TS16949 & Supplier Development - To which suppliers does this requirement apply?

[Kerry]

According to TS16949 7.4.1.2, "Unless otherwise specified by the customer, suppliers to the organization shall be third party registered to ISO 9001:2000 by an accredited third-party certification body."

To which suppliers does this requirement apply? Obviously suppliers of direct material that would go into your saleable product would be required to be registered, but what about suppliers of indirect material such as tooling & equipment, coolants, or anything else that could affect product quality? What about prototype suppliers? Suppliers of services such as design/CAD work?

If, as Note 1 of 7.4.1 states, purchased products include all products and services that affect customer requirements...then one could make a case that all of the suppliers listed above would be required to be registered.

Anyone have any clarification on this requirement for me?

[M Greenaway]

Sounds like you have figured it out for yourself Kerry.

[Kerry]

Why do I always feel like I should be lying on a psychiatrist's couch when I ask questions in these forums? ....well Kerry, how do you feel about the supplier development requirement???

I apologize for the sarcasm, but I'm sure most of you can relate. In my position I like to think I understand the intent of the Standards and how they apply to my company. My biggest problem is convincing the non-quality folk in the organization that I'm not just making this stuff up as I go along - trying to find bigger and better ways to screw up their days. The question I am most frequently asked is "where is it written?" If I don't see where "it" is written, I ask my fellow quality folk and hope that someone out there can tell me. In this instance I'm really not trying to figure "it" out for myself, I'm trying to find some sort of sanctioned interpretation, if you will, to show the non-believers that I am not leading them astray.

Is there anything in writing on this issue, or am I pretty much on my own on this one?

[Sam]

Kerry,There are no sanctioned interpretations on this para yet.
This question was asked of the panel at he ISO/TS rollout meeting I attended. The panel response was " if you have any questions/concerns relating to supplier development, contact your customer. Waivers must be in writing."

[Howard Atkins]

According to the standards that are usually applied then all suppliers that have a bearing on the part should be included.
Normally things like toilet paper etc are excluded but as we discussed before the need for motivation maybe the standard of the toilet paper has a direct effect on motivation and thus needs to be a recognised supplier with incoming inspection.

[db]

IMNSHO I think that the body of 7.4.1.2 and the note are talking about two separate things!

The body refers to all suppliers, saying that all suppliers need to comply. The note just states what the priority of supplier development. A critical supplier needs to be developed (comply with the body) before a lesser supplier.

The problem I have is based on ISO 9000:2000 a supplier is an organization that provides a product, which in turn is defined as a result of a process, which in turn is defined as activities that turn inputs into outputs. Given those definitions (excluding notes) ALL suppliers fit under this requirments.

Taking into account the notes, one could argue that only "value added" processes need to be included. This would eliminate many lesser suppliers, but still include tooling and coolant.

[Kerry]

I'm sorry - I may have confused things by referring back to a note from 7.4.1 after discussing 7.4.1.2. Anyway, I find the whole thing rather conflicting.

I just returned from a meeting with my supplier quality and purchasing organizations. Again, the need for clarification reared its ugly head. I work with a bunch of people who want to see in writing something like "this requirement applies to supplier type A in this situation, but not in this situation, supplier type B in this situation..." and so on. I know I'm not going to find that anywhere, but still they want it.

My bottom line that I'm telling everyone is that all suppliers of material that could affect customer requirements or satisfaction must be registered to ISO9001:2000 by 12/31/2003 unless waived by the customer. This includes suppliers of direct material (material that goes into the final saleable product), tooling, equipment, gages, spare parts, coolants and other processing materials, outside processing services (i.e., painting, machining, sorting, sequencing, calibration, etc.), and prototypes.

If anyone out there disagrees with me, please let me know why. For those in agreement, do any of you know how various Tier 1's are handling this?

[Sidney Vianna]

The following link applies to QS-9000, but I suspect that the same rationale would apply for TS-16929:2002. I believe that the document addresses most of your questions.

http://www.aiag.org/forms/QS-9000Info-07-01-02Final.pdf

Just be aware that you might have more questions after you read this. Just don't shoot the messenger, please.