17
IMPLEMENTATIE IATF16949 Tiel, 8 maart 2018 FRANS DOLMANS TECHNICAL MANAGER LRQA LLOYD’S REGISTER, AREA NORTH EUROPE OLAF JANSEN SENIOR CONSULTANT QUALITY (AUTOMOTIVE) – TATA STEEL

Chi-square Goodness-of-fit test - symbol.nl · Harmonisatie FMEA handboeken AIAG en VDA: Timing: ... 4,2 0 4,3 0 4.3.1 0 4.0 Context of the Organization Yes/No/Partially Score the

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

I M P L E M E N TAT I E I AT F 1 6 9 4 9

Tiel, 8 maart 2018

FRANS DOLMANS – TECHNICAL MANAGER LRQA LLOYD’S REGISTER, AREA NORTH EUROPE

OLAF JANSEN – SENIOR CONSULTANT QUALITY (AUTOMOTIVE) – TATA STEEL

© Symbol 2018 2

✓ Status transitie audits IATF 16949

✓ Ervaringen IATF 16949 implementatie LRQA.

✓ Non conformity analyses

✓ Nieuwe ontwikkelingen

✓ Hoe nu verder?

✓ Open discussie over ervaringen, struikelblokken etc.

DOEL VAN DEZE SESSIE

© Symbol 2018 3

AANTAL CERTIFICATEN ISO/TS EN IATF16949

© Symbol 2018 4

GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION

© Symbol 2018 5

GLOBAL OVERVIEW UITGEVOERDE AUDITS

© Symbol 2018 6

NC ANALYSE GLOBAL (ALLE CB’S )

© Symbol 2018 7

MOST COMMON NON CONFORMITIES DURINGIATF16949 AUDITS

✓ Management review

✓ Core tools

✓ Calibration / MSA

✓ Context analysis, Stake holders analyses

✓ Measures to achieve objectives

✓ Internal audits + auditor qualification

✓ Supplier management, improvement. Evaluation

✓ Customer specific requirements

✓ IATF knowledge, general knowledge management

© Symbol 2018 8

TRICKY AREAS TO AUDIT

✓ Product development, process development.

✓ All procceses were interfaces with other processes exist (often located out of the location, following audit trails).

✓ Cascade of objectives top down, result registration bottom up.

✓ Effectiveness of training.

✓ Effectivity vs Efficiency.

© Symbol 2018 9

REQUIRED EVIDENCE DURING REMOTE FOLLOW UP OF NC ’S

Proper non conformity management from the customer:

✓Containment

✓Root cause (e.g. Ishikawa, 5Why)

✓Actions, timing, execution, evidence of execution

✓Verification of effectiveness by customer (evidence)

✓Closure of finding by customer

When not closed by customer: (for justification of 100% resolved)

✓Reasoning / justification

✓Always followed by a special audit on site before the next audit.

© Symbol 2018 10

NIEUWE ONTWIKKELINGEN HARMONISATIE FMEA AIAG & VDA

Harmonisatie FMEA handboeken AIAG en VDA:

Timing:

✓ Validatie fase: June/July 2017 (met aangewezen klanten en evaluatie van de resultaten)

✓ Uitgifte yellow print 15 November 2017

✓ Uitgifte final version eind April 2018

✓ Publicatie May 2018.

✓ Training voor de nieuwe manual FMEA in 2018, zal verzorgd worden door VDA, AIAG en hunlicentie houders.

© Symbol 2018 11

NIEUWE ONTWIKKELINGEN UNIFORM AUDIT RAPPORT VOOR ALLE CB’S

© Symbol 2018 12

NUTTIGE WEBSITES

✓ http://www.iatfglobaloversight.org/

✓ http://www.iatfglobaloversight.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/IATF-16949-Transition-Strategy-and-Requirements_REV04.pdf

✓ http://vda-qmc.de/en/publications/fmea-alignment

Tata Steel Slide

Title-slide

O. Jansen

Transition to the new IATF 16949

Don’t Panic

Tata Steel Slide

50% text / 50% image

How did we do this

14

Leadership

KnowledgeMethods

Compliance matrix

GAP

BEX

BEX

Project

management

Proceseigenaren

MT

Deel project +

proces/project

eigenaar

Extern: Symbol!

Tata Steel Slide

50% text / 50% image

Game time

Presentation title, change Insert >> Header & Footer 15

https://kahoot.it/

Tata Steel Slide

50% text / 50% image

GAP tool

• Proces of documentatie vereist

• Proceseigenaar

• Link naar proces en/of project

• CSR van alle onze klanten

• Verwijzing naar oude norm en VDA waar mogelijk

Aangevuld met:

ClauseIs this a new

requirement?Applicable Process(es)

Level of current

implementationJustification

Level of difficulty to

implementJustification

Level of complexity to

implementAction Required Resources Required

1 = Fully implemented 1 = Not difficult 1 = Not complex

5 = Nothing in place 5 = Very difficult 25 = Very complex

4,1 0

4,2 0

4,3 0

4.3.1 0

4.0 Context of the Organization

Yes/No/Partially

Score the Level of current implementationof the affected process

on a scale of 1-5.

In the jusfitfiacitonbox, indicate the rationale behind the

assigned value in the previous column.

If a clause affects more than one process, click the plus sign

to expand the clause into 5 rows. You will then be able to generate a complexity score for each process that is affected by the clause. Use one row per

Score the Level of difficulty to implement each affected process

on a scale of 1-5.

In the jusfitfiacitonbox, explain the rationale behind the

assigned value in the previous column.

Cells with a light blue background represent clauses from IATF

Cells with a white background represent clauses from ISO

Indicates the Level of complexity to implement each process. This score is automatically generated for each process by multiplying the values l isted in colums D and F. The level of

complexity can range from 1-25. The level of complexity is also represented by colors ranging from green to yellow to red. Green indicates the lowest level of complexity, and red

In the action required box, identify what activities need to be

performed to close the gap.

In the resourcesrequired box, identify what resources are

needed to perform the activities.

List applicable processes. Each process owner should

indicate if the requirements are

© Symbol 2018 17

VRAGEN?

Indien u vragen heeft, dan beantwoorden we deze graag.

We denken graag met u mee!

Dennis van Scherpenzeel: [email protected]