IATF 16949 Cl. 8.4.2.3 - Supplier Quality Management System Development

[Dave Cx]

All
I had a similar NC when transitioning of not having a supplier development plan, it was addressed by understanding which suppliers would become IATF (basically anyone who was TS) no action for them. For the ISO9001 only suppliers we had to identify what we wanted from them over & above 9001, in this case we wanted for example: PPAP & IMDS submissions (but it could be any requirement).

I believe the IATF own motivation behind this is get more companies IATF 16949 certified hence more revenue for the IATF - or am I just being cynical.
Dave

 

[Sidney Vianna]

...how do receive these updates from IATF, are they automated or some trigger of some sort?

In the IATF website, they have a subscriber option.

 

[AMIT BALLAL]

All
I had a similar NC when transitioning of not having a supplier development plan, it was addressed by understanding which suppliers would become IATF (basically anyone who was TS) no action for them. For the ISO9001 only suppliers we had to identify what we wanted from them over & above 9001, in this case we wanted for example: PPAP & IMDS submissions (but it could be any requirement).

I believe the IATF own motivation behind this is get more companies IATF 16949 certified hence more revenue for the IATF - or am I just being cynical.
Dave

I feel, there purpose is to reduce risk in automotive supply chain. If there is risk, there might be a possibility that someone might lose his/her life due to that (using an automobile). If that is the case, this is where they are proposing to get IATF16949 certification.
They have clarified their purpose in the revised SI stating "Using a risk-based model, the organization shall define a minimum acceptable level of QMS development and a target QMS development level for each supplier".

 

[QualitySpirit]

I believe the clause defines itself.

The organization shall require their suppliers of automotive products and services to develop...

Only automotive product and service suppliers need ISO9001.

I originally understood as Johnnymo62 that this clause applies to only automotive suppliers and that it makes sense that the ultimate objective to get all these automotive suppliers to IATF certification.

The newly revised SI makes it more confusing. Now it says about eligible organization and giving examples scrap metal suppliers, trucking
companies who provide transport and logistics support, etc.

It seems like the applicable supplier of this clause expand to not only automotive suppliers. Then auditors need to verify if all scrap metal suppliers, trucking companies get ISO9001 certified?

 

[vincee]

Amit:
Yes, key here is to have a "Plan in place to develop, implement, and improve a QMS with the ultimate objective of becoming certified to this Automotive QMS Standard".
In my case for the ISO9001 only suppliers who supply automotive product (based on percentage of total business - including Non-North American Automotive Product) the added requirement/expectation was to have APQP Main Docs in place and compliant to AIAG guidelines, i.e., PFD, PFMEA and Control Plans.

 

[QualityKRSC]

Looking for clarification on Supplier Development, our current Suppliers are ISO Certified, many are Distributors (due to the low Sales volume)

Regarding Distributors, how would you go about developing them to IATF if your customer won't sign an approval stating ISO 9001 is acceptable?

Do you go back to the products original manufacturer, who we have no business relationship? We aren't sure how to proceed.

Thanks in advance for any guidance.

 

[Sebastian]

Supplier is meant as manufacturer. Sometimes organization gets goods from "supplier" who is ISO 9001 certified, where its scope is "supplier research, purchasing, storage and sell of goods", blah, blah blah.When goods are e.g. steel plates, supplier is organization with stamping process and in some cases they are not even ISO 9001 certified. That's problem.
Development is focused on manufacturer and not distributor, same as second party audits. But when there is a risk, that distributor can negatively affect quality of purchased goods, because of storage conditions, distributor shall be covered as well. Obviously, distributors are not eligible to be IATF 16949 certified, so you can't develop them to state of fully compliance to IATF 16949 requirements, but at least you can select some requirements applicable to their activities.

 

[AndyN]

Supplier is meant as manufacturer.

Is this your definition? What about painters/platers/heat treaters? Distributors are still important, trust me, and to take the narrow view that you are proposing is very dangerous IMHO.

It's simply a case of determining WHICH suppliers should be developed. At the end of the day, many IATF users don't SPEND enough to get their suppliers to jump through the IATF hoop. - end of story.

 

[QualitySpirit]

Amit:
In my case for the ISO9001 only suppliers who supply automotive product (based on percentage of total business

Not true any more as the new SI made it such that all suppliers not just automotive ones are applicable for this requirement e.g. minimum ISO9001 certified or customer approved+second party audit to ISO9001. Now even suppliers who supply pens, toilet papers would need ISO9001 certification by a recognized CB under IAF MLA.

 

[Golfman25]

Not true any more as the new SI made it such that all suppliers not just automotive ones are applicable for this requirement e.g. minimum ISO9001 certified or customer approved+second party audit to ISO9001. Now even suppliers who supply pens, toilet papers would need ISO9001 certification by a recognized CB under IAF MLA.

It's not clear where you are getting this from. 8.4.2.3 applies only to "suppliers of automotive products and services." Requiring Office Depot to be ISO certified is silly.