IATF 16949:2016 Transition Q & A from IAOB

Welding robots movement in a car factory

Cherie Reiche, program manager for International Automotive Oversight Bureau (IAOB) recently presented at Eagle Certification Group’s June Boot Camp to discuss progress of the IATF 16949 transition and the unique intent behind some of the new requirements.   While no FAQs or SIs have yet been published for IATF 16949:2016, Cherie shared some of the common questions that IAOB and IATF members have received for interpretation and clarification from Certification Body automotive auditors.

Must both ISO 9001:2015 and IATF 16949:2016 be used when conducting audits?
Answer:  Yes, as it states in the IATF 16949 Foreword – Automotive QMS Standard, IATF 16949 is not a stand-alone standard, it must be used in conjunction with ISO 9001:2015.

Will the IATF be granting waivers for those organizations who cannot meet the transition plan timing?
Answer:  No, there are no plans to approve/grant waivers.  If the organization does not complete their transition audit in a timely manner (including allowing time for Non Conformance management and CB certification decision), then the organization will lose their certification.  ISO/TS 16949 certificates are not valid past their expiry or September 14, 2018.

Is IATF 16949, Section 4.4.1.2 related to product safety during manufacturing or final customer product safety concerns?
Answer:  4.4.1.2 was created to address final customer safety concerns (braking systems, airbags, fuel systems, etc.).  If the product (or process) is a safety item on the final product, then the organization has to identify the statutory and regulatory product safety requirements that must be met, along with items a) through m) in 4.4.1.2.  This is one of IATF 16949’s required documented processes, so inputs/outputs, metrics, etc. are required.

Can an organization demonstrate competence only through degrees and certifications for their employees?
Answer:  No, there are multiple ways for an organization to identify training needs and achieving the necessary competence for their personnel.  It is up to the organization to define (and document) training needs, including awareness, and competency requirements for all personnel performing activities that impact conformity to product and process requirements.

What about competency for internal auditors and second party auditors?  Do they all have to take an IATF-sanctioned lead auditor training course?
Answer:  No.  Organizations are responsible for ensuring key personnel, including their auditors, are properly trained and competent.  The IATF supports the use of IATF-recognized training providers; however, the IATF does NOT mandate the use of a lead auditor training course for all auditors in the organization.  Organizations are still allowed to have key personnel trained and certified as lead auditors, and then use those key personnel to train-the-trainer to disseminate the information throughout the organization.

If an organization is not design responsible for the software used in their product, does 8.3.2.3 (embedded software) apply?
Answer:  Section 8.3.2.3 refers to internally developed embedded software, not “functional test” software to see if a widget works (or not) during production.  For those organizations that are design responsible for the software used in their product, they must use a software development assessment methodology to assess their own software development process.  Annex B contains suggested Software Process Assessments such as CMMI or SPICE.

What is the goal of 8.4.2.3?  Do all organizations supplying automotive product have to be IATF 16949 certified?
Answer:  The ultimate objective is to have IATF 16949 certification; however, the IATF recognizes that for various reasons, that is not feasible for all organizations.  At a minimum, the expectation is for organizations to be certified to ISO 9001:2015, unless otherwise authorized by the organization’s customers.  Items a) through e) are a cadence which is applicable to the entire automotive supply base.

How are 8.3.2.3 and 8.4.2.3.1 different?
Answer:  8.3.2.3 refers to the organization itself and their internally developed embedded software. 8.4.2.3.1 refers to the organization’s suppliers of automotive product related software.  The organization needs to ensure that their suppliers of automotive product related software implement and maintain a process for software quality assurance for their products.

SimpleQuE will be sharing more information from IAOB and other Eagle Boot Camp sessions in future posts and on social media.  Follow us on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter for the latest quality and certification news.

Sign Up For Our Newsletter