1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

CQI-X Audits - what's the general consensus as to use?

Discussion in 'IATF 16949:2016 - Automotive Quality Systems' started by ncwalker, Apr 7, 2016.

  1. ncwalker

    ncwalker Well-Known Member

    Sep 21, 2015
    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    North Carolina
    So there are quite a number of CQI audits out there. Theoretically, everyone (in automotive) should be compliant with every one that applies. My experience in reality is that this is NOT the case. They definitely do not all have the same weight with the OEMs. My experience is this:

    CQI-8: Layered audits - nobody ever checks for this.
    CQI-9: Heat Treating - everyone wants this, everyone asks for it. It's a live and viable audit.
    CQI-11: Plating - Hit or miss. Sometimes they want it, sometimes they don't care. (My product is not cosmetic).
    CQI-12: Coatings - Taken a bit more serious than CQI-11, but only a bit more.
    CQI-15: Welding - One would think it gets a lot of focus, but it doesn't.
    CQI-17: Soldering - Almost unused. (My product isn't circuit heavy either, but we do have some.)
    CQI-27: Castings - nobody checks this.

    And what I mean by "my experience" is when my customers are reviewing all my documentation, they want to know if we are doing CQI-9 on our suppliers. The others ... not so much. But they DO apply.

    What's the groups experience?