Permitted exclusion for IATF16949 standard

Hi guys. Here is something confuses me a lot when reading the IATF16949.

In the subclause 4.3.1, it is stated that "The only permitted exclusion for this Automotive QMS standard relates to the product design and development requirements with ISO 9001, Section 8.3".

My understanding towards this content is that the QMS which conform to IATF16949 can only do the exclusion declaration on the Section 8.3. And the reason for the exclusion is also quite obvious to me. Some companies just don`t do the product design and developement. They get related information from the cutomers. Since there is no process needed for product desgin and developement, the exclusion is also justified.

What is confusing me is that there is also a subclause, subclause 8.4.2.3.1 Automotive product-related software or automotive products with embedded software which states the requirement for the software developement. In reality, a lot of organizaions (my company is among them) in the Automotive supplier chain have nothing to do with the software stuff. Thus, for this kind of organizaion, 8.4.2.3.1 should be also excluded from their QMS (for there being no software involved).

Here is the question. If we also exclude the 8.4.2.3.1, it would be logical to say that we will no longer conform to 4.3.1 which I think it doesn`t make any sense. Looking forwards to some ideas on this matter.

NOTE：In the case of my company, we actually exclude 8.4.2.3.1 in the quality manual. And in the transfer audit, there is no relevant NC about it.

 

Good day @judegu;
Your understanding of how the standard is written is accurate. The standard does not mince words and clearly states "The only permitted exclusion for this Automotive QMS standard relates to the product design and development requirements with ISO 9001, Section 8.3". Therefore, it is not up to "us" to determine otherwise.

As you know, 8.4 is intended to ensure "Control of externally provided processes, products, and services. It is, therefore, a requirement of the standard that the organization can show evidence of these controls. In addition, a sub-clause (as you mentioned) 8.4.2.3.1 indicates that "...their suppliers of automotive product-related software or automotive products with embedded software..."

If, as you say you have no "...their suppliers of , then why would the auditor hold your organization to it? (they would not). On the other hand, who would have figured 20 years ago that steering wheels would have the embedded software they do today? Is there potential that your products could have embedded software in the future?

Summary: The standard is clear and specifies what an organization can claim exclusion of. Your organization has no ""...their suppliers of , so don't fret it.

Hope this helps.
Be well.

 

Thanks a lot for your detailed explanation on this matter. So what I take from your explanation is that we do not need to exclude sub-clause 8.4.2.3.1 in our quality manual. Since we don`t have this kind of suppliers YET, so we do not need to think about it NOW. However, if we strictly follow the "BOOK", it is a slightly "inappropriate" to declare the exclusion of 8.4.2.3.1 in any documented information. (I have to confess here. I have a tendency to be inquisitive at times)

PS: we are making the LED chips for the lamps in the cars.(Supply Chain: LED Chips -> SMT -> Lamp Assembly -> OEM) I don`t see the potention use of embedded s/w in the reachable future.

 

It not excluded, but it is "not applicable."

 

The auditor should not permit the exclusion. Since it is very clear in the standard that you can only claim exclusion within clause 8.3.

 

thank you for this explicit answer.

 

I just wrote down "there is no embedded software in our products" in the quality manual and didnt have any problem on the audit.

 

I see. Thanks for your sharing. It seems that sometimes using plain words is also a good choice.