TS 16949 Supplier Auditor Certification course

[Sam]

Has anyone taken this training course yet?

I recently completed the training in July, through AIAG,and just received the results. I failed the exam; the written and oral exam.

I'll share my experience with everyone because this training was not anything like the QS9000 or the ISO14001 auditor training. I knew I was in trouble the first when the instructor said " If you don't know the TS specification then you probably won't pass the test".
And please don't take this as "sour grapes". I may be the only one that failed this session, but I can at least get it out of my system.

There are three parts to the exam; performance, oral, and written,
1- The performance portion consists of discussions of various types of inputs and outputs to a process, filling out forms, turtle, octopus. Also included were two case studies that comprised a simulation audit.
2- There was a brief period in which the major differences between QS and TS were discussed.

Observation: Although there were several questions asked during these exercises, there was never any critique offered by the instructors.

2- The oral exam consists of the selection of a process scenario. You are given 35 min to review the scenario, determine the inputs, activities, outputs, facts to be verified during the audit and necessary information for the audit. Then you get to make a private presentation in front of the two instructors. No critique after.

Observation:
1- We had a 30 min. discussion about this method on the 3rd day. We did not role play this method at any time.
2- This approach was different then what we encountered during the course.

3- The written exam was 25 questions, multiple choice to be completed in 30 mminutes.

Observation:
1- Unlike QS9000 and ISO14001, there was no overview of this test.
2- Above all, know the TS specification before signing up for the course.

Did I learn anything? I learned what a turtle diagram is, I know what an octopus diagram is. I know how to fill out a process audit worksheet.

For what it's worth, I at least i got it out.

[rsalinger]

Could you very briefly explain "turtle diagram" and "octopus diagram"? I have never heard of these, and a search for these terms together with 16949 in Google gave no enlightenment.

[M Greenaway]

Octopus diagram is used to determine the customer orientated processes of an organisation. You show the organisation as a whole and then show the inputs and outputs between the customer and the organisation. Each input and output loops in and out of the organisation such that the diagram ends up looking like an octopus.

Turtle diagrams are pretty much a standard process diagram, i.e. a box with inputs to the left, outputs to the right, and modified to show 'with what', 'with who', 'how many' and 'how' branching out of the process box such that the diagram looks like a turtle.

What purpose does all this serve ? Maybe its just a new language so that we can differentiate between the old school and the new school

[Sam]

Good explanation M.
If I could elaborate a little.

Definition from the classroom text "The "Octopus" is graphacally illustrates the direct inputs from the customer to the organization and the resultant direct outputs from the organization to the customer." Thereby noting that each "leg" on the octopus is an customer oriented process (COP). Development of this method has been attributed to Ford.

The "Turtle" diagram is identified as a tool used for the analysis of a customer oriented process.
From the classroom text " The risk (turtle - the diagram is sometimes referred to as the turtle diagram) Analysis of a process allows the RISKS related to the process to be identified, studied and to the extent possible, mitigated."; using the question ststements note by M.
Instructors indicated that this tool was developed by Crosby. (?)

It is interesting to note, as I stated before, use of either one of these methods is not required by the specification. Developing Customer oriented processes is not a requirement of the specification; defining processes in general is. However this is the method that is being "taught" by the various CB's. So it appears that our methods of defining processes may be dictated by the CB.