AIAG approved for sanctioned training delivery

[dewie]

May somebody tell me Which organization has been given permission from AIAG to perform training in QS9000? As I have seen in QS requirement manual page ii, there are only BV and Plexus. But I saw in the www that some organization has announced that they get premission from AIAG to do trainig for Big 3 supplier assessment.

 

[Marc]

All I know of is Plexus.

 

[Marc]

I have just been informed that Omnix has some 'AIAG Approved" supplier of training services. Anyone else have any info on Omnix or other 'AIAG Approved' training provider?

 

[barb butrym]

I am not ure what you are saying/asking....We, BSL International/CMCI are running QS 9000 lead auditor courses at Ford in Deerborn...as well as all over the Uk/world for ford and their suppliers. TDA in the Uk are running all sorts of PPAP, APQP, TE, Q1 stuff for Ford....and have begun to sell through BSL International here in the US, to suppliers of Ford. Have had no AIAG approval, but Ford is happy. Currently our waiting for our vendor #. No one has asked for any sanction from AIAG.

 

[Marc]

OK - Here it is. See http://www.aiag.org - It was in this directory --> /quality/index.html

There are, in the upper left, 2 links for "A. Task Force Sanctioned Training". They are, Plexis (Alex Chong's group) and Omnix. As I remember there was a push to use these two and there was a mini revolt when it was proposed that QS9000 companies use either of these two for training. It sorta 'went away' but the result was that although not required, Plexus (see http://Elsmar.com/obsolete/plexus.html ) and Omnix (I know of them mainly through their business in Thailand from an old association with Paul Robere) are 'preferred' providers of training services. In large part, Dan Reid (who has somewhat recently left GM to work with KPMG as I think) appeared to be the force behind getting Plexus and Omnix their 'status' as 'Sanctioned'. As we all know, there has been a lot of cronyism in the QS9000 'system'. A lot of individuals have made significant money out of the QS9000 'customer requirement'. As I said, I believe the original intent was to restrict all training to 'sanctioned' companies if you wanted it to 'count' during an audit. To get sanctioned you were going to have to pay a tax to the AIAG. Typical of the whole program and the source of the push to have internal auditors 'registered' or whatever like Lead Auditors have to do with the IRAC or the RAB. But then I have a dim view of the significance of companies doing their own internal auditing in most companies.

What do y'all think?

 

[Laura M]

mmm...Those who can do, those who can't teach? Maybe not always, but companies who only train for a living seem to not have the practical experience to answer all the "what if's" that come up. I prefer auditors who teach on the side. Or implementors who know the standard from being audited.

On the Internal auditor issue... I didn't have a problem with internal internal auditors. My only suggestion is that they need to go to a Lead auditor class, not the 2 day internal auditor, in my opinion. We didn't use AIAG sanctioned (not sure if there was at the time). Of course due to the size of the company, they are practically full time IA. At smaller companies, a 2-day course and once a year audit won't cut it.

Laura