Who has Design Responsibility in this Scenario - Rubber Parts Manufacturer

[vanputten]

Hello Someshakar

Design and development is not always shared. Our customers do not share design responsibility with us for all of our 7,000 devices.

"Every" and "always" are can be risky words.

 

[Stijloor]

Design and development is always a shared responsibility. A rubber part in an automotive can be designed and developed by a tier 1/tier 2 supplier, but in the eye of the customer, every part is designed and developed by the automotive manufacturer.

Are you referring to the customer as the "End User?"

Design and development is not always shared. Our customers do not share design responsibility with us for all of our 7,000 devices.

Are you referring to the customer as the OEM, the "Automotive Customer?"

Stijloor.

 

[somashekar]

Are you referring to the customer as the "End User?"



Are you referring to the customer as the OEM, the "Automotive Customer?"

Stijloor.

Yes, the one who pays money and buys the automotive.

but in the eye of the customer, every part is designed and developed by the automotive manufacturer

.
I had made reference to both the type of customers in my line as quoted above

 

[WCHorn]

I was looking for other information when I stumbled upon this thread. I apologize for not having participated when it was timely.

The standard gives a definition for a design responsible organization in paragraph 3.1.2. It?s basically the same as it was for QS-9000. The design responsible organization is the ?organization with authority to establish a new, or change an existing, product specification."

I have been associated with the manufacture of rubber products for 28 years, from formulation through shipping. Those products are made to customer and industry drawings and specifications; 15 years under certification of ISO 9001, 10 years under QS and TS, and nine years under AS9000 and AS9100. In that time there have been no less than 10 different third-party auditors involved in auditing our system in initial, periodic and recertification audits. Not one of them has taken exception to our quality manual, which cites our exclusion of paragraph 7.3 for product design. Over the years, the same goes for dozens of second-party auditors from automotive companies, including U.S. Big 3, over-the-road truck manufacturers and Tier 1 and 2 suppliers to those companies. There may be customer-specific requirements that define the design responsible organization differently; I have not discovered one.

Once a PPAP is approved, I believe you are obligated to use the same processes (from raw materials through shipping) to make the product until the customer approves a change. No automotive customer has ever given us latitude to change raw material composition. Such a change requires a new PPAP.