Implementing IATF 16949 over ISO 9001

Answer:

ISO 9001 is foundation for IATF 16949 and having it implemented facilitates to great extent implementation of IATF 16949 which represents additional set of requirements specific for automotive industry.

Considering the complexity of IATF 16949, I would suggest you to first perform a gap analysis to determine to what extent you are already compliant with the standard and what needs to be done to achieve full compliance. Here you can find our free IATF 16949:2016 Gap Analysis Tool https://advisera.com/16949academy/iatf-16949-gap-analysis-tool/

Once you determine the gaps, you can define the plan for you implementation project and start making updates to your existing documents and processes and creating new ones. For more information, see: Checklist of IATF 16949:2016 i mplementation steps https://advisera.com/16949academy/knowledgebase/checklist-of-iatf-16949-2016-implementation-steps/

As far as the competences of MR (Management Representative) are concerned, the standard does not mandates MR as a role and therefore there are no explicit competency requirements for this role. However, the standard is very specific when it comes to competency requirements for internal auditors and these requirements can apply to MR as well. The competency requirements are the following:
- understanding requirements of both ISO 9001 and IATF 16949
- understanding core tools

Based on clause 9.1.1.1, the organization shall perform and maintain results as specified by the customer part approval process requirement.Q: If let say our cpk value get 4.22 during the initial stage and it possible to maintain during mass production. can we request to monitor above 1.33 and get customer approval. if the customer approves, its that okay for the IATF requirement?If we get customer approval any issue we facing from IATF clause?

Actually we already get Major NCR during CB audit. The Finding is No evidence to show that the manufacturing process capability or performance for part ######## has been maintained as specified by the customer’s part approval process Initial process capability (i.e during trial run) showed the Cpk result was 1.995 but during the mass production, the Cpk result was 1.424. 

IATF requirements assume that customer-authorized waiver must be documented in order to retain the evidence. We could see that per example at requirements 8.2.3.1.1 and 8.3.6.1.

Based on available facts at your question if you get documented waiver approval from the customer for Cpk monitoring above 1.33 that no issues with the IATF1694 clause 9.1.1.1.

Even that, you should to take in consideration that if during the monitoring process capability we have special causes that must be identified, analyze root causes and implement corrective actions to avoid reoccurrence., and according IATF16949 requirement 9.1.3.1 trends in operational performance shall be compared with progress toward objectives and lead to action to support prioritization of actions for improving customer satisfaction