Automotive and non automotive - 2 systems?

We are a tier 2 supplier working to be registered to QS 9K, and I am frequently asked about several issues regarding waivers:

1. Can a customer waive ALL "QS" requirements? This approach has great favor with Marketing, but leaves me uneasy.

2. We have several plants overseas, but we are the design center. If we design a product, but it will be built and sold only overseas, do we have to follow APQP and have all the PPAP documents on hand, even if the overseas customers don' t require (or care about) QS?

3. If piece part or sub-assembly manufacturing is subcontracted, do we need control plans, FMEA's etc from all the suppliers to support our PPAP package? We have some suppliers that might refuse to make parts if we require this.

4. To what extent must we have PPAP documentation on existing products that are sold to customers that don't require QS 9000?

Any clarification would be greatly appreciated.

[Marc]

--> ...1. Can a customer waive ALL "QS" requirements? This approach has
--> great favor with Marketing, but leaves me uneasy.

They can, for themselves, waive all requirements I suppose. If you supply hoses for automotive and ropes for a non-automotive client you do not have to go through APQP or PPAP or anything else for the non-automotive customer.

--> 2. We have several plants overseas, but we are the design center. If
--> we design a product, but it will be built and sold only overseas, do
--> we have to follow APQP and have all the PPAP documents on hand, even
--> if the overseas customers don' t require (or care about) QS?

The only thing that matters is if the customer requires it. If it's Ford, GM or Chrysler, or if your customer requires it, you have no choice.

--> 3. If piece part or sub-assembly manufacturing is subcontracted, do
--> we need control plans, FMEA's etc from all the suppliers to support
--> our PPAP package? We have some suppliers that might refuse to make
--> parts if we require this.

If your customer requires you to provide sub-supplier documentation, you have no choice.

--> 4. To what extent must we have PPAP documentation on existing
--> products that are sold to customers that don't require QS 9000?

There is no requirement for you to do QS anything if you are not required to specifically by your customer. If some of your products are automotive, you will probably be required to be QS9000 (actually ISO9001) registered.

HOWEVER - The ISO9001 requirements apply to ALL your products/systems. PPAP and APQP (per se) are not required by ISO9001.

But Marc, if your quality system conforms to QS9000, can you not do APQP? in your vast exposure to other qualitt systems, are you allowed to have two systems? One for automotive customers (or those that require PPAP submissions, etc.) and one for non-automotive customers (those that do not know PPAP, etc.)? I believe we were required to set our system up to always do APQP / PPAP, but if the particular customer does not require PPAP we just did not submit a PPAP. One was available, though.

[Howard Atkins]

I believe that 2 systems are dangerous, there is always a chance of double standards and different operating procedures that cause confusion.
We are begining to get demands from non-automotive customers to supply a truncated form of PPAP.
To follow APQP can only help you from all points as the process is I believe helpfull and should be cost saving in the long run. The output of APQP is PPAP even if you do not transfer the whole documentation to the specific forms you have evidence that the process was completed.
We do not put all the output on standard forms but have tailored our procedures to allow us to us our own methods and just transfer when needed.
The method here will help to improve your performance and as such I would suggest to use it.

[Marc]

I'm not advocating 2 systems. First let's agree PPAP is just a warrant you send in with APQP derived documents and data.

OK - your planning process is your planning process. Many now call it APQP. BUT - APQP is really inception of design through end of production. Do we agree on this?

That said, you can vary your planning requirements in accordance with need. This is to say maybe your automotive product is injection molded arm rests AND you have another product (non-automotive) which is injection molding toy soldiers. You will probably not be as critical on your design / verification / validation requirements with the toy soldiers as you will with the automotive arm rest you produce. You will probably not be as critical about your capability requirements for the toy soldier. In fact, you may not have any critical characteristics / requirements for the toy soldier.

Most of you systems will operate as usual - like contract review and purchasing. On the other hand, you management review will probably address arm rest issues in much more detail than any toy soldier issues.

Have I confused the issue or does this make sense to you... ???

[Howard Atkins]

This discussion is still relevant in the days of TS 16949 and not only in the APQP/PPAP field.

How do you manage customers from different industries?