What changes do you expect for ISO/TS 16949:2016?

The latest is that AITF / IAOB and its members are working on a new version (same format as ISO 9001:2015). The AIAG had a blog post asking for input.

What changes do you think are necessary and what new things will become requirements?

 

It will be nice to see some detailed requirements on Maintenance, spare management, etc - has such an important relevance to Product quality. How about having a mandatory requirement to record 4M change points. Capacity management is another underestimated area in the current version despite being a huge Business interest.

 

ISO 9001:2015 is not very specific regarding requirements. A lot is left open for auditor interpretation. Considering the issues we have with ISO/TS 16949:2009 interpretations, the CSR's, and the "Rules 4th Ed., I can not wait for the fireworks to start. I hope for the best of course...

 

This will really heat things up and I am afraid there will be more opinions on changes than actual changes which will delay this even longer. It will be very interesting to see if some of the built-in (non-value added) task master items are taken out. I am all for control and consistency of process but some of the things in TS go beyond value added control or improvement.

 

More than changes in the standard there is a need for the oversight bodies to be more harmonious.
There are big differences between the way in which SMMT, the UK, and IAOB, the US, act an perform their oversight in terms of requirements.
To often the actions of the IATF are reactive and they have taken negative action rather than constructive actions.

I am not optimistic as to the adaptation

 

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst...

 

I hope to see more emphases on change management/configuration management. The risk is too high to have a sloppy process in this area.

 

Please suggest that support processes at remote location be reclassified as "outsourced" so we do not have to travel overseas to conduct Internal Audit twice within the 3-year cycle. Examples are: Customer Service Center, Corporate head office, Sales, and Distribution Center. Under ISO9001 we do not need to consider the processes outside the manufacturing facility. ISO9001 is simplier than TS. Thank you.

 

I agree with Andy. It appears that even the Audit facilitator does not go deep into Product Audit. That makes Internal Audit training not effective. Also remove the manufacturing process audit and replace it with a Risk Based audit of the business management system. Thank you.

 

Thank you

Thank you Andy. Product audit is sometimes missed when doing process audit.

 

I was informed that some of the TS 16949 auditors have started to give up auditing because TS is a very "un-friendly" standard. They do not want to be witness-audited either. As an internal auditor, I find that to be somewhat true. In addition, going overseas to audit the support processes is not very cost effective. Why don't IATF change their definition of processes conducted somewhere else and just require them to get their own ISO9001:2015 certificate? Other than the italics, which specific TS sub-clause calls for periodic review of CSR? I have to create a matrix (thank you Elsmar Cove TS experts) just to satisfy the auditor. But we never look at that matrix on a regular basis except during he Internal/External audit. Can we just be audited to the VD standard in order to match our European counterparts? Thank you.

 

Remove the requirement for supplier PPAP. If they have ISO certificate that should be enough, isn't it? Anyway my company is just a supplier of bulk commodities.

 

That's been one of the long standing complaints about ISO and TS - it does not matter to most organizations if you have achieved registration to the standard, they still want all documentation as if you did not have it - at most it stops them from coming in and auditing you because they accept your registration in stead of the auditing - however, in a lot of cases it does not even stop that.

The statements I have heard from a lot of customers is that "Your ISO and TS registration is for your organization, not ours - so we still treat you as if you did not have it."

 

I agree 100%. We have an OEM customer who, despite our extensive documentation, still treats us like we do not have a TS16949 certification. But we are still OK. We all share the same problem in our TS certification but we have a resource in this website that will provide us with the help we need.

"Stay close to the rock", Wisdom

 

After looking at and thinking about the new ISO standard I am of the mind that the new version of TS will put back most of what the new version took out..the required documents, the need for a management rep..
At the end of the day TS requirements will be very close to what they currently are..if not more prescriptive.

 

fully agree regarding product audit. No value adding. If the daily, weekly or monthly checks are already in place does not make any sense to repeat all of these. In our company we are struggling with this. Only a time consumption with out any value added.

 

Welcome and congrats on your first post Lucian!

The focus needs to be on value added requirements, however, I can also see the need to monitor and improve when the opportunities arise. I think some companies want to claim little in TS adds value, and that is just code for not wanting to do it. If they focus on value added business processes, things that will make you a better company, I would think it would be hard to argue against it. The problem is when someone comes in for a few days a year and tries to tell an organization what would be good for their business, especially on a subjective interpretation, can be challenging.

The challenge has always been the whole trust but verify approach. The only two things I have ever seen a TS cert do for a company is stop "some" customer audits and get your foot in a door with potential new customers. However, even then most will want to trust but verify. From a business perspective, the cost of TS can be seen as an expense with no direct impact to the bottom line. That's where as Quality Professionals we have to continually sell the advantages of process control as the mechanism to impacting the bottom line.