Qualityworld

• Knowledge portal
• FAQs
• Information
• Qualityworld
  • Current issue
  • Editorial comment
  • Free Qualityworld
  • Past articles
  • Advertisers
  • Subscribe to Qualityworld
  • Advertise in Qualityworld
• Journal of Quality
• Jobs
• Press
• Links

Soapbox: Paul Hardiman

Are TS 16949 and lean too much for auditors?

It has become a prerequisite for organisations in the automotive supply chain to be registered to ISO/TS 16949, and use lean manufacturing principles to survive in a global market. But can the two really work together? The answer should be yes. In ISO/TS 16949:2002 section 6.3.1 states that plant layout and material flow optimisation 'shall focus on lean manufacturing principles and the link to the effectiveness of the quality management system.'

An auditor should have the competence to verify the effectiveness and efficiency of a manufacturing organisation's processes. However, this is not always the case. Some believe that many auditors do not understand lean manufacturing principles well enough, including terms such as 'synchronous material flow', and therefore deem them inadequate at performing an effective audit.

Another issue is why western vehicle manufacturers, who actively prescribe ISO/TS 16949 certification for their suppliers, are lagging behind in business and quality performance when compared with their Japanese competitors? The Japanese culture is to drive lean manufacturing from top management and involve employees at all levels of the organisation in continual improvement programmes. The quality system therefore exists to provide a sustainable foundation from which to drive continual improvement.

Typically, European and US manufacturer subscribers to ISO/TS 16949 are more mechanistic in their approach to quality system requirements, and therein may lie the root of the difference. Often there is internal conflict created between top management, those responsible for lean implementation, and those responsible for managing the quality system who are simultaneously battling to comply with a variety of quality systems' specific requirements.

An example would be where lean manufacturing engineers want to change the layout of a manufacturing process and, in doing so, modify the standard operations with an aim to improve production efficiency.

The person responsible for the quality system would have to obtain customer approval for the change, make the change, update all the relevant quality system documentation and then comply with what many see as a complex product approval process. In this instance there is the risk that some may see the implementation of this change as more effort than it is worth.

So what is the conclusion? I strongly believe that lean manufacturing and quality systems can effectively work together to drive improvement in the automotive supply chain. For this to succeed:

• vehicle manufacturers must promote flexibility and not be over-prescriptive in their additional requirements
• top management understanding and commitment must be evident from the outset
• lean manufacturing engineers need to work with, and not against, quality system professionals
• auditors must be competent and familiar with the terms and principles of lean manufacturing

Paul Hardiman is manager of Global Systems for SMMT Industry Forum which develops global training and qualification for ISO/TS16949 certification body auditors.