I
ids001
How do I figure out if my company should be ISO certified or QS certified?
L
Lassitude
You would know if you have to be QS registered - your customer would have asked (required) you to register by now. QS9000 is for automotive suppliers. ISO9001 is for everyone else.
By the way, while everyone says 'certified', you actually become 'registered' by a registrar. Just an 'Oh my' fact.
[This message has been edited by Lassitude (edited 14 July 1999).]
By the way, while everyone says 'certified', you actually become 'registered' by a registrar. Just an 'Oh my' fact.
[This message has been edited by Lassitude (edited 14 July 1999).]
I
ids001
We do serve mainly, but not exclusively, the automotive industry. Perhaps we have not been asked to become certified because we are fairly small and are generally not within the first couple of tiers. Will becoming QS9000 still be beneficial?
A
Andy Bassett
Can i throw in a suggestion that i am making to clients at the moment. Avoid QS 9000 if you can, get yourself a draft copy of the proposed new ISO standard (ISO 9000:2000 i think), and build your systems according to this. (Although i wouldnt mind betting that some samrt alec will force you down the QS route if you are even vaguely involved with the Auotmotive industry)
Personally i think the new standard is better than the old one, pinching some of the good bits from QS 9000 and borrowing heavily from the Business Excellence Model.
The only risk is that the standard might not be released by the time you want to become registered. But i still thinks its the way to go becuase after you should be able to quickly and cheaply upgrade, and anyway i really beleive ISO 9000:2000 will bring better results for the company.
------------------
Andy B
Personally i think the new standard is better than the old one, pinching some of the good bits from QS 9000 and borrowing heavily from the Business Excellence Model.
The only risk is that the standard might not be released by the time you want to become registered. But i still thinks its the way to go becuase after you should be able to quickly and cheaply upgrade, and anyway i really beleive ISO 9000:2000 will bring better results for the company.
------------------
Andy B
> engineer wrote:
>
> > Lassitude,
> >
> > Your replied in July 99 to question concerning how to know if to decide
> > to register for QS9000 or ISO9002 by stating customer would have advised
> > which one.
> >
> > Our automotive customer is not so clear. We are a USA distributor for a
> > Japanese manufacturer of electronic components. The Japanese
> > manufacturer is now registered to QS9000. While our automotive customer
> > does state that "QS9000 registration must be attained within 12 months
> > of first shipment " as well as "supplier is responsible for controlling
> > quality of all sub-suppliers", I must ask the question: Do we as the USA
> > distributor must also be registered to QS9000? If yes, I do not
> > understand how we can comply with requirements such as FEMA, PPAP, etc;
> > which seeem to pertain only to the manufacturer. Would we then be
> > required to go for ISO9002 instead ? Or, is the Japanese manufcturer
> > the only one responsble for demonstrating a certified quality system.
> > -Michael
>
> > Lassitude,
> >
> > Your replied in July 99 to question concerning how to know if to decide
> > to register for QS9000 or ISO9002 by stating customer would have advised
> > which one.
> >
> > Our automotive customer is not so clear. We are a USA distributor for a
> > Japanese manufacturer of electronic components. The Japanese
> > manufacturer is now registered to QS9000. While our automotive customer
> > does state that "QS9000 registration must be attained within 12 months
> > of first shipment " as well as "supplier is responsible for controlling
> > quality of all sub-suppliers", I must ask the question: Do we as the USA
> > distributor must also be registered to QS9000? If yes, I do not
> > understand how we can comply with requirements such as FEMA, PPAP, etc;
> > which seeem to pertain only to the manufacturer. Would we then be
> > required to go for ISO9002 instead ? Or, is the Japanese manufcturer
> > the only one responsble for demonstrating a certified quality system.
> > -Michael
QS9000 is only required by Ford, GM and Chrysler. They also require that their tier 1's develop their suppliers to QS9000.
But - suppliers blindly pass requirement for QS9000 registration down the line, so to speak.
I'm sorry but I can't answer any differently that I did before:
You have to contact your customer and ask them to state their specific requirements of your company (if you're smart, IN WRITING). It wasn't all that long ago that distributors were not elegible for QS9000 registration but now many are.
If you are required to do the QS dance, you are not responsible for elements which are not applicable to your business. However, if you repackage and such you will find many are applicable.
But - suppliers blindly pass requirement for QS9000 registration down the line, so to speak.
I'm sorry but I can't answer any differently that I did before:
You have to contact your customer and ask them to state their specific requirements of your company (if you're smart, IN WRITING). It wasn't all that long ago that distributors were not elegible for QS9000 registration but now many are.
If you are required to do the QS dance, you are not responsible for elements which are not applicable to your business. However, if you repackage and such you will find many are applicable.