Article :
How to meet the demands of ISO/TS 16949 regarding
“external” customer satisfaction
ISO/TS 16949 is a technical
specification specific to automotive industry. It is developed by IATF
(International Automotive Task Force) which includes representatives from
major OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers) throughout the world.
Consequently, the very essence of the specification itself requires attention to customer.
Two elements of
ISO/TS 16949 specifically address customer satisfaction. These are :
5.2 Customer Focus
and
8.2.1 Customer Satisfaction
Some of the “highlights”
regarding problematic issues will
be explained below :
ISO/TS 16949 is not limited to the
requirements listed in the elements of the specification. It also covers “customer specific requirements
(CSRs)” and these are mandatory as well. Customer specific
requirements may differ from customer to customer, and it is the responsibility of the supplier to
obtain and implement the current version of the requirements, in addition to
ISO/TS 16949 clauses.
Consequently, the very first step in
meeting the customer demmands will be “obtaining,
evaluating and internalizing” the CSRs. This is a key issue and
should not be overlooked. The method should be transparent including :
1.Which CSRs apply to the company
2.How are the current revisions identified
3.How are they obtained and by whom
4.Who checks the updates and how
5.After obtaining, who reviews the CSRs (more preferably
a team review because most of the CSRs require the attention of more than one process)
6.After review, how are the findings deployed to the related personel
7.After deployment, how does the
company ensure that the related timely
actions are taken by the personnel
Each item listed above requires deep
thinking, and the evidence of this deep thinking should be clearly
demonstrated at the audits.
The second critical issue is customer scorecards. As its name
implies, these are scorecards issued by the customers. They shall be obtained
and evaluated by the organization. If there are missing issues, the customer
should be contacted. It is the responsibility
of the organization to obtain these (if released) and/or check through
necessary means (such as intranet). Consequently critical questions regarding
this matter are :
1.Which customers issue scorecards
2.What is the method of obtaining
3.What is the method of regular re-checking of the past issues
(electronically released scorecards may be subject to changes based on score
correction requests of the organizations for example)
4.Are there any issues/volumes missing, is the customer contacted
5.Are they evaluated, if so at which periods, what is the method (regular
meetings, reviews, etc. to ascertain timeliness)
6.What are the findings of the reviews, how are they followed up, how are the responsibilities assigned
7.How is the top management involved in all this
8.Are there signs of additional
emphasis on repetitive problems
9.Are there signs of additional
emphasis to “red lines” of
the customer (such as customer notifications)
10.If there is an inconsistency
between the customer scorecard and
internal scorecards of the
organization (as requested by element 8.2.1.1 – please note that
internal scorecards will need to be evaluated by the organization just like
the external scorecards), what is the method of resolution
11.How are the trends analysed, which time domains are taken into account
(some organizations will have different meetings for different evaluation
scopes/perspectives)
The third critical issue is the communication with the customer.
Please beware that communication goes far beyond complaint resolution. The organization is expected to
assess the “perception of the
customer”.
Successful complaint resolution can
affect customer perception. However, there is not one to one relation.
Because (when evaluated anaytically):
1.The fact that a customer is not
raising complaints may not necessarily
mean that the customer is happy
2.The fact that a customer is raising
too many complaints may not
necessarily mean that the customer is very unhappy (this is not a perfect
world after all!)
Consequently, the organization is
expected to go beyond complaint
resolution. Critical issues are :
1.How does the organization assess customer perception (ISO
9004:2000, ISO/TS 16949:2002 Guidance and APQP manual will be helpful in
answering this question)
2.How does it ascertain the effectiveness of the methods it uses
Obviously, the argument above should
not understate the importance of “complaint resolution”. It is a
critical issue as well. Import aspects are :
1.How are the complaints obtained (which channels, how are they put
together)
2.Who evaluates and how
3.Who assigns the responsibilities and makes sure about timeliness and effectiveness
4.Are the CSRs taken into account regarding the method and timeliness
5.At which stages is the customer contacted and by whom, is it
clearly known
6.What is the understanding of the
organization regarding “effectiveness” (i.e. does it include root cause analysis, timeliness,
quality management system effect, repetition analysis, etc.)
7.What are the methods of deployment (lessons learned) to make
sure that everyone learns a lesson and evaluates the complaint from his/her
perspective
8.Are the effects to the quality management system considered effectively
and how (eg. Effects on the product file components such as FMEAs)
9.Are they evaluated taking the
“customer red lines –
customer special notifications” into account and if so, are the effects
traceable (whenever applicable) such as certification body notification (CB) or not
The requirements
of ISO/TS 16949 may look short in text, however they imply a lot more. The listings above are simply an example
of that. These should only be considered as “highlights” of the expectations regarding problematic
issues rather than the whole picture.
|