IATF 16949: Do we have too many processes? Are they all the same?

[Dadofeleven]

I am confused by the use of processes in the IATF standard. We passed our IATF 16949 audit, but our auditor hinted (can't consult) that we had way too many processes. He hinted that we could get by with only six or seven. It made it difficult for him because he had to enter metrics and audit results for each one. We had 30 processes, which I am more than happy to admit is a lot. However, when I look through the standard, I see requirements for a document drocess at least 18 times, ranging from Calibration to Supplier Selection. 4.4.1 states that "the organization shall determine the processes needed for the quality management system", but the standard already is determining 18 of the processes itself. When the standard states that we need a documented process for calibration, for example, does that mean that it must meet all of the requirements in 4.4.1? I assume their use of the word "process" instead of "procedure" is deliberate, but how do I reconcile this with my auditor who seems to indicate that 6 or 7 process are all that is necessary?

 

[Golfman25]

You have major processes and sub-processes within those major processes. So for example, we a process called "purchasing." Inside that process it may contain several processes related to purchasing from supplier selection, monitoring, to receiving.

 

[Dadofeleven]

You have major processes and sub-processes within those major processes. So for example, we a process called "purchasing." Inside that process it may contain several processes related to purchasing from supplier selection, monitoring, to receiving.

So the sub-processes do not necessarily need to have effectiveness metrics or meet all of the requirements of 4.4.1 a-h?

 

[Golfman25]

The metrics for the main process, will include the sub processes. So if I have a measurement for purchasing -- say quality and delivery. That will incorporate my supplier selection, evaluation, order processing, etc. stuff.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

It made it difficult for him because he had to enter metrics and audit results for each one. We had 30 processes, which I am more than happy to admit is a lot. ...snip...., but how do I reconcile this with my auditor who seems to indicate that 6 or 7 process are all that is necessary?

Don't ever let what makes it easier for an external auditor be the determining factor on how you structure your QMS.

The discussion of what is a (macro?) process, a core process, a support process, a subprocess or an activity can be endless.

My suggestion for you is: identify your business processes and which ones that can affect product conformity and/or customer satisfaction. These are the quality system processes, plus the ones that the standard require, such as internal audits.

Good luck.

 

[Sebastian]

Let me quote one document who listed suggested Customer Oriented Processes:
1. Market Analysis/Customer Requirements
2. Bid/Tender
3. Order/request
4. Product and Process Design
5. Product and Process Verification/Validation
6. Product Production
7. Delivery
8. Payment
9. Warranty/Service
10. Post Sales/Customer Feedback
These processes need Supporting processes, e.g. competence, purchasing, etc.
This is information just for reference.

IATF 16949 requires around 27 documented and (not documented) processes, but some of them can be merged or be a parts (sub-processes) of other processes.

P.S.
This thread shall be moved to other sub-forum e.g. Process maps... or IATF 16949, as it is only marginally registrar related.

 

[AndyN]

Agree totally with Sidney. I'd be confused by a statement like that. Perhaps, just perhaps, 30 is a high number, but for the auditor to suggest a number - and then tell you it makes it easier to report, that's just unprofessional.

 

[Golfman25]

The old standard, in 4.1, note one gave us a clue. It identified the main processes most companies would probably have: Management activities, provision of resources, product realization, measurement, analysis and improvement. So to keep things simple, in a smaller company, I would stick with those as the major processes, with sub-processes inside.

Management Activities: the context and leadership stuff.
Provision of resources: things like purchasing
Product realization: fancy way of saying manufacturing (for us manufacturers).
Measurement and Analysis: management review type stuff, quality lab stuff.
Improvement: Continual improvement stuff.

You can make it as simple or complex as your company desires. YMMV.

 

[jenkinsbr7]

I am confused by the use of processes in the IATF standard. We passed our IATF 16949 audit, but our auditor hinted (can't consult) that we had way too many processes. He hinted that we could get by with only six or seven. It made it difficult for him because he had to enter metrics and audit results for each one. We had 30 processes, which I am more than happy to admit is a lot. However, when I look through the standard, I see requirements for a document drocess at least 18 times, ranging from Calibration to Supplier Selection. 4.4.1 states that "the organization shall determine the processes needed for the quality management system", but the standard already is determining 18 of the processes itself. When the standard states that we need a documented process for calibration, for example, does that mean that it must meet all of the requirements in 4.4.1? I assume their use of the word "process" instead of "procedure" is deliberate, but how do I reconcile this with my auditor who seems to indicate that 6 or 7 process are all that is necessary?

Where did you end up on this?