The past events of the "certificate-oriented" concept in the TS 16949 certification in 2008
In 2008, to meet the supply chain qualification threshold for customers in the automotive industry, we urgently launched the TS 16949 certification. The core goal at that time was very straightforward - to obtain the certificate. The whole process was more like "completing a task": The consulting company helped us compile a whole set of system documents, but these documents were almost divorced from our actual business; Employee training was a mere formality. Everyone memorized a bunch of terms (such as APQP, FMEA) but didn't know how to apply them in daily work; We made up three months' worth of records right before the on - site audit. After passing the certification, the system documents were locked in the filing cabinet and never opened again. Looking back now, that certification was just a "qualification label" for customers and didn't solve any of our actual management problems at all.
The current core requirement: Make the system truly "take root" rather than obtain another certificate
Over the years, our business has grown from a "small component supplier" to a "Tier 1 supplier for vehicle manufacturers", but the management bottleneck has become increasingly prominent:
- When developing new products, decisions still rely on "the gut feelings of old engineers". The Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) has not been carried out in a thorough and detailed manner, resulting in "design flaws" often appearing during the trial production phase. Not only does it cause delayed delivery, but also requires a large cost for rectification.
- The process quality control relies on "empirical judgment", the FMEA updates are not timely, and the same type of problems (such as shrinkage of injection-molded parts) occur repeatedly. The internal rework cost accounts for 5% of the annual revenue.
- During the customer audit, we still have to "supplement records" temporarily because we didn't follow the system requirements in our daily work at all. This makes us realize that an unimplemented system is more terrifying than having no system at all.
Now our goal is very clear: it's not about obtaining another IATF 16949 certificate (the upgraded version of TS) but integrating system tools into management in a real - sense. What we want is to use APQP to transform "customer requirements" into "executable design requirements", use FMEA and control plans to plug "process loopholes", use MSA (Measurement System Analysis) to ensure "accurate data", and use internal audits to cultivate the "system thinking" of the team – ultimately achieving the practical results of "stable quality, improved efficiency, and reduced costs".
What kind of consultation or guidance do we need?
We don't look for "evidence - gathering" consulting (using templates, supplementing records, and coping with audits). Instead, we need "implementation - oriented" partners.
1. Understand the automotive industry scenarios: One should be familiar with the supply chain requirements of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) (such as Volkswagen and General Motors), and be able to customize solutions based on our business (such as injection molding and assembly), rather than just talking about a bunch of "general theories".
2. Be good at "hands-on" tutoring: For example, lead us through a complete APQP project, teach us how to link FMEA with control plans, or help us set up an internal audit team - it should be "teaching us how to do it" rather than "doing it for us".
3. Focus on results orientation: It can help us set quantifiable goals (such as a 30% reduction in customer complaint rate and a 20% reduction in process non-conformity rate) and track the implementation effects, rather than "leaving after submitting the report".
If you have friends who are familiar with consulting companies specializing in the implementation of automotive industry systems, or if you yourself are an expert with over 10 years of experience in promoting automotive industry systems (such as leading the implementation of an OEM's supply chain system) and are interested in providing part-time guidance, you're welcome to contact us at any time. What we need is not a "certificate," but a "system that can solve problems" - Thank you all for your kind recommendations!