A TS 16949 Implementation through Registration Project Diary - Automotive

[Marc]

Ah, the fun of TS 16949 registration. I appreciate your getting back and letting us know what happened - Especially the details. Your continuing reports really are a big help to many people!

[Marc]

In Reply to Parent Post by Icy Mountain

Lack of Training on FMEA, APQP, PPAP (6.2.2.2)
If you just read the book and execute flawlessly (no findings on any of these processes by customer or registrar), it is not enough. You must pay AIAG for some training materials and then generate paperwork showing that someone used them. (DUFAS).

I would like to hear the details on this. Where is it required that:

You must pay AIAG for some training materials

?

[Marc]

In Reply to Parent Post by Icy Mountain

You have 21 Continual Improvements, 31 Corrective Actions but only 4 Preventive Actions in your Improvement Database. Go get some more Preventive Actions. (8.5.3)

By whose authority is there a required 'ratio' or numerical quota? I won't continue to 'reply' to all the findings, but if this is what you're being audited by, I have to say it's a joke. This makes a TS 16949 audit nothing more than a consultant visit.

[Icy Mountain]

In Reply to Parent Post by Marc

I would like to hear the details on this. Where is it required that: You must pay for AIAG Training Materials?

Good question, Marc. We don't actually have training records for who read the AIAG Manuals, etc. However, considering that we have a signed Parts Submission Warrant from our customer for our only product that ships to a TS subscriber, our customer must be happy with our PPAP for that product, which contains the requirement for APQP, which contains the requirement for FMEA, MSA, and SPC. I guess I need to DUFAS some training records?

[Icy Mountain]

In Reply to Parent Post by Marc

By whose authority is there a required 'ratio' or numerical quota? I won't continue to 'reply' to all the findings, but if this is what you're being audited by, I have to say it's a joke. This makes a TS 16949 audit nothing more than a consultant visit.

Of course a Pre-Assessment is consulting. That's why the IAOB changed the rules so the registrars cannot send the same team on a Pre-Assessment and a Registration Audit.

[Marc]

In Reply to Parent Post by Icy Mountain

Good question, Marc. We don't actually have training records for who read the AIAG Manuals, etc.

Reading the book isn't training (per se), is it?

Lack of Training on FMEA, APQP, PPAP (6.2.2.2)
If you just read the book and execute flawlessly (no findings on any of these processes by customer or registrar), it is not enough. You must pay AIAG for some training materials and then generate paperwork showing that someone used them. (DUFAS).

I must be missing something. 6.2.2.2 states:

6.2.2.2 Training
The organization shall establish and maintain documented procedures for identifying training needs and achieving competence of all personnel performing activities affecting product quality. Personnel performing specific assigned tasks shall be qualified, as required, with particular attention to the satisfaction of customer requirements.

NOTE 1 This applies to all employees having an effect on quality at all levels of the organization.
NOTE 2 An example of the customer specific requirements is the application of digitized mathematically based data.

It doesn't cite specific training required. I just gave a 2 day APQP course in Virginia but I was (am) unaware of a requirement that people must be formally trained in APQP (for example). They had the training because they were cited on one step in their APQP process for one PPAP and decided to do the training as a part of their reply to the nonconformance, but as far as I know training wasn't a requirement per se. We need a TS 'Expert' to chime in on this one.

However, considering that we have a signed Parts Submission Warrant from our customer for our only product that ships to a TS subscriber, our customer must be happy with our PPAP for that product, which contains the requirement for APQP, which contains the requirement for FMEA, MSA, and SPC. I guess I need to DUFAS some training records?

Let's get feedback from a TS Expert. I have to admit, as I said above, I am not aware of a requirement for specific formal training in APQP, etc. As long as the APQP process is being followed, and as long as process FMEAs, control plans, etc. are being done correctly, I'm surprised there was an issue.

[Marc]

In Reply to Parent Post by Marc

By whose authority is there a required 'ratio' or numerical quota? I won't continue to 'reply' to all the findings, but if this is what you're being audited by, I have to say it's a joke. This makes a TS 16949 audit nothing more than a consultant visit.

In Reply to Parent Post by Icy Mountain

Of course a Pre-Assessment is consulting. That's why the IAOB changed the rules so the registrars cannot send the same team on a Pre-Assessment and a Registration Audit.

Well, yes, but I was referring to the numerical ratio in the below context.

In Reply to Parent Post by Icy Mountain

You have 21 Continual Improvements, 31 Corrective Actions but only 4 Preventive Actions in your Improvement Database. Go get some more Preventive Actions. (8.5.3)

[Icy Mountain]

OK, for Production and Service Provision, the auditor let me pick the person to be interviewed. I chose wisely and she slam-dunked him.

Auditor: What is your process?
Person: Team C.
A: Yes, but what do you do?
P: We produce products.
A: Are you the process owner?
P: Yes, I am the Team Leader.
A: What are your outputs?
P: Equalizers.
A: Yes, but what do you make?
P: Equalizers.
A: So this process outputs....
P: Equalizers. Let me show you my Team Diagram. See, Equalizers are a product, we output them to this list of Core Customers.
A: What are your inputs?
P: Like it shows here, a Repetitive Schedule, which contains a Bill of Materials, the approved drawings, the assembly and test procedures and the part number specifications for all the components.
A: So, do you have a Control Plan?
P: Yes, this is it.
A: That's not a Control Plan.
P: Sure it is, it contains everything I need to build this product properly.
A: It's still not a Control Plan.
P: Whatever. Do you have any more questions?
A: Do you have a procedure?
P: Yes. Here are the assembly and test procedures (they were all current per our masters!). We have a Production and Service Procedure, too, that controls the whole process out here. Do you want to see it?
A: No, that's OK. How do you determine the effectiveness of your process?
P: See these metrics on our scoreboard. We continually measure On Time Delivery, First Pass Yield, Rework, Scrap, Productivity, Utilization, Customer Service, and Workplace Organization.
A: Do you have training?
P: Yes, here is our training matrix. I just updated it.
A: How do you determine the effectiveness of your training?
P: Our Team uses positive peer pressure. Everyone wants to do a good job and we check each step in our process to make sure that the team did the previous process correctly. If someone is lacking in training or didn't understand another team member will help. Our metrics prove the effectiveness or our training. How could I maintain yields like this unless everyone on my team knew what they were doing?
A: I don't know.
P: That's right.
A: Do you have a description of your role in the process (job description)?
P: Yes. I am a Team Leader and my team produces equalizers. If you want the longer, formal one that I signed, go see Icy Mountain.
A: I think we're done here.

Very nicely done. She will be recognized in front of the entire plant at our next Communications Meeting for "cowboyin' up when surrounded by wolves". Her's is the only Team/Process to have 0 Findings.