Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of Elsmar.com** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

CSR (Customer Specific Requirements) in TS 16949 Audits - Always required?

Peters

Quite Involved in Discussions
#1
During the TS audit in one automotive firm we had difficult discussion with the person responsible for the quality system:

His answer for nonconformities based on CSR:

In the case of customers with whom we have contract, eg. Eaton, Delphi, TRW, Bosch - if the contract recall formally Supplier Quality Manual or Customer Specific Requirements we will implement this. If such agreement does not exist in contract - we have no reason to implement this Manual or CSR. The fact that the customer have manual for suppliers - it’s not a reason for implementation. What matters is what is in the contract, not the manuals, which are at the customer on the website "

What do you think about such line of defense...
 
Paid Advertisement - Forum Supporter

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#2
During the TS audit in one automotive firm we had difficult discussion with the person responsible for the quality system:

His answer for nonconformities based on CSR:

In the case of customers with whom we have contract, eg. Eaton, Delphi, TRW, Bosch - if the contract recall formally Supplier Quality Manual or Customer Specific Requirements we will implement this. If such agreement does not exist in contract - we have no reason to implement this Manual or CSR. The fact that the customer have manual for suppliers - it’s not a reason for implementation. What matters is what is in the contract, not the manuals, which are at the customer on the website "

What do you think about such line of defense...
Given only the information that's available, I think he's technically correct. There are no "requirements" that exist outside of contractual obligations and agreements in this regard. I think it's a good idea to not allow customers, especially automotive customers, to impose requirements that haven't been subjected to negotiation. Whether the auditee is correct in stating that he has no reason to "implement" CSRs is another question.
 

Stijloor

Staff member
Super Moderator
#3
Customer Specific Requirements only apply from the initial contact (quotations and P.O. review & approval) until the end of the contractual obligation (invoicing and obtaining customer feedback). After this, they may still be called your customer, but unless you actually produce and ship parts to them, their CSR's do not apply.

When I play auditor, I only look at CSR's associated with current customers and their contracts.

To make life easier for all involved with CSR's, see linked post. I developed a CSR matrix. It is an older version, but you get an idea how to address CSR's

Stijloor.



.
 
Last edited:
#4
During the TS audit in one automotive firm we had difficult discussion with the person responsible for the quality system:

His answer for nonconformities based on CSR:

In the case of customers with whom we have contract, eg. Eaton, Delphi, TRW, Bosch - if the contract recall formally Supplier Quality Manual or Customer Specific Requirements we will implement this. If such agreement does not exist in contract - we have no reason to implement this Manual or CSR. The fact that the customer have manual for suppliers - it’s not a reason for implementation. What matters is what is in the contract, not the manuals, which are at the customer on the website "

What do you think about such line of defense...
Customer specific requirements shall be agreed, confirmed and signed off. If they are not communicated and agreed in formal way, they do not exist.
Take into account that CSR can vary from supplier and supplier. For instance, if you want the product to be shipped in yellow box, this is a requirment of mine.Other customers may want other colours and you as supplier has a cost for this to be agreed in a formal way. Just for this exist FMEA and Control plan.
A question for you , just to frame the issue: are you conducting a supplier audit, Registrar audit, internal audit?
:bigwave:
 
Last edited:

Peters

Quite Involved in Discussions
#5
Jim Wynne, Stijloor, qusys

In theory - formally, he could be right, taking into account the legal issues. However, in many companies, it appears, it is not entirely clear what is established in the contract because the sales department is in another location and the production plant has not received any information about customer requirements. Another problem - one day I read in the company (tier I) contract with General Motors (along with the general terms and conditions) and I read there is not any reference to GM Customer Specifics. It is difficult to imagine that the GM Supplier Quality Dpt did not require GM Customer Specifics from suppliers.
Many companies don't want to know the customer requirements because it's easier. They think CSRs are only problems and cost for them.
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#6
Jim Wynne, Stijloor, qusys

In theory - formally, he could be right, taking into account the legal issues. However, in many companies, it appears, it is not entirely clear what is established in the contract because the sales department is in another location and the production plant has not received any information about customer requirements. Another problem - one day I read in the company (tier I) contract with General Motors (along with the general terms and conditions) and I read there is not any reference to GM Customer Specifics. It is difficult to imagine that the GM Supplier Quality Dpt did not require GM Customer Specifics from suppliers.
Many companies don't want to know the customer requirements because it's easier. They think CSRs are only problems and cost for them.
If you're auditing CSRs, you must start with a relevant purchase order (the contract). As an auditor you shouldn't be making assumptions about what a given customer might or might not be expecting.
 

Peters

Quite Involved in Discussions
#7
If you're auditing CSRs, you must start with a relevant purchase order (the contract). As an auditor you shouldn't be making assumptions about what a given customer might or might not be expecting.
But keep in mind that the determination of customer requirements is the responsibility of audited firm, not the auditor. Company should present agreements to the auditor.
 
#8
Jim Wynne, Stijloor, qusys

In theory - formally, he could be right, taking into account the legal issues. However, in many companies, it appears, it is not entirely clear what is established in the contract because the sales department is in another location and the production plant has not received any information about customer requirements. Another problem - one day I read in the company (tier I) contract with General Motors (along with the general terms and conditions) and I read there is not any reference to GM Customer Specifics. It is difficult to imagine that the GM Supplier Quality Dpt did not require GM Customer Specifics from suppliers.
Many companies don't want to know the customer requirements because it's easier. They think CSRs are only problems and cost for them.
This can carry to a non conformity based upon this evidences.
Besides, it seems to be not clear the relation with remote functions, this is another way to investigate.
In case of a registrar audit, this could carry to a major ncn
 

Jim Wynne

Super Moderator
#9
This can carry to a non conformity based upon this evidences.
What evidence?
Besides, it seems to be not clear the relation with remote functions, this is another way to investigate.
If there is a disconnect between the mother ship and its satellites there could indeed be issues, but none that necessarily affect the validity (or lack thereof) of CSRs. The OP stated pretty unequivocally that there are no contractual obligations in the matters at hand.
In case of a registrar audit, this could carry to a major ncn
How so?
 
#10
What evidence?

If there is a disconnect between the mother ship and its satellites there could indeed be issues, but none that necessarily affect the validity (or lack thereof) of CSRs. The OP stated pretty unequivocally that there are no contractual obligations in the matters at hand.

How so?
I was referring to the other poster of Peters
Jim Wynne, Stijloor, qusys

In theory - formally, he could be right, taking into account the legal issues. However, in many companies, it appears, it is not entirely clear what is established in the contract because the sales department is in another location and the production plant has not received any information about customer requirements. Another problem - one day I read in the company (tier I) contract with General Motors (along with the general terms and conditions) and I read there is not any reference to GM Customer Specifics. It is difficult to imagine that the GM Supplier Quality Dpt did not require GM Customer Specifics from suppliers.
Many companies don't want to know the customer requirements because it's easier. They think CSRs are only problems and cost for them.
However I do not know if it is a real fact evidenced during an audit.
No info of which kind of audit is this .:bigwave:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top Bottom