit format) i suggest let people with first hand experience provide the initial throws first.

Looking forward to an ejoyable reading!

[ksanders]

I was audited to the VDA 6.3 format last year by a European company. We neither prepared or had any knowledge of the audit until it happened. The company is TS16949 registered, and we had no major issues during the audit. This could be due to the skills of the auditor though. They didn't actually follow any specific checklist, just did the audit and completed the checklist after the fact. I searched quite a while until I found the VDA website and obtianed a copy of the VDA6.3 standard. I have to admit, I never looked at the book after receiving it, and have now moved on to another company who does not have this as a requirement.

Bottom line, if your TS level, you shouldn't have any additional issues, but as with any audit, it really depends on the auditor....

[Howard Atkins]

I personally like VDA 6.3 and think that it is a good format.
See this search for some documents
and here for discussions
Good Luck

[harry]

To add to Howard's post, check this section/forum: VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards (Under one roof!)

[Richard Pike]

In Reply to Parent Post by Pogi_

I just need some information and related experiences on VDA 6.3 format audit ("victim" and "attacker").

I guess the obvious question is, were you audited on this format?
Why and how did you got out of it?
Did you know anything about it when you got audited on this format?

You can google this VDA 6.3 all you want but, however, (caveat: VDA6.3 is not a dreaded audit format) i suggest let people with first hand experience provide the initial throws first.

Looking forward to an ejoyable reading!

Seriously not understanding the issue.

If a customer requires (as part of a contract or not), to conduct Process Audits (VDA 6.3) then part of that requirement would be for the organization to conduct "Internal" Process Audits,. This would obviously require some research and subsequent implementation and hence there would be no surprises when the Customer did their audit.

Bear in mind that the VDA 6.3 process Audit is nothing more than a detailed TS Audit "on a "specific process" as opposed to throughout the QMS.

Further more; although more detailed, it is a "relaxed" audit, because it allows a rating system, as opposed to the conform or not conform principles of TS.

If you have a problem during VDA 6.3 Audits, then your TS based QMS is weak and we should be thankful the VDA 6.3 shows this up.

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by Richard Pike

<snip>
If you have a problem during VDA 6.3 Audits, then your TS based QMS is weak and we should be thankful the VDA 6.3 [audit] shows this up.

I fixed that for you.

[Ron Rompen]

I have been audited to VDA 6.3 several times, at several different companies. In all cases, I didn't find it too onerous an experience; we were well-prepared beforehand (we did obtain a copy of the standard well in advance, and reviewed it thoroughly), and revised our internal audit practices to ensure that we were looking for the same things.

I did (as someone else has already pointed out) like the scoring system, rather than the strict pass/fail criteria; even though all nonconformances must be addressed, a score makes it easier to prioritize those observations that the auditors have made.

Sounds to me like you had a particularly difficult audit; care to share some of the highlights (or lowlights) of it?

[Pogi_]

I guess...what's grinding my gears to head on to this subject is that the fact VDA6.3 is a "FREE FOR ALL" audit and depending on the auditors ability to notice and catch non-compliance (similar to "some" audit format) gives the auditee....a really narrow escape to get 30 - 60 observations each time everytime (thereby cause more waste of time). Maybe no major findings but never in my entire career have I seen anyone pass into this audit and get less than 10 observations....maybe if you have a 1-step process or your auditor is blind...then i may believe that it is a possibility.

You can have an "A" score but entailing 20+ actions to fix (if that's what its supposed to be called or it is an idea/picture of what they so called ideal conditions).

I been reading the standard forward and backward and it occured to me that you can actually do this audit (minus the checklist) to someone and make them look like a stallion but a donkey on the inside....(i think i confused you there..read again so that you can get the point else send me a PM and i'll tell you the story about the stallion and a donkey.. he he).

Seriosly...i can't see the rationale of auditors pointing out non-sense items...e.g. why is this monitor placed here?? not that you have the monitor in the bathroom sink but man...it sometimes feels that they just trying so fill-in the spread sheets? I have more examples that will make you ROFLMAO (been reading my daughters text messages)!

Nothing against them (-the VDA6.3 auditors..who else?)...i'm working for a TS, MIL, ISO etc, etc certified firm that is there for 50++ years and im sure we know what we are doing.

I think sometimes auditors needs to be more broad minded and be the experts in the field that they are auditing....and not because they got certificates to audit...

Just an opinion..