Customer's Interpretation vs. TS16949 clause 7.4.1.2 Supplier Development Requirement

[qualitytrec]

I am discussing something with my customer right now and hope you all can help me.
In the TS it states "The organization shall perform supplier quality management system development with the goal of supplier conformity with this Technical Specification. Conformity with ISO 9001:2000 is the first step in achieving this goal.
We are doing our first full internal audit with management review currently in order to prepare for the registration audit. We are a small 6 person stamper and the customer has required us to be registered because they say the standard says they have to. In addition they said we would have to start toward TS as soon as we were ISO. So I started to investigate. It is not in the ISO so I looked in the TS and found the above quote as the only reference to this.
My opinion is that conformity and registration are two different things as are goals and requirements.
We provide very good service and low price and run stuff most people can not. We get the junk and make it work for the customer. The standard to me seems ambiguous enough to allow a supplier to a TS company to remain fully uninterested in pursuing a QMS registered or conforming. and only requires that a TS company has the goal of making us come to our senses and conform.
I am sure this has been beat to death somewhere here but I have not found it yet, so any help would be great.

 

[vanputten]

Look at the last sentence under 7.4.1.2. - the sentence underneath the note. "Unless otherwise specified by they customer [your customer], suppliers [you] to the organization shall be third party registered to ISO 9001:2000 by an accredited third-party certifiaciton body."

Unless your customer says otherwise, you need to be certified to ISO 9001:2000 and eventually conforming (but not certified) to TS 16949:2002.


More importantly is... what is "supplier qms development?" Is that hitting your suppliers over the head with this requirement? Or is it actually helping suppleirs develop their QMS? The original intent is the latter. Hardly anyone does this. Also, if we go back to the 8 Quality Management Principles upon which ISO 9001:2000 and TS 16949 are based, #8 is Mutually Beneficial Supplier Relationships. Is you customer creating a mutally beneficial relationship? Are they owning up to the principles upon which the standard is based?

Regards, Dirk

 

[qualitytrec]

Why is that under the note?
I missed it because at first glance it looked like part of the note. We are pursuing registration to ISO already so that is not the issue.
But they are still saying it says we have to pursue TS registration after and that that is in the standard. Is that under a note somewhere also. Why are the notes not at the end of the section?
So reading it as it is, my interpretation is that unless specified by my customers customer we have to be registered. And if we are not then my customer is out of compliance with the standard. How can you develope a supplier with the first step being ISO and yet have to have them registered to ISO at the same time? And if my customers registrar finds this noncompliance is that a major or a minor for them in the audit?
I hate when something makes me responsible for someone else. Its like saying if your nieghbor speeds you will get a ticket.
Mark

PS thanks I did not see that dirk.

 

[Howard Atkins]

This issue of supplier development is one of the most problematic in the standard and in QS9000 before it.

The idea of development as Dirk says is that you should work together with the supplier to help him improve his system. This is something which in my opinion is not performed by most of the large Tier 1 and the OEM's (who are not bound by 16949)
In the IATF guidelines for 7.4.1.2:
Supplier quality management development is the demonstarted performance of a proces with the goal to achieve conformity to 16949. Indicators of performance include:

• conformity with ISO 9001:2000

• achievement of ISO 9001:2000 certification as a minimum unless otherwise specified by the customer

• compliance with ISO/TS16949 unless otherwise specified by the customer

• evidence of a process to achieve thew above steps

The standard distinguishes between compliance and reqistration as the suppliers are required to be 3rd part registered to ISO 9001:2000.
The standard requires your customer to only use suppliers that are ISO9001:2000 unless he is required otherwise. The situation in the US where by a lot of QS9000 companies did not upgrade to ISO9001:2000 and only have QS9000 is an example of a reason why the customer can release you from the requirement. The release is by your customers customer.

The other requirement for your customer from his suppliers at 7.3.6.3,

The organization shall conform to a product and manufacturing process approval procedure recognized by the customer.
NOTE Product approval should be subsequent to the verification of the manufacturing process.
This product and manufacturing process approval procedure shall also be applied to suppliers.

Despite what is said in the 16949 standard if you are ISO9001:2000 then you are duty bound to act as acording to customer requirements, in this case PPAP etc.

But to my mind the letter of the law is in fact defeating the spirit. Development should not be with a big stick

 

[vanputten]

Ultimately your organization does not have to be TS 16949 registered; only conforming. You will have to be ISO 9001:2000 registered.

There are many times people are confused becasue they have not read and understood all of ISO 9000:2000, ISO 9001:2000, and ISO 9004:2000. It is hard to understand ISO 9001:2000 without reading the other two documents in the trilogogy. The TS 16949 Guidance document helps also. In addition, we all need to read everything at the ISO/TC 176 website: https://isotc176sc2.elysium-ltd.net/

I repeat this mantra over andover like a broken record so please bare with me.

Regards, Dirk

 

[qualitytrec]

Added poll

I added a poll just to see if I am alone in my opinion of TS.
I realize it is off topic.

 

[ralphsulser]

I voted "it is an evil......"
How may of them have to comply with it?

 

[Mustang]

If your Customer requires you to be TS16949, don't you have to, regardless of what the Standard says?

 

[ralphsulser]

If your Customer requires you to be TS16949, don't you have to, regardless of what the Standard says?

Yes, if you are involved in automotive. If the customer specifies it in writing, then you are to comply with TS16949.You are required to do it, and will be audited for it as part of your Customer Specific Requirements. It doesn't matter if you like it or not, you have to address the necessary evils to do business with those customers.

 

[Mustang]

That's what I thought, but I got confused after trying to follow the gist of this thread. Thanks.