Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
TS 16949Where
Did It Come From?
by R. Dan Reid
T
S 16949 is not a term that comes to mind
readily when you think about the interna-
tional automotive community. Its certain-
ly not something such as see the USA in your
Chevrolet that Madison Avenue would come up
with for brand recognition. Yet Technical Specifi-
cation (TS) 16949 is rapidly gaining recognition.
Based on ISO 9000, TS 16949 is an international
fundamental quality management system (QMS)
specification for the automotive industry and is the
In 50 Words
Or Less
Until the mid-1980s, auto suppliers were troubled
by multiple specifications and standards.
first International Organization for Standardization ment, manufacturing capabilities and much of the
(ISO) technical specification. advanced quality planning content.
The International Automotive Task Force (IATF)
and the Japanese Automobile Manufacturers Assn. Adding to Supplier Profits
(JAMA) produced TS 16949 with support from ISO The benefits of QS-9000 have been documented.
Technical Committee 176 (TC 176), the ISO commit- A 1998 ASQ/Automotive Industry Action Group
tee that deals with quality management standards. (AIAG) survey of more than 200 suppliers reported
the average cost of QS-9000 registration to be about
QS-9000 Morphs $120,000.1
TS 16949 evolved from the DaimlerChrysler, Ford All but $20,000 paid by the supplier to the certifi-
and General Motors (GM) quality system require- cation body17% of the total reported costturned
ments (QS-9000) and the quality system assessment out to be discretionary cost on the part of the suppli-
(QSA) manuals released in August 1994. er, such as for consultants or training. The average
Large sections of QS-9000 text (outside of the ISO sales of the survey respondents was $130 million,
9001:1994 text) are still recognizable in TS 16949. and they reported an average savings of 6% of sales
Surprisingly, QS-9000 was not a DaimlerChrysler, as a result of the QS-9000 registration, which is
Ford or GM idea. Actually, the automotive suppli- about $8 million per company.
ers suggested it in a June 1988 ASQ Automotive This 1998 survey also correlated greatly with the
Division conference with the Big Three automakers 1997 version of the same survey, which had more
purchasing vice presidents. than 600 respondents.2 That survey indicated a 3-
to-1 return on total costs and almost 17-to-1 return
Where We Were on certification body fees. In addition, about half
By the mid-1980s, suppliers were subject to the suppliers improved their parts per million
numerous military, national and customer stan- defect rates by about 50%.
dards. Large automotive suppliers dedicated full- This contrasts with the benefits of ISO 9000. In a
time employees to each customer account just to 1999 McGraw-Hill ISO 9000 survey with more than
address the varying customer quality requirements. 1,100 respondents, the average total cost of ISO 9000
For tier two suppliersthose who sell to a tier registration was reported to be $156,000, with an
one supplierthe situation was worse. They were average total savings of $187,000, or a savings-to-
subject to numerous unique tier one supplier quali- cost ratio of only 1.2-to-1.3 Less than 19% reported
ty standards, which also included the standards of their defect rate was significantly improving and of
the final customer. Furthermore, tier two suppliers these, only one-third reported the improvement was
typically have fewer resources for dealing with attributable to the ISO 9000 registration to a high or
variation than tier one suppliers have. very high extent.
In 1987, the ISO 9000 family of QMS standards The difference in quality improvement and sav-
was released. Its use promoted the use of consistent ings between QS-9000 and the ISO 9000 scheme is
quality terminology internationally and resulted in primarily due to the additional sector specific
significant harmonization. The standards were slow requirements and process controls imposed on the
to take root in the United States, however. third-party registration systemfor example, QS-
The Big Three elected to use the ISO 9001 stan- 9000 appendixes B, G, H and I.
dard as the base for QS-9000, mainly because there Interest in adopting QS-9000 within the Big
was a widespread rumor at the time that companies Three original equipment manufacturers (OEMs)
would have to be ISO 9000 certified by the mid- globally was high from the beginning. To accom-
1990s to do business in Europe. modate the international rollout, the second edi-
While nothing in ISO 9000 was objectionable to tion of QS-9000 was released in February 1995.
the Big Three, it lacked some elements in current The second edition was the first version to be
automotive industry documents, such as business deployed by OEMs worldwide. This required the
plans, customer satisfaction, continuous improve- translation of the requirements, certification scheme
text alone was insufficient for use by the automo- cations or not applicable to other product sectors.
tive industry, so efforts were then focused on how In discussion with the other sectors involved
best to accommodate them. with TC 176, such as medical devices, aerospace
At the November 1996 TC 176 plenary, a resolu- and telecommunications, two things became
tion was adopted to ensure the generic quality man- apparent. ISO TC 176 would either have to find
agement needs of the automotive industry would be a way to accommodate the automotive sector
addressed in the future revision of the ISO 9000 specifics outside ISO 9000 but within the ISO port-
family. folio of documents or the automotive group would
continue to publish its own supplier requirements.
These other sectors preferred ISO 9001 contain only
the minimum requirements for quality assurance
It was soon apparent to while each sector published its own sector specific
requirements.
all that the ISO 9001:1994 The ISO Sector Pilot
text alone was insufficient In consultation with TC 176, it became clear the
best path was through a pilot project with the auto-
for use by the automotive motive group so ISO could gain some experience
on how to address sector specific requirements
industry, so efforts were going forward in conjunction with a revision to the
ISO directives.
then focused on how best At the November 1997 ISO TC 176 plenary meet-
ing in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, another resolution
to accommodate them. was adopted that approved the pilot to go forward
according to the plan jointly developed by TC 176
and IATF.
This plan called for the development of an ISO
Alternatives as to how this might work were technical report as the vehicle for the automotive
discussed, but the prevailing thought was to use requirements. It also targeted a decision to be made
another type of document in the ISO portfolio, a by the end of the first quarter of 1998 with regard
technical report, to house the additional require- to which version of ISO 9001 to use: the 1994 text,
ments. Additional meetings between IATF and which would allow the project to begin immediate-
TC 176 leadership led to IATF being recognized ly, or the 2000 text, which would require a delay in
as a liaison member to ISO TC 176, under a new beginning the project but would include the
category. Japanese OEMs.
The TC 176 plan then was for the automotive The work group would consist of subject matter
industry to participate in the ISO 9000:2000 revision experts (SMEs) from TC 176 subcommittees 1, 2 and
process already under way to see whether enough 3 and the IATF if the short-term option was chosen,
additional content could be added to make the next or the IATF and representatives from JAMA if the
version of ISO 9001 fit for automotive industry use long-term option was selected. The SMEs on the
without supplement. Eight IATF members became work group would ensure consistency with ISO
engaged in the various activities of TC 176 and its protocols for terminology, standards and auditing.
subcommittees. The issue of Japanese OEM involvement was
However, this participation came about too late. raised a year earlier by TC 176. JAMA preferred
The year 2000 design specifications for the revision having one or two representatives join the ISO
were complete by then, so much of the significant pilot project when the work began on integrating
content brought forward by the automotive group the new ISO 9001:2000 text.
was rejected as being outside of the design specifi- Once the short-term approach was selected, the
What Could Go Wrong? problem in the field, which likely would generate
For many years, there have been some chronic customer dissatisfaction and possibly warranty or
implementation problems with TS 16949 that orga- recall exposure.
nizations and auditors should be aware of. Some of PPAP. PPAP was a common Big Three require-
these problems are: ment predating QS-9000. About 15 items must be
Characteristic management. completed for each PPAP (third edition) approval,
Production part approval process (PPAP). regardless of how much evidence the customer
Control plans. requests from the organization to ensure the items
Error proofing. have, in fact, been completed.
Work instructions and training. For example, the customer may request only a
Management representative empowerment. PPAP source warrant (PPAP level one submission).
IATF approved certification body. The warrant is a record to certify the other PPAP
Characteristic management. Automakers define requirements have been completed with no noncon-
at least two types of product characteristics: standard formance found except as is noted on the warrant.
and key/critical/significant. QS-9000 and ISO/TS Organizations may not have all the necessary
16949 use the term special to harmonize the vari- PPAP documentation or records as required when
ous company specific terms in use for the latter type. audited, despite the intent of the warrant form.
ISO/TS 16949 defines a special characteristic as Third-party auditors should cite this as a noncon-
being a product characteristic or manufacturing formance.
process parameter that can affect safety or compli- Further, the organization is to notify the customer
ance with regulations, fit, function, performance or when the product or process changes from the last
subsequent processing of product.5 PPAP approved process. A significant quality prob-
These characteristics require extra care to miti- lem can result when changes have not been commu-
gate the effects of a potential problem. The types of nicated to the OEM customer. These changes could
controls necessary are customer specific. TS 16949 actually occur at a tier two or lower level in the sup-
emphasizes it is a joint responsibility of the cus- ply chain as well as within a tier one supplying
tomer and supplier organizations to identify and organization.
designate special characteristics, even for cus- Control plans. Control plans are one of the key
tomer-responsible designed parts. deliverables of the automotive quality planning
In some cases the suppliers are the only parties process. Controlled characteristics, including all
in a position to identify some special characteristics special characteristics, are to be documented in the
because of their unique knowledge of their produc- control plan (TS 16949:2002, clause 8.5.1.2).
tion processes. If a supplier organization takes a Too often, control plans are not developed with a
minimalist approach to the identification and des- multidisciplinary process (TS 16949, clause 7.3.1.1)
ignation of special characteristics, the customer and are not current relative to the process they are
stands to lose much of the power of the ISO/TS to control, such as gage or device numbers, inspec-
16949 specified quality planning and control tools tion frequency or location. The control plan should
such as FMEAs, control plans, work instructions be up-to-date and representative of the process.
and standard operating procedures. Operators should have input into the control plan
PPAP requires only that initial process studies be development to ensure applicability. Further, when
performed for special characteristics. This assumes proven effective controls are in place, these should
special characteristics have been properly identi- be deployed to similar processes and control plans
fied and designated by both the customer and sup- across the organization.
plier, which may be a bad assumption. Incomplete Error proofing. Despite published material now
or inadequate FMEAs can compromise the proper available regarding error proofing methodology,
identification of special characteristics and thus the subject is still not well deployed in the automo-
impact the effectiveness of this part qualification tive supply chain considering its value and poten-
activity. The result is the risk an end user finds the tial. W. Edwards Deming pointed out in his famous
This makes the task of maintaining the standard This article is based on the authors previously pub-
fairly easy, as it was with the TS 16949 revision. lished material in the ASQ ISO 9000:2000 Handbook, chapter
48 (ASQ Quality Press, 2001) and in Quality Progress Stan- R. DAN REID, an ASQ Fellow and certified quality engineer,
dards Outlook columns of April 2000, January 2002 and is a purchasing manager at GM Powertrain and a member
November 2003. of the American College of Healthcare Executives. He is co-
author of the three editions of QS-9000 and ISO/TS 16949;
REFERENCES
the Chrysler, Ford, GM Advanced Product Quality Plan-
1. 1998 Annual Quality Survey Report, Automotive Indus- ning With Control Plan, Production Part Approval
try Action Group (AIAG), 1998.
Process and Potential Failure Modes and Effects Analy-
2. 1997 AIAG/ASQ Quality Survey Results presented at
a 1997 quality survey workshop, March 17, Novi, MI.
sis manuals; ISO 9001:2000; and ISO IWA 1. Reid also was
3. ISO 9000 Survey 99: An Analytical Tool To Assess the the first delegation leader of IATF.
Costs, Benefits and Savings of ISO 9000 Registration prepared
by Quality Systems Update and Plexus Corp., McGraw-Hill,
1999. Please
4. Technical Specification ISO/TS 16949, Quality Management
comment
Systems; Automotive Suppliers; Particular Requirements for the
If you would like to comment on this article, please
Application of ISO 9001:2000 for Automotive Production and
post your remarks on the Quality Progress Discus-
Relevant Service Part Organizations, clause 8.2.1.1, Interna-
tional Organization for Standardization, 2002. sion Board at www.asq.org, or e-mail them to
5. Ibid, clause 3.1.12. editor@asq.org.
6. W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis, MIT Press, 2000.