Remote Location - Design Responsibility - TS 16949 Certification - Join the debate

G

ganesh_nc

#1
Hello all,

I am here starting a debate on a topic that has been widely misinterpreted and inconsistently applied - "Product Design Responsibility", "Identification of Remote locations within the scope of TS 16949 Certification"

I straightway present a case-study here:

A multinational automotive paint manufacturer has several manufacturing sites in Asia. These manufacturing sites are supported by the Company's 4 R&D Centres in Japan. The paints (Coats, Primer, thinner etc.)manufactured are used for painting the Car body (Steel), Bumper etc. The R&D Centres perform reasearch and develop the Technical formulation / recipe for the paint - taking into account functional / performance / environmental friendly / statuory requirements for the paint - including the application requirements. The Technical formulation details what goes inside and how much and in what sequence for the manufacturing . The Technical formulations are provided to the manufacturing sites. These manufacturing sites located in various Asian countries supply the paint to the Automotive OEMs located in the respective countries. The OEM customer requests the car body paint providing a colour sample / panel. The manufacturing site then follows the technical formulation provided by the R&D centre - with a bit of modification here and there - mainly modifying the colour pigment to suit the customer's colour and finish requirement. Painting trials are conducted and samples approved by the OEM Customer. Later, mass production starts at the sites as per customer schedule.

One of the manufacturing sites applies for TS 16949 Certification.

Now, the questions to be answered are the following:

Is the manufacturing Site, that applies for Certification, considered product design / development responsible? That is, will it be audited with the scope that includes Product design and development? (I would say, Yes)

Should the Site declare "R&D Centres" in Japan as "Remote locations" as far as Certification to TS 16949 is concerned - considering the fact, that, almost all of the Product and Process development takes place in the R&D Centres? (I would say, Yes)

Join the debate fellows.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#2
ganesh_nc said:
Now, the questions to be answered are the following:

Is the manufacturing Site, that applies for Certification, considered product design / development responsible? That is, will it be audited with the scope that includes Product design and development? (I would say, Yes)
Me too. The mfg sites does partial product development. But since it can change the formulation, yes, design is applicable there.

ganesh_nc said:
Should the Site declare "R&D Centres" in Japan as "Remote locations" as far as Certification to TS 16949 is concerned - considering the fact, that, almost all of the Product and Process development takes place in the R&D Centres? (I would say, Yes)
I would say yes too, with the question mark if all R&D sites need to be audited. Could all R&D sites support that one manufacturing site that is going for certification? Or would they (the mfg site) have a dedicated R&D support site?
 
G

ganesh_nc

#3
Hi Sydney Vianna,

We had the same conclusion for question 1. However, we seem to differ on the logic for our conclusion. I reproduce below your answer to the first question: Yes, The mfg sites does partial product development. But since it can change the formulation, yes, design is applicable there.

My opinion: Even if the manufacturing site does not do any change to the formulation - that is no partial product development done at the site - still, the site would be audited with "Product design and development" in the scope. As per IATF Rules, when it comes to design responsibility there are only two options: either the Company or the Customer - one of them is design responsible. In this case study, the OEM customer is not developing the paints to be produced - hence the Site organisation that applies for Certification is Proudct design responsible

Now to your answer to the second question: I would say yes too, with the question mark if all R&D sites need to be audited. Could all R&D sites support that one manufacturing site that is going for certification? Or would they (the mfg site) have a dedicated R&D support site?

You are right - the applicable design centres - that support the manufacturing site for the products produced there, should only be declared as the Remote locations.__________________
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#4
ganesh_nc said:
Hi Sydney Vianna,

We had the same conclusion for question 1. However, we seem to differ on the logic for our conclusion. I reproduce below your answer to the first question: Yes, The mfg sites does partial product development. But since it can change the formulation, yes, design is applicable there.

My opinion: Even if the manufacturing site does not do any change to the formulation - that is no partial product development done at the site - still, the site would be audited with "Product design and development" in the scope. As per IATF Rules, when it comes to design responsibility there are only two options: either the Company or the Customer - one of them is design responsible. In this case study, the OEM customer is not developing the paints to be produced - hence the Site organisation that applies for Certification is Proudct design responsible
Who controls the specifications at the highest level? The customer has at least some design responsibility here, unless the customer specifications just say, "Make some paint." The dichotomy involving either the customer or the supplier having design responsibility doesn't always hold true.

In my opinion, the manufacturing plants in this instance do not have design responsibility. Tweaking a formulation in order to match a customer's standard (or preferences, when the standard has been sidestepped) does not equal design. There is a dedicated design center here, so it seems clear to me, given the information available, that the manufacturing locations do not have design responsibility.
 
G

ganesh_nc

#5
Mr. Wynne, I tend to disagree with you on the interpretation of "design responsibility". Let's go back to the case study involving the paint manufacturing site:

The site manufactures and supplies paints to the automotive OEMs. It has its own company's design centres in Japan. Let's first conclude if the site will be audited with design responsibility in the scope:

Take one step back and look at what is a design / development activity: Converting functional / enduse requirements of the product to Product features / specifications. For a company that is manufacturing paints, this development responsibility would be coming up with a formulation / process critieria of the Paints together with Thinner etc - that would meet the enduser / functional requirements - Paint performance / functional / environmental friendly requirements. In other words these functional, performance requirements - which are actually inputs used for the design - may come partially from the customer. Some other inputs may come from the Statutory or Legal product related requirements. Irrespective of the level or extent of inputs coming from the customer, the Paint manufacturer is responsible for the Development of the formulation or the recipe. A subsequent customer approval of the samples does not take away the Design responsibility from the manufacturer.

Once this conclusion is made - that the Site organisation is design responsible to whatever extent it is - we should ask the following question:

At which location / facility / address, the development acticity goes on? At the manufacturing site itself or at a Remote location? Wherever, it happens, the process of developing the recipe shall be audited for TS (to get the confidence on the company's processes that contribute to the scope of the QMS that is certified). So in our case study, the Design centre in Japan will be identified as a Remote location and audited for TS - before the manufacturing site is audited.

It is also important to fix the design responsibility purely from a "responsibility point of view" (that is, either the audited Organisation or the OEM Customer). The decision on whether or not product design is included in the scope, should not depend on the audited Site's "capability" to do the design. The capability, in our example, comes or will be "demonstrated" when the Japan Design Centre is audited. The totality of the "positive conclusion" of the audits at the Site and the "Remote location" - together will give the confidence on the company's processes that contribute to the product realization.

Having the R&D Centres in their home countries and having the manufacturing facilities in cheaper countries - this kind of organisational set up by the Companies - is purely for business, technological and commercial considerations. This kind of set up should not interfere with the interpretation of product design responsibility. The design responsibility will be viewed always from the eyes of the OEM customer (not based on if the audited organisation does it at the site or at a different location)

I look forward to the debate on my views here
 

Helmut Jilling

Auditor / Consultant
#6
Jim Wynne said:
... Tweaking a formulation in order to match a customer's standard (or preferences, when the standard has been sidestepped) does not equal design. There is a dedicated design center here, so it seems clear to me, given the information available, that the manufacturing locations do not have design responsibility.

We have to remember that TS certifies mfg. plants. The design centers perform the design process, but it is audited and certified in conjunction with the manufacturing plant. Thus, one corporate design center with 10 mfg. plants would result in all 10 plants showing design responsibility.
 
G

ganesh_nc

#7
I fully agree with Hjilling. TS 16949 Certification applies to manufacturing sites only. That is, only the sites will apply to the Registrar for the Certification. When they apply for certification, the Registrar will ask, right before giving a quote, if there is any Remote location that supports the manufacturing site - within the scope of Certification. When the site is audited, the concerned remote locations will be audited as they support the site. As per IATF Rules, the audit of the remote location shall be conducted before the audit of the manufacturing site.

In our case study of the Paint manufacturer - if every manufacturing site declares, that, they are doing manufacturing only (because the design activity is done by their own R&D centre elsewhere) and hence the audited organisation is not responsible - then, the result is that the Certification scope will exclude the Product design - so the remote locations will not be audited at all. This kind of scenario will not be in line with the intent of acquiring the confidence in what the company is doing for the customer - through the certification audit processes.

So the conclusion should be: the manufacturing sites will be audited with the design responsibility. The Registrar will audit the site as well as the remote location. Needless to say, the interfaces between the site and remote location will also be audited.
 
S

senthilkumar

#8
ganesh_nc said:
I fully agree with Hjilling. TS 16949 Certification applies to manufacturing sites only. That is, only the sites will apply to the Registrar for the Certification. When they apply for certification, the Registrar will ask, right before giving a quote, if there is any Remote location that supports the manufacturing site - within the scope of Certification. When the site is audited, the concerned remote locations will be audited as they support the site. As per IATF Rules, the audit of the remote location shall be conducted before the audit of the manufacturing site.

In our case study of the Paint manufacturer - if every manufacturing site declares, that, they are doing manufacturing only (because the design activity is done by their own R&D centre elsewhere) and hence the audited organisation is not responsible - then, the result is that the Certification scope will exclude the Product design - so the remote locations will not be audited at all. This kind of scenario will not be in line with the intent of acquiring the confidence in what the company is doing for the customer - through the certification audit processes.

So the conclusion should be: the manufacturing sites will be audited with the design responsibility. The Registrar will audit the site as well as the remote location. Needless to say, the interfaces between the site and remote location will also be audited.
Mr. Ganesh,
I fully agree, when a company applies for a certification, the scope of certification is based on the value addition it gives to customer, irrespective of who makes the product design & process design. As for as customer is concerned he is interested in the final product which must satisfy his requirements.
In your case study the Design centre makes the product design (May be one or more as applicable) & Manufacturing unit does the Process design.
So, the certification scope is Desgin & Manufacture of paints.
When auditing is concerned both Design & Manufacuring & it's linkage to be audited.
I hope, you could understand this.

senthilkumar.r
 
P

pinpin - 2009

#9
Re: Remote Location - Design Responsibility - TS 16949 Certification - Join the debat

Hi all, I have this question, kindly advise me quickly:

My company is in Malaysia and is going for TS 16949 certification.

The product design spec is provided by our customer.

We need to make mould to produce injection-moulded parts and then assemble the parts to make a finished assembly to meet customer's product design spec.

We order injection mould from our related company in Singapore. This Singapore company designs the mould and makes the mould for us, then deliver to us in Malaysia.

Is our related company in Singapore our "remote site" ? Or just a subcon doing the design and making of mould for us?

Thank you very much!
 
S

senthilkumar

#10
Re: Remote Location - Design Responsibility - TS 16949 Certification - Join the debat

Hi,

What do you mean by related company? Is it your own group or dedicted company to your malaysia plant.

Whatever it is. If you defined that location as part of your system, then it is your remote location.

If it is your subcon, then need to specify as Remote location. Just follow the controls as part of supplier management.

Regards,

R. Senthilkumar:thanx:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M IATF 16949 - Audit of Remote Location/Support Site and IT IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
J Remote location vs. site extension IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
J IATF 16949 - Company Sold - Remote Location Certification IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
S RSL (Remote Site Location) Laboratory - Does it need to be ISO 17025 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
D Certificate Scope Change - Remote Location(s) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
D No evidence of certain processes on our scope being audited at our remote location IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
L IATF 16949: Adding a Remote Location between certifications IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
A Remote Support Location Audit - Engineering prototyping and process evaluation Internal Auditing 2
S Customer or Support - Remote Location IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
S Registration - Want to combine one marketing company as remote location IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
S TS 16949 Stage 1 Readiness Review for remote location processes...? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
I Remote Location Internal Audit Requirements - TS 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 16
S Mexico Plant - Remote Location or Supplier? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
C What should a temporary, remote location have in place to ensure OSHA compliance? Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 14
S Remote location - QMS documentation - TS 16949:2002 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
D Possible to list remote manufacturing locations on the main location certificates? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
T Accreditation Requirements - Facility laboratory either on-site or remote location IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
V Remote QMS Coordinator Position Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
B Remote IATF 16949 audit preparation General Auditing Discussions 10
supadrai Remote Opportunity - Large Scale Glove Factory QMS / RA / Legal Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
R Remote Audits for ISO 9001 (or any other standard) General Auditing Discussions 31
Ed Panek Remote Audit GOTOMEETING thoughts Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 22
B ISO 9001 - "Remote Audit Fee" Registrars and Notified Bodies 13
L IATF external audit virtual (remote) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
H Remote product audits in Coivd-19 - IATF 16949 9.2.2.4 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
J Remote Audit Experiences - June 2020 General Auditing Discussions 32
Randy Remote auditing (for disaster, disease, disturbance etc...) during the Neo Coronavirus Pandemic and Social Distancing Registrars and Notified Bodies 7
M IATF 16949 (6.1.1 - Planning and Risk Analysis for a remote site) Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 5
Crimpshrine13 IATF 16949 and ISO 9001 Remote Support - Pass Through Inventory IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 20
G Timing allowed by IATF to close a Remote Site Minor Nonconformance IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
M Why have IATF rules required the CBs to audit remote supporting functions at first? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 11
A Adding Remote Site to Current IATF 16949 Certification IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
M Acceptance of remote auditing techniques - Can you help me with my research? General Auditing Discussions 0
B IATF 16949 - Different Registrars for remote and manufacturing sites? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
F It is acceptable moving remote locations staff to manufacturing plant for auditing? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
D Supporting Process Definitions - Remote Locations IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
R Remote Sites per IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
W Is sharing resources treated same way as remote function? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
R Remote Support - Calculating Number of Employees IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
R Internal Audit Frequency - Remote Site (a Design Center) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
1 Applicable ISO 9001:2015 Clauses for Remote Site(s) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
M Remote Office only has Invoice Function - Audit Needed? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 0
B Thoughts on performing an ISO 9001:2015 Remote Internal Audit ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
Marc The Most Remote and Beautiful Landscape in the World Is in Westfjords, Iceland Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 0
A Supplier's remote site is not on their ISO 9001 Certificate ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
G Role of Remote Locations IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
J ISO/TS 16949:2009 Remote Support Provided By Sister Plants IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
A Other Remote Locations - Do they need to be under our ISO/AS9100 System? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 9
O How can I test remote control for television? Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 10
L Remote Control Inspection Digital Indicator with a TIR (range) function Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4

Similar threads

Top Bottom