You may want to take a look at Aug. 1999 issue of Quality Digest. It outlines some of the differences. Marc, please give me your thoughts on this question. The company I work for is in final stages of preparing for QS9000 registration. Any advantages to revising that to try and be one of the first companies registered to ISO/TS16949 instead of one of the last to QS9000?
My clients haven't had much info on it - and when I suggest it they give me that "look" - what the heck are you talking about. Many are small and driven to do ISO/QS by there customers. We can suggest, but it'll take awhile for the companies anxious to hang a "9000" on their building to get used to the idea.
They'll get over it. They always do. They have no choice. Take it slowly-there's at least three years before QS will die. I have the TS standard, and if it helps and you are sold on ISO-like I am; then you will be happy with the new changes-they are good things that help companies.
With regard to registering only to ISO 16949 and ignoring QS-9000 because it will certainly die in the future: some of us cannot afford to do that because we supply to the heavy truck industry. Companies like Cummins and Caterpillar have been slow to accept QS-9000, but they are now REQUIRING their supplier to register. It may take them several years to recognize and accept the new standard.