The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums
Thread Closed  Topic Closed
  The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  QS-9000
  TR16949 - Thread 2 - 1 More Spec - More Costs?

Post New Topic  
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   TR16949 - Thread 2 - 1 More Spec - More Costs?
Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 07 October 1998 02:48 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
From Quality Digest:

International Automotive Standard Gets Green Light

A new international automotive standard will offer a bridge to conformity among the many automakers in the United States and Europe.

The Big Three U.S. automakers, in cooperation with standards bodies from Germany, France, Great Britain and Italy, are developing an international automotive standard. Known by its working title, TR16949, the new standard encompasses U.S. automotive requirements QS-9000 as well as European standards such as Germany's VDA 6.1.

The International Organization for Standardization's participating members currently are considering approval of TR16949. A three-month voting period began in August; in late November, a final decision regarding the standard is expected.

So far, voter reaction is positive, according to R. Dan Reid, General Motors' representative for the Supplier Quality Task Force, the body responsible for drafting and maintaining QS-9000. If ISO voters accept TR16949, ISO is expected to release the final document, which it will also administer, in January 1999.

Although an international automotive standard was considered during an ISO meeting in South Africa several years ago, work actually began on the standard during ISO's October 1997 meeting in Rio de Janeiro, says Reid. At that time, ISO/TC 176, the ISO technical committee responsible for the ISO 9000 stand- ards, undertook a pilot project that addressed sector-specific needs in the automotive industry. The ISO/TC 176 Delegation Leaders' Task Group formed to consider ISO 9000-related issues and concerns, as well as the auto industry pilot in cooperation with the International Automotive Task Force.

"It's clear to TC 176 that sectors aren't interested in using ISO 9000 to replace their standard," notes Reid.

A new standard necessarily will affect both registrars and suppliers. So far, new registrar qualifications remain undefined. However, suppliers face a new requirement, which emerges from QS-9000, warns Reid. "Their quality systems have to be performing," he states. "We've moved that provision from the appendix and put it in the document itself."

A meeting was recently held between the International Automotive Sector Group, U.S. QS-9000 registrars, the QS-9000 Task Force and representatives from the Registrar Accreditation Board, RvA and other associations. They discussed stringent auditor requirements for TR16949, including a suggestion that auditors conduct a minimum of 10 audits per year to qualify for ongoing certification.

"This may end up shaking out a number of registrars, possibly some of the more reputable ones," commented one registrar representative from the meeting, who asked to remain anonymous. "It will definitely be a cost that is passed along to the suppliers."

The new standard won't mean the end of QS-9000 as a free-standing document, reports Steve Walsh, Ford Motor Co.'s QS-9000 Task Force representative. "Suppliers will have the option to be registered to one or the other," he explains.

So far, Asian automakers haven't participated in the international effort. However, during a Japanese Automotive Manufacturers Association meeting in Tokyo in January, Reid discussed the issue with them. They expressed interest in becoming involved with the effort in 2000 or 2001, reveals Reid. "They're interested, but for the longer term," he adds.

IP: Logged

Roger Eastin
Forum Wizard

Posts: 345
From:Greenville, SC
Registered:

posted 07 October 1998 10:29 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Roger Eastin   Click Here to Email Roger Eastin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This article is very interesting. From the other thread, a discussion point was that the Big 3 themselves seemed to be interested in doing the auditing. This is conspicuously absent in this article. On the flip side of the coin, I heard from a QS9K auditor this morning, that the Big 3 want to start doing supplier "spot" audits. This auditor said this action is being taken because the Big 3 are dissatisfied with the QS9K third-party audits. One of the dissatisfactions (with the auditors) expressed by the Big 3 is that indivudual auditors are not doing enough audits/year to QS9K, therefore they do not understand the intent of the standard well enough. I see, according to this article, that they have taken care of that problem (for TR16949, anyway) with requiring auditors to do 10 audits/year. I think that that requirement will spill over to QS9K as well eventually. By the way, this auditor that I spoke with also said that they have moved back the application date (for TR16949) from 1 Jan. to some date later in the winter.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 09 November 1998 11:11 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Has anyone heard anything else about the document?

IP: Logged

Christian Lupo
Forum Contributor

Posts: 117
From:Auburn, NY
Registered:

posted 09 November 1998 03:36 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Christian Lupo   Click Here to Email Christian Lupo     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I've heard that comments for its implementation have been favorable, and that its expected to be voted on in November. A meeting of accredited registrars is currently taking place in Houston, TX as I write this, I'm sure something will come out of that. I'll keep ya updated.

IP: Logged

Roger Eastin
Forum Wizard

Posts: 345
From:Greenville, SC
Registered:

posted 11 November 1998 03:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Roger Eastin   Click Here to Email Roger Eastin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Christian,
When you say there is a meeting of accredited registrars, do you mean the ones that the Big 3 have asked to do these audits or do you mean all accredited registrars? I was just wondering if their (B3) strategy has changed since we last heard. I had also read in Quality Digest a couple of times that November was the month for some sort of decision. I also wonder if having TR16949 approved by an international coalition of automotive makers will affect the profileration of standards like VDA6,etc. We are having to deal with VDA6 now as BMW begins to put the squeeze on.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 11 November 1998 04:06 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Where can I get a copy of the current VDA 6 (6.1 I believe)?

IP: Logged

Roger Eastin
Forum Wizard

Posts: 345
From:Greenville, SC
Registered:

posted 07 December 1998 12:45 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Roger Eastin   Click Here to Email Roger Eastin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Has anyone heard whether TR16949 goes into effect on 1 Jan 1999? It's less than a month away and it's been pretty quiet.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 12 December 1998 10:30 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I haven't seen anything lately. We'll have to look around. I haven't been proactive lately - been kinda busy.

IP: Logged

Roger Eastin
Forum Wizard

Posts: 345
From:Greenville, SC
Registered:

posted 06 January 1999 04:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Roger Eastin   Click Here to Email Roger Eastin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I see that Christian Lupo hasn't replied with respect to TR16949, so I'll share what he wrote to me in an e-mail message: the 1/1/99 implementation date has been moved. He didn't share another date with me, so I don't know what the new date is. He has some more information which I hope he shares with the group later.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 06 January 1999 07:50 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks for the info, Roger!

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 12 January 1999 05:38 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

By the way - I e-mailed Christian and said we miss him! Hopefully he'll come by now and again. A good resource sorely missed.

Anyone have any recent information on TR16949?

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 01-12-99).]

IP: Logged

Bryon C Simmons
Forum Contributor

Posts: 65
From:Zeeland, MI USA
Registered: Dec 98

posted 12 January 1999 09:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Bryon C Simmons   Click Here to Email Bryon C Simmons     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I heard a couple of weeks ago that it has been accepted by the ISO community......not really sure what that means.....

I wonder what effect the DaimlerChrysler thing will have on QS......i.e. VDA 6/TR16949 for Chrysler and QS for all others....hmmm.....looks like we are heading back to the old days of different quality requirements...kinda defeating the purpose of QS, at least the "One World, One Quality System" motto......well, the plot thickens


Bryon

IP: Logged

Bryon C Simmons
Forum Contributor

Posts: 65
From:Zeeland, MI USA
Registered: Dec 98

posted 12 January 1999 09:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Bryon C Simmons   Click Here to Email Bryon C Simmons     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I heard a couple of weeks ago that it has been accepted by the ISO community......not really sure what that means.....

I wonder what effect the DaimlerChrysler thing will have on QS......i.e. VDA 6/TR16949 for Chrysler and QS for all others....hmmm.....looks like we are heading back to the old days of different quality requirements...kinda defeating the purpose of QS, at least the "One World, One Quality System" motto......well, the plot thickens


Bryon

IP: Logged

Christian Lupo
Forum Contributor

Posts: 117
From:Auburn, NY
Registered:

posted 03 March 1999 11:51 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Christian Lupo   Click Here to Email Christian Lupo     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm finally back, sorry I have not been involved lately, but I have been on the road a lot and I have not had access to the internet. Hopefully I can particpate a little more, the wealth of knowledge in this forum has helped me out immensly and I hope I can return the favor. Any way this is the news I just received on TR16949:

Attention QS-9000 People: Technical Report 16949 - Automotive suppliers -
Particular requirements for the application of ISO 9001 (1994) has been
voted through for approval by ISO. Ford Motor has said that suppliers can
be registered to either TR 16949 as part of an ISO 9001 certificate, or to
the QS-9000.

Once again, this throws more confusion and questions into the fate of
QS-9000. If the automotive makers of the world settle on one standard it
is likely to be ISO with TR 16949. Essentially, this is section one of the
third edition of QS-9000. So, if the 2000 version of ISO 9001 comes along,
what happens to this scheme?

Wait, more news: At the same time, the QS auditors are discovering from
RAB that they have to go through testing and more training to stay a QS
auditor. For example, you have to go to AIAG and take an initial test. It
covers all of the QS topics, like APQP, MSA, PPAP, and the like. Fail any
one of these sections and you are off to a class to "refresh" your memory.
By the way, did I mention that you pay for the test and the extra classes?

It looks as though it has been approved. the good news is it looks as though the auditing will be more consistent sinec auditor need to be requalified. the bad news is, us certified auditors who are QS certified currently will be paying for the privilege of staying QS certified.....Blaaaah

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 03 March 1999 12:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hwere's what I have.

This is for informational (shock) purposes. It is not intended to be an advert for Powerway. I don't particularly like Poweray. But - for info:

---------snippo----------

Subject: March 1 QPPS
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 11:05:05 -0500
From: "RICHARD CLEMENTS"
To: "Discuss9000"

Open Discussion of the Year 2000 Version of ISO 9000
--------------------------------------------------------

Quality Professional Problem Solver

March 1, 1999

Special News: Committee Draft #2 of ISO 9001:2000 was just released this week. Details to following in our discussion e-mail group.

Attention QS-9000 People: Technical Report 16949 - Automotive suppliers - Particular requirements for the application of ISO 9001 (1994) has been voted through for approval by ISO. Ford Motor has said that suppliers can be registered to either TR 16949 as part of an ISO 9001 certificate, or to the QS-9000.

Once again, this throws more confusion and questions into the fate of QS-9000. If the automotive makers of the world settle on one standard it is likely to be ISO with TR 16949. Essentially, this is section one of the third edition of QS-9000. So, if the 2000 version of ISO 9001 comes along, what happens to this scheme?

Wait, more news: At the same time, the QS auditors are discovering from RAB that they have to go through testing and more training to stay a QS auditor. For example, you have to go to AIAG and take an initial test. It covers all of the QS topics, like APQP, MSA, PPAP, and the like. Fail any one of these sections and you are off to a class to "refresh" your memory. By the way, did I mention that you pay for the test and the extra classes?

Next, if you finally pass all of your sections, you take the new QS retraining class for three days. The third day includes your qualification test. Pass this and you get to stay a QS auditor. Naturally you pay for this and the retakes of the exam. At a minimum you will pay a few thousand dollars for the honor. With the average auditor getting $500 a day at best, you can see that you want to be doing a lot of QS audits to follow this path.

This leads to the realization that many auditors will bail out this year. What will this do for the future of QS-9000?

The Powerway Option:

For the past couple of months we have been reviewing the high-end software packages designed to help you with ISO 9000. In particular we are looking at how well they currently work and how close they are to coping with the year 2000 revisions. Last month we looked at ISOxPert from MSI and the month before ProQuis.

This month we are examining the results of using Powerway's software packages. Thanks to the cooperation of Powerway, they loaned up a full working copy of the suite of packages you would use for both ISO 9000 and QS-9000. This includes:

The Desktop Policy Writer Procedure Writer Instruction Writer Document Manager Audit Manager Corrective Action Assessor Quality Planner 9000

The Desktop is the central controlling piece of software. You must buy one copy of this to make the system work, whether used by itself or as part of a network. Then you buy the modules, one for each user, to build your system. People on the network just viewing the documents you create don't need copies of the modules. Participants that will contribute to the work will need these. The cost is around $3,000 for desktop for a network and a 10-user license, then $300 per module. For a single user the cost is around $650 for the desktop. Thus, Powerway is competitive in price to the two packages we earlier reviewed.

Powerway is unique from our other two packages. It has the database power of ProQuis with the distribution power of ISOxPert. However, it doesn't exceed those capabilities. Powerway is designed for the ISO coordinator that wants to create the documentation system, distribute documents properly, control the system, and establish regular ISO activities using the company's network.

Policy writer, procedure writer, and instruction writer all function about the same but, you still need all three to write all three levels of documents. You can click open a standard format for a document, fill in the details, link to other documents, assign distribution rights, assign authorization rights, and set up how and where the document gets posted, both electronically and as a hard copy. These features are well suited for the larger companies where coordination of documents is very important.

The text of the standards ISO 9000, QS-9000 with TE supplement, and ISO 14000 are all at your fingertips to use while you compile your documentation.

The desktop then gives you the ability to check documents in and out of the database as administrator. It also prepares reports on who is working or using which document, what action items have to be done today, where routed documents are lying, and other coordination information.

The audit module helps you to prepare audit activities. The Quality Planner 9000 module for QS-9000 is a recommended option for companies that want to expand their quality system or get a jump on the year 2000 revision. It coordinates your FMEAs, prepares design and development reports, schedules gage checks, and has all the AIAG forms used for QS-9000.

Powerway offers a guided tour and training to fully understand the software. The Powerway people do an excellent job of providing the training you need at sites across the U.S. The training is highly recommended to get the full potential out of this software. However, they also report that many clients have been able to use the software well without any instruction.

Summary of all Three Software Packages

You face a unique choice when it comes to using ISO 9000 software. The first option is to develop a paper based system and not touch software. This takes the most time and effort but has little maintenance costs and you keep doing your job. The software option requires someone to tend the software and all of the control settings almost full time. However, you get just about everything you need to get your ISO 9000 system put together. All three packages are ready or modifiable for the year 2000 revision of the standard.

The third choice is to build an intranet based ISO 9000 system. This requires a lot of your time and the annoyance of establishing the network permissions to control the system properly. The cost is low, so it comes down to whether you think it is worth around $4,000 to $10,000 or so to avoid the project and buy one of the high-end software packages. For small companies the intranet option is looking more attractive. Using either HTML web pages or Office 97 you can create a shared document area with authorization restrictions. With Office you can also route documents and approvals using Outlook via e-mail.

Threatening all software options is the current race by several companies to produce a ready to go intranet for ISO 9000 on a CD-ROM. A couple of the companies are targeting prices at under $50 for instructions on how to implement, sample documents, and the basic intranet. Once they hit the market the high-end software guys will be limited to the larger companies, where they work best.

IP: Logged

barb butrym
Forum Contributor

Posts: 637
From:South Central Massachusetts
Registered:

posted 04 March 1999 07:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for barb butrym   Click Here to Email barb butrym     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
for what its worth,,ISI has a much better package than powerway...in my humble opinion, more user friendly and adaptable. Powerway tends to be very rigid...its as written or not at all. That said, I still like developing my own.

IP: Logged

Roger Eastin
Forum Wizard

Posts: 345
From:Greenville, SC
Registered:

posted 04 March 1999 02:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Roger Eastin   Click Here to Email Roger Eastin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
These announcements about TR16949, where did they come from? From Powerway? or an official organization like ASQ or AIAG or B3?

IP: Logged

Christian Lupo
Forum Contributor

Posts: 117
From:Auburn, NY
Registered:

posted 04 March 1999 03:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Christian Lupo   Click Here to Email Christian Lupo     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Roger-

The info I received came from the IAAR, the Independant Association of Accredited Registrars

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 05 March 1999 01:07 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My info was from a listserve - the author is cited in his e-mail.

Barb: I'm not a powerway fan at all. I decided to leave the message intact but I put in my disclaimer as well. On the other hand, it is a 'canned' solution which some find appropriate.

IP: Logged

Amar Seth
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 4
From:New Delhi , India
Registered: Mar 99

posted 25 March 1999 05:28 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Amar Seth     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Marc,
This site is wonderful and I find it a great source of information which is of value. But may I suggest that this site be kept free from sponsoring any type of product. ( It refers to Powerway software).Personally,I tend to agree with comments of Barb that ISI software is much better package and extremely user freindly and adaptable.As opinions may be different ,it is better to keep this site free from controversies as far as possible.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 25 March 1999 06:03 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks for the nice comments! Glad the site is a resource for you!

Do note that there is no 'significant' advertising on this site - there is absolutely no paid advertising. People may, and are encouraged to, express opinions about, or detail their experience with, any supplier / company they wish.

While you may not have a favourable opinion of Powerway products (neither do I but I must say my experience with their products is very limited), others have used Powerway products to good effect. My position is simple - I would prefer folks opinions to total ignorance. I believe anecdotal 'evidence' from users and/or product reviews by disinterested perties are fair. RICHARD CLEMENTS's thread addresses Powerway as part of an evaluation series - I believe it is evident it is not a Powerway advertisement.

All that said, I do hope you continue to stop by the Cove. If you want the site to prosper without advertising, your input in helping to answer folks questions is important!

IP: Logged

waberens
Forum Contributor

Posts: 17
From:Akron,Ohio,USA
Registered: Feb 99

posted 25 March 1999 09:44 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for waberens   Click Here to Email waberens     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Marc,

I also want to say thanks for this site. I visit almost daily. Only recently have I been stirred to enough to post.

I value the reports and evaluations of various software, consulting, and registrars. It does not mean I am going to use or not use them, we have our own evaluations to make. But the open sharing of knowledge and experiences is invaluable. Thanks to all who contribute!

Bill

IP: Logged

Tom Goetzinger
Forum Contributor

Posts: 123
From:Milwaukee, WI USA
Registered: Mar 99

posted 25 March 1999 11:44 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tom Goetzinger   Click Here to Email Tom Goetzinger     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have to agree with Bill. This site is the best organized source of information concerning QS9000 and Tooling and Equipment supplement that I have found. I welcomed the information concerning Powerway, and do not see it as a conflict with the principles of the site; the sharing of experience and knowledge is what this site is all albout.
One of the choice I must make soon is how to handle document control and I have looked at a couple of the packages. Demos can be misleading, and I am about to initiate a new thread looking for experiences and opions on compliance software packages.

------------------
Tom Goetzinger

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 26 March 1999 08:09 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Glad you folks are getting something out of all this! Participation is what makes it.

IP: Logged

Jada
Forum Contributor

Posts: 26
From:Melbourne, Australia
Registered: Mar 99

posted 29 March 1999 01:48 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jada   Click Here to Email Jada     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Does anyone have a copy of TR 16949 standard?
Would appreciate any info. as to where I can get a copy. Thanks

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 29 March 1999 04:12 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It's in the pdf files directory as 16949.pdf

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 03-29-99).]

IP: Logged

Jada
Forum Contributor

Posts: 26
From:Melbourne, Australia
Registered: Mar 99

posted 30 March 1999 01:36 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Jada   Click Here to Email Jada     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Marc,

Thanks for the info! I've just read through the standard and what I am finding great difficulty in understanding is why O why did they not include the incidental changes into QS rev 3??

Of great interest to me is the deletion of Final product audit and the "minimisation" of supplier lab. requirements.

Do you know of any registrar who is auditing to this standard?

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 30 March 1999 03:04 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I dunno, but I can guess for the same reason there is no requirement for Guide 25 or equivalent 'registered' labs - The ISO folks have more sense.

Best I can suggest.

[This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 03-30-99).]

IP: Logged

Dawn
Forum Contributor

Posts: 245
From:St. Marys, PA
Registered: Sep 98

posted 09 April 1999 10:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Dawn   Click Here to Email Dawn     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
What does the TR stand for?
I have been looking this standard over and I don't see much of a diference so far.
I'm wondering why on earth the AIAG would have 2 standards if they have QS-9000. What would be the point?
And would it be any easier or meaningful if suppliers were certified to TR16949 AND ISO instead of QS?
Why do they want to be bogged down with 2 standards?
Is that enough questions for one post?
Thanks, Dawn

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 09 April 1999 11:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
TR stands for Technical Report. It is an ISO (International Organization for Standardization) document. It has nothing to do with the AIAG. QS9000 is a customer requirement.
quote:
And would it be any easier or meaningful if suppliers were certified to TR16949 AND ISO instead of QS?
That's the idea on an international level.

International Standard vs Customer Requirement

Won't really change anything if you want to sell to GM or Chrysler - or Ford, for that matter...

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Open Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic   Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!