Z
ziggyroo
My compnay is trying to decide whether to be ISO or TS certified.
Is there a big difference between the two?
Is there a big difference between the two?
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
B
Bill Ryan - 2007
Fist off - Welcome to the Coveziggyroo said:
ISO9001 is, word for wod, contained in TS19649. The TS standard is the automotive world's add-ons. Unless I'm completely wrong, you don't have a choice in which one you go for. If you have a customer mandating registration to TS you must go for that. If you not in the automotive supply chain, you can't get a TS cert and if you're a low enough tier you may not need to.
I'm sure someone will chime in to correct me (if I'm wrong) and expand a little more.
W
WALLACE
ziggyroo said:
Welcome Ziggyroo (Now that's a handle) to the best resource for business management on the web.
Question:
What is your motivation (Business or otherwise) for going through a decision process regarding potentially using an international business system standard????
Question:
Do you have an established business format in place at this time and, if so, for how long???
Question:
What product and/or service do you produce/offer???
Wallace.
Q
qualitytrec
I disagree with Bill
I have to disagree with Mr. Ryan here. You always have a choice it is after all not your customers business. Our customer required us to go after the TS and we reasoned with them and after awhile it became ok for us to be ISO only and we have let them know that we have no intention at this time to go after the TS because it just was not practical for our business. If you are not automotive I would not even concider TS (Bill says that you can not be registered if you are not automotive but me thinks if you will ask for it you will get it. Just think of the businesses that are not currently automotive but would like to, for whatever insane reason, attract future business. I think a registrar would be more than happy to take your money for this, but I could be wrong.) I would say to get the TS book and evaluate what makes the most sense for your company and its goals. If you are large enough and are or would desire to be in the automotive sector I would suggest looking at TS, it will likely open some doors that may never otherwise open. If you are not going to expand and have a stable customer base ISO may work.
JMO FWIW
Oh by the way I do agree with Bill on the difference between the two. TS is automotive based, ISO is generic and can supposedly be applied to any business that sells product or service.
Hope this helps.
Mark
I have to disagree with Mr. Ryan here. You always have a choice it is after all not your customers business. Our customer required us to go after the TS and we reasoned with them and after awhile it became ok for us to be ISO only and we have let them know that we have no intention at this time to go after the TS because it just was not practical for our business. If you are not automotive I would not even concider TS (Bill says that you can not be registered if you are not automotive but me thinks if you will ask for it you will get it. Just think of the businesses that are not currently automotive but would like to, for whatever insane reason, attract future business. I think a registrar would be more than happy to take your money for this, but I could be wrong.) I would say to get the TS book and evaluate what makes the most sense for your company and its goals. If you are large enough and are or would desire to be in the automotive sector I would suggest looking at TS, it will likely open some doors that may never otherwise open. If you are not going to expand and have a stable customer base ISO may work.
JMO FWIW
Oh by the way I do agree with Bill on the difference between the two. TS is automotive based, ISO is generic and can supposedly be applied to any business that sells product or service.
Hope this helps.
Mark
Last edited by a moderator:
Q
qualitytrec
one more thing to concider
Ziggyroo,
Being that TS is just an expansion of the ISO I would start by going after ISO and expand if necessary or desired to the TS at a later date.
Mark
Ziggyroo,
Being that TS is just an expansion of the ISO I would start by going after ISO and expand if necessary or desired to the TS at a later date.
Mark
Wes Bucey
Prophet of Profit
Here is an excerpt of a document from IATF
The International Automotive Task Force’s second edition rules were recently updated in response to a number of factors having to do with the IATF audit scheme, registrar office and witness audits, and IATF training feedback. They were also updated to improve the overall performance of audits within the ISO/TS 16949:2002 scheme.
. . .
The scope and assumption changes are really quite significant. There are two changes in scope. The scope must list the company’s automobile customers and may include any that do not subscribe to ISO/TS 16949:2002, as long as their product meets the applicability requirements of the standard. In other words, if the product is part of the automotive supply chain, that customer can be included in the scope.
The second change, which may have a larger implication, is the requirement that ISO/TS 16949:2002 can only be applied to automotive organizations and that an ISO/TS audit can be conducted only for the automotive products of a company. Thus, if an organization produces automotive and farm equipment in the same plant and requires the total plant to be certified by a third party, there needs to be a split-scope audit performed, using ISO/TS 16949:2002 for the automotive product and ISO 9001:2000 for the farm equipment. The IATF even remarked that there needs to be two quotes applied for such an organization. This clarifies the content of the scope statement and what is detailed on the certificate.
Another major change in scope and planning is the identification and audit of the interfaces between the site and support functions. Per the new rules, support functions need to be audited before the site audit, and the two must occur within 90 days of the completion of the stage 1 assessment.
I think you can trust almost any accredited registrar to explain whether or not your operation is eligible for TS16949 registration and why, regardless of whether you hire them or not. It's a simple matter of answering a few questions about your products and customers.
The International Automotive Task Force’s second edition rules were recently updated in response to a number of factors having to do with the IATF audit scheme, registrar office and witness audits, and IATF training feedback. They were also updated to improve the overall performance of audits within the ISO/TS 16949:2002 scheme.
. . .
The scope and assumption changes are really quite significant. There are two changes in scope. The scope must list the company’s automobile customers and may include any that do not subscribe to ISO/TS 16949:2002, as long as their product meets the applicability requirements of the standard. In other words, if the product is part of the automotive supply chain, that customer can be included in the scope.
The second change, which may have a larger implication, is the requirement that ISO/TS 16949:2002 can only be applied to automotive organizations and that an ISO/TS audit can be conducted only for the automotive products of a company. Thus, if an organization produces automotive and farm equipment in the same plant and requires the total plant to be certified by a third party, there needs to be a split-scope audit performed, using ISO/TS 16949:2002 for the automotive product and ISO 9001:2000 for the farm equipment. The IATF even remarked that there needs to be two quotes applied for such an organization. This clarifies the content of the scope statement and what is detailed on the certificate.
Another major change in scope and planning is the identification and audit of the interfaces between the site and support functions. Per the new rules, support functions need to be audited before the site audit, and the two must occur within 90 days of the completion of the stage 1 assessment.
I think you can trust almost any accredited registrar to explain whether or not your operation is eligible for TS16949 registration and why, regardless of whether you hire them or not. It's a simple matter of answering a few questions about your products and customers.
M
michelle8075
Hi Ziggyroo,
Everything I read in the post so far is great information.
TS-16949 (The Big "3" pretty much mandated all of their Tier 1 suppliers to go to this standard from QS-9000. HOWEVER....... If you are a Tier 1 supplier to the Big "3" and you are Tooling and Equipment Supplier (meaning that you do not product 100 widgets etc. at a time) your move is to ISO9001:2000.
ISO-9001:2000: Agree what was previously said, it is for generic "non-automotive" suppliers.
Bottom line, you have to determine what is right for your business. And, yes calling a reputable registrar should insure that you obtain the right certification for your company.
Everything I read in the post so far is great information.
TS-16949 (The Big "3" pretty much mandated all of their Tier 1 suppliers to go to this standard from QS-9000. HOWEVER....... If you are a Tier 1 supplier to the Big "3" and you are Tooling and Equipment Supplier (meaning that you do not product 100 widgets etc. at a time) your move is to ISO9001:2000.
ISO-9001:2000: Agree what was previously said, it is for generic "non-automotive" suppliers.
Bottom line, you have to determine what is right for your business. And, yes calling a reputable registrar should insure that you obtain the right certification for your company.
Q
qualeety
a stupid question
Has GM, Chrysler or Ford been ISO, QS or TS registered?
If not, what are their justifications? Sometimes, you have to wonder.
Has GM, Chrysler or Ford been ISO, QS or TS registered?
If not, what are their justifications? Sometimes, you have to wonder.
Q
qualitytrec
I stand humbled and corrected sorry Bill. Thanks Wes.Wes Bucey said:
Mark
According to www.worldpreferred.com , GM has a large number of sites certified to ISO 9001:2000 and ISO 14001. Some sites have QS-9000 and TS.qualeety said:Has GM, Chrysler or Ford been ISO, QS or TS registered?
If not, what are their justifications? Sometimes, you have to wonder.
Ford has a number of sites certified to ISO 14001. And I can not find the information on DCX.
Similar threads
