To be or not to be TS16949?

M

Maria-2006

:confused:

Hi, all!

I am new to the forum, but I have read lots of messages for 2 years now! It is a great place to share!

I work for a resin manufacturer (recycler) and we are QS-9000 certified since 1999. The company has got QS-9000 certification due to some pressure from GM. We are not a direct supplier to any OEMs, although GM had a tentative to buy material directly from companies like ours and re-sale it to molders. I am not sure of results, but I have not seen any direct orders from GM. We would like to get TS certification by June this year and I was wondering if your suggestion would be to go ISO only. We have never been requested a PPAP from any of the customers, we hardly do any APQP and for us is just a pain in the rear... There are lots of great ideas and advantages in using all the paperwork required, but only if we had the resources! My management wants TS as a new way of refreshing the QS, and they are all very excited about the process mapping and all that. They do not want to understand that all the other requirements are still there and even more regarding customer satisfaction, employee motivation and supplier certification.

Any advice?
Thanks!
 
D

db

Welcome Maria!!! :bigwave:

There are two different questions in your post:

Can we upgrade to TS?


Should we attempt it?


First of all, there are some specific qualifications involved in whether you qualify or not. Your QS registrar might be able to shed some light on this. First, make sure your registrar is qualified for TS themselves. If they aren't, they will undoubtedly tell you that you are not eligible. Also, your customer will also give you an indication.

My advice is that unless your customer tells you: "You must", then just go with ISO 9001. It sounds like it is much more applicable for you anyway. Understanding processes is required in both (but mapping is not), so you can get many of the benefits without the extra hassle and expense.

My opinion anyway.
 
T

tomvehoski

There would be advantages and disadvantages to going for TS in your situation.

Advantages:

Could open doors as a marketing strategy to get direct OEM business, if that is a business goal.

Might add business systems that would help the company.


Disadvantages:

More work to get ready for certification. It sounds like some of the requirements are not there, but you would still have to show evidence of PPAP, APQP, etc. to prove you have the capability.

More expensive to get registration (more audit days required).

TS is still new, so intrepretations tend to be all over the place.

Shortage of qualified auditors makes it more difficult to schedule.



If implementing APQP would be a pain and is not required, I would recommend going for ISO 9001: 2000. You can always upgrade to TS at a six month audit if you find you need that flag. I don't have the chart in front of me, but I believe it requires fewer audit days to upgrade from ISO 9001:2000 to TS than it does from QS to TS. You will probably be able to allocate your resources easier if you do a QS to 2000 to TS approach.

Tom
 
M

Maria-2006

Thanks, Dave and Tom!

We already have QS-9000 so it is not a matter of implementing APQP and PPAP but I'd rather simplify and get rid of them. APQP is kind of a joke (all paperwork is done retroactively) and we get together just to sign the checklists and all documents. There are not really new formulations but variations of the same ingredients. Also, our suppliers cannot be all ISO or QS or whatever since most of them are small garage operations, recyclers that sell regrind.

Our auditor is SGS and they are already capable of doing TS audits. My auditor is great and I would love to keep him, but I would like to make something that really works. I am also considering buying a software for APQP if my management absolutely wants to go TS. I am looking at Pilgrim and Q-Solve. Any other recommendations?

Thanks,
M:)
 
N

Neil

Same Boat

Maria,

It is kind of uncanny, we are in the exact same boat that you are. We have QS-900, we do not supply directly to Big3, we have our renewal to QS-9000 due in June 2003 and SGS is our registrar. I have sent letters and nagged our automotive customer to death about their expected quality system requirements for us. I am getting nowhere. Those decisions just don't seem to have been made yet. Having a QS-9000 program and an ISO 9001:2000 system simultaneously makes zero sense, think of the manual alone. How does one make that work?

So to heck with it. New letters have been sent out. We are going ISO9001:2000 and we are dropping QS-9000. We will work on being TS compliant by end of 2004. If the automotive customer's don't like, tough, I have records of repeated inquiries. If you embrace the Plan-Do-Check-Act method of continuous improvement in your key processes then I think existing QS-9000 companies will realize almost all of the benefits of TS16949 with only ISO9001:2000.
 
M

Maria-2006

Hi, Neil!

Good to know that there are others like us! Not that it is a good thing, but I sure feel better!:biglaugh:

Teh difference is we have our QS-9000 re-certification audit actually tomorrow and Friday. 2 auditors are coming for 2 days (one of them I don't know) so it'll be very interesting. I'll also ask them about TS tomorrow so. I'll let you know about their suggestions.

Maria
 
T

tomvehoski

Maria,

TS still has requirements for your suppliers to be ISO certified. That will continue to be a headache if you go the TS route. ISO 9001: 2000 does not have the requirement, so you can certify your suppliers based on past performance, your own audits, etc.

I would be interested to know how your QS audit goes in regard to supplier certification. Any problems for your audit with your non-certified suppliers on the C9 interpretation?

Tom
 
M

Maria-2006

Tom,

My QS-9000 audit just passed with no nonconformances. We had about 5 opportunities for improvement. On Friday we had our first PO from GM coming in as well, so there is not other route for us but to go TS.

I have asked many questions regarding the supplier certification to ISO for the TS standard. Teh answer I have received was that it has to make sense for the business. We have to ask our supplier to be ISO certified but we have to identify our key suppliers. Also, since we are in the recycling industry we are buying from lots of scrap suppliers which we cannot ask to become ISO certified. The auditor said that if we are assuming the responsability on their quality system and have proofs on that such as tests on incoming materials, supplier audits etc. they do not have to comply to ISO.
The guy was very easy on us this time. He'll come in summer for the TS audit.

Maria
 
T

tomvehoski

Maria,

Congratulations on the zero nonconformances.

I am glad to see that the auditor used some common sense and was not hard nosed about the supplier development issue. I can see how in this instance, since it is recycled material and you are responsible for the quality, that you can consider it a non-critical supplier. I think others will still have issues with small machine shops, heat treaters, etc. that will be more difficult to claim as non-critical.

Thanks for the update,

Tom
 
Top Bottom