VDA Volume Product Safety and Conformity - February 2018

Quality Management
in the Automotive Industry

Product safety and conformity in
© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

the automotive supply chain in the
case of Product nonconformities
1st Edition, February 2018

Online-Download-Document
Product safety and conformity in
the automotive supply chain in
the case of product nonconformities
1st Edition, February 2018

Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)

ISSN 0943-9412
Published: February 2018
Copyright 2018 by

Qualitäts Management Center (QMC)
Behrenstraße 35, 10117 Berlin,
Germany
Non-binding VDA recommendation of standards
The German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) recommends
that its members apply the following standard for the implementation
and maintenance of QM systems.
Exclusion of liability
This VDA volume is a recommendation that is freely available for
general use. Anyone who implements it is responsible for ensuring that
it is used correctly in each case.

This VDA volume takes into account state-of-the-art technology that is
current at the time of issue. Implementing the VDA recommendations
does not relieve anyone of responsibility for their own actions. In this
respect, everyone acts at their own risk. The VDA and those involved in
the VDA recommendations shall bear no liability.
If during use of the VDA recommendation, errors or the possibility of

misinterpretation are found, it is requested that the VDA are notified of
this immediately so that any possible errors can be corrected.
Copyright protection
This publication is protected by copyright. Any use outside of the strict
limits of copyright law is not permissible without the consent of the VDA
and is punishable. This applies in particular to copying, translation,
microfilming, and storing or processing in electronic systems.
Translations
This publication will also be issued in other languages. The current
status must be requested from VDA QMC.
3
Preface
Increasing globalization is accompanied by both new business opportu-
nities and risks. The opening up of new markets offers the opportunity of
gaining new customers. However, organizations therefore do not just
have to deal with the new customers, but also with their cultures and the
country-specific laws and requirements that apply for products. Fur-
thermore, the sensitivity and connectedness of product users and au-
thorities as well as the public discussions concerning the topic of prod-
uct safety and conformity have increased significantly.
In this context, the question arises as to which organizational structures

and processes must be established in an organization and how it should
react if a product is classified as potentially non-conform or as potential-
ly safety-critical due to nonconformities in one or multiple countries.
The answer to this question is subject to a certain level of complexity

that results from, among other things, the number of parties involved
(authorities, product users, OEM, suppliers) and their various require-
ments.
The goal is to define a possible organizational structure and establish

processes to allow a coordinated approach for identifying relevant prod-
uct nonconformities with respect to this. In this context, it may be useful
to individually define a collaboration model with the parties involved in
advance, so that each individual party can meet their own obligations.
The present VDA volume sets out recommendations for action. Terms
and approaches are explained using examples.
The purpose of this practical paper with its examples is to further strengthen
the collaboration between the automotive manufacturers and their sup-
pliers in the field of quality.
4
Contents
Preface 4
Introduction 6
1 Product safety system 9

1.1 Structure of an organization for product safety and conformity 10
1.2 Implementation of a recall management system in the organization 12
1.3 The flow of information within the supply chain 12

2 Organizational structure 19
2.1 Organization guideline 19
2.2 Regulation of responsibility 19
2.3 Communication and documentation 18
2.4 Sensitization of the organization to product safety and conformity 24
3 Product safety process 26

3.1 Product monitoring and complaint reporting 26
3.2 Analysis of the facts 28
3.3 Risk assessment 24
3.3.1 Special characteristics 24
3.3.2 Risk assessment in the supply chain 24
3.3.3 Methodological example in the course of RAPEX 24
3.4 Resolutions concerning further action 27
4 Examples 29
4.1 Example presentation of an organizational process in a medium-
sized organization 29
4.2 Example case 31
5
Introduction
Each organization is obliged to ensure the safety and conformity (valid
laws and regulations) of the goods it produces. Product safety means
that products must not endanger people’s health and safety. This ap-
plies to both the intended use and foreseeable misuse of the products.
Conformity means that the products comply with the legal requirements
in the relevant sales region.
The question of when a product is safe and conform is not uniformly
defined in the various legal systems in the different sales regions. Never
the less almost all legal systems agree on one thing – only safe and
conform products may be introduced to market. Product conformity

means conformity of product features or product functions with a speci-
fication. If unsafe products are on the market, the manufacturer is
obliged to do everything possible to protect the product user. Alongside
the fundamental interest of every organization to protect the product
users and third parties, quick and effective handling of product noncon-
formities also serve the further interests of the organization. A safe and
conform product safeguards its good reputation and thus its economic
interests.
In order to meet the country-specific obligations, it is essential that

product nonconformities that have been identified are processed inter-
nally, quickly and effectively, and a decision concerning further action is
made with all parties involved in the process.
Each organization should take suitable measures to monitor the product

in the market. However, it is not the object of this VDA volume to set up
an organizational structure suitable for this purpose. Instead, this must
be ensured on an individual organization basis (taking into consideration
size, product, customer and market peculiarities etc.).
The purpose of the present VDA volume is not to outline the individual
obligations for all parties involved within the supply chain or provide
them in the various country-specific legal systems. The publication is
rather intended to give recommendations to all parties involved in the
product manufacturing process concerning collaboration in the event
that a product nonconformity is identified regarding product safety or
conformity. Product nonconformity is understood to be non-conformity
6
with the agreed upon characteristics or functions of a product. Further-
more, this VDA volume also gives recommendations concerning swift
internal processing and evaluation of the circumstances. In doing so, the
objective is to allow a timely and appropriate implementation of
measures, where necessary.
A prerequisite for an effective approach is that the organization involved

is engaged preventively with the individual requirements in its organiza-
tion and establishes an organizational structure along with processes,
procedures and methods for monitoring, identifying, and processing
product nonconformities. Only by doing so is it possible to reliably identi-
fy product nonconformities and process them without delay.

A possible organizational structure, from the identification of a product
nonconformity to the decision concerning the appropriate reaction
(which may range from a recall of the affected vehicles to determining
that no action is necessary), is shown and explained below using practi-
cal examples.
The example process sequence in the automotive supply chain pre-

sented in the following section should be used for guidance.
Moreover, all parties involved may (depending on the individual legal

systems) have further obligations (e.g. to report to authorities) after the
decisions have been made.
Each individual organization must determine individually whether, and to

what extent, they are subject to such obligations. For example, this can
take place in coordination with the local authorities. The individual obli-
gations are expressly not the object of this VDA volume.
Irrespective of this, each manufacturer has the option of protecting itself

from the effects of possible product nonconformities with further
measures (e.g. with insurance). Obligations to provide information may
result from this type of contractual relationship, and they are also not the
object of this yellow print.
The following explanations may be relevant for each of the parties in-
volved in the supply chain (from the smallest organizations to large cor
7
porations), whereby the required scope and implementation has to be
individually customized on a case-by-case basis. The present VDA vol-
ume therefore makes no pretense of being complete.
8
1 Product safety system
For manufacturers in the supply chain (e.g. software suppliers, service
suppliers, and parts suppliers up to overall vehicle manufacturers) dif-
ferent obligations and tasks arise. This is the case when product non-
conformities with regard to product safety or conformity could be present
in products that have already been supplied.
If a manufacturer or a distributing organization becomes aware of prod-

uct nonconformities, it must determine the circumstances, carry out a
risk analysis, and make a decision about necessary measures. In order
to determine the circumstances, it is generally necessary for the vehicle

manufacturer and supplier to collaborate closely. This likewise applies to
the overall supply chain.
It must be ensured within the organization that internal and external

information is collected, processed, and evaluated.
The aim is that relevant circumstances are quickly, efficiently, and com-
prehensively processed and a decision is taken. This can be achieved
by establishing an appropriate structure within the organization and by
defining relevant processes.
A possible structure and the associated processes, procedures and

methodical aspects are described in the following section and illustrated
by means of examples. Whether and to what extent the individual manu-
facturer should adopt this type of structure is dependent on the organi-
zational structure and size, and therefore has to be individually consid-
ered and adapted.
9
1.1 Structure of an organization for product
safety and conformity
Product monitoring and the obligations derived from it are a fundamental
and legally-prescribed requirement of product manufacturers and dis-
tributing organizations.
In order that swift and precise action can be taken in the case of rele-
vant product nonconformities, it is necessary that the responsibilities
and approach are clearly structured within an organization.
Internationally operating organizations are faced with additional chal-

lenges due to the diversity and complexity of various legal systems. The
structure of product monitoring within the individual organization may
differ significantly depending on the requirements in different countries.
It is essential that the people that deal with nonconformities from prod-
uct safety and conformity for each of the relevant markets are specified
in advance and qualified accordingly.
As a part of these activities, not only does the individual organization

deal with the topic, but instead cooperates with other organizations in-
volved in the relevant value-added chain. Skills, obligations, and re-
sponsibilities must be clearly defined and known to all parties involved in
advance.
Responsibility for product safety and conformity fundamentally lies with

the top management, but can be delegated depending on the organiza-
tion size and structure in the course of assigning decision making.
The examples shown in the following section are intended to illustrate

how it could possibly be implemented in the organization.
10
1.2 Implementation of a recall management sys-
tem in the organization
If the safety or conformity of a product is not ensured, suitable measures
must be taken. For example, this can include an obligation to report to
authorities, a product warning, reworking, or a recall of the product. The
aim is to protect the product user or third parties against possible harm
caused by the product or its usage, or to ensure conformity with legal
requirements.
For larger organizations, it is currently advisable to set up an internal

recall management system. External suppliers can generally also as-
sume sub-tasks, e.g. legal advice, field data analysis, sorting activities,
reworking, modifications, etc.
1.3 The flow of information within the supply

chain
8 6 4 2 8 6 4 2 8 6 4 2 8 6 4 2 8
It is in the interests of the manufacturer to implement a product safety
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
system, in order to exclusively have safe and legally-conform products

in the field. The product safety system includes the organization with
clearly specified processes, tasks, and skills for ensuring product safety
and conformity. This approach does not only relate to the organization
itself, but also to the interfaces to the process partners in the supply
chain.
Behörde
n-tier/ 1st-tier/
OEM Produktnutzer
Supplier Supplier
Händler
Figure 1: Reporting processes
11
If possible nonconformities relevant for safety or conformity are identi-
fied in the course of product monitoring, this information must be
promptly passed on to the affected interface partners in the supply chain
for further risk analysis. In the event of a nonconformity that has to be
reported, it is generally advisable for the OEM to submit the report to the
authorities and, if necessary, to the product users or dealers. The rea-
son for this is that the consequence of possible nonconformities on a
component concerning the risk assessment can only be appropriately
and comprehensively evaluated in the overall vehicle system. However,
if the supplier has its own reporting obligations, it must, if necessary,
also individually report to the authorities. This should take place with the
involvement of the OEMs affected. Moreover, suppliers with direct cus-

tomer contact (e.g. via direct marketing in the spare parts market) can
switch to the “OEM role”.
12
13
1. Incident reported
(OEM, supplier,
or other sources)
2. Initial analysis by
OEM (vehicle system)
and/or supplier (sub-system)
3. Incident
No
determined
based on initial
analysis?
4. The same or Yes

Yes similar product No
delivered to

more than one
OEM?
5. Documentation
(End)
6. Risk assessment
by OEM on vehicle level
(if applicable w/ supplier)
No; Further analysis

7. Defect
determined?
Yes
8. OEM reports to authorities
(and informs supplier- if applicable)
9. Supplier to check own reporting

obligation because of pot. defect
10. Potential
unreasonable safety No
risk on vehicle level or
violation of regulations /
standards?
Yes
11. Supplier reports to authorities and

notifies OEM
12. Initiate recall actions

related to the
potential safety risk
Figure 2: Example reporting process from the German-Chinese product

safety working group as part of the collaboration of BMWi
and AQSIQ from 2017.
14
Table 1: Explanation of the example reporting process in Figure 2.
Step Authority OEM Supplier Remark
1 R R Possible incidents maybe triggered by following issues: abnormalities oc-

curred or detected in the process of testing or validation, analysis of field
claims, during the production or information from authorities or social media
2 R/S R/S The initial analysis can be performed on two different levels:
-on the overall vehicle level by the OEM
-on the sub-system level by the OEM or the supplier
3 R/S R/S The incident is to be verified after the initial analysis.

4 I R If the supplier delivers same or comparable product to more than one OEMs,
the initial analysis is to be applied for each of the other OEMs. According to
the related system impact of this incident on the whole vehicle level, the
analysis result might be different.
5 R S All relevant information will be documented and the process will be closed.
6 R S OEM performs risk assessment for the verified incident. The assessment is
performed on overall vehicle level. The supplier provides support on sub-
system-level if requested.
7 R S Based on the result of the risk assessment to determine whether there are
non-conformities with state standards or industrial standards regarding
protection of personal or property safety or any other unreasonable risks to
personal or property safety.
8 R (I) If a potential risk cannot be excluded, the OEM shall report to the authorities
within 5 working days. If applicable, the supplier is to be informed by OEM as
well.
9 R If the joint risk assessment performed by OEM and supplier does not lead to a
report to the authorities through OEM, the supplier has to check his own
reporting responsibility.
10 R The supplier shall further evaluate whether the incident related to his product
could lead to nonconformities with state standards or industrial standards
regarding protection of personal or property safety or any other unreasonable
risks to personal or property safety in the vehicles in China market use this
product.
11 I I R According to the provisions in article 13 of AQSIQ Order No. 176 regarding

the notification obligation of supplier (auto product part manufacturers), in
case the circumstance described in step 10 is determined, the supplier shall
provide the related information to the authorities and notify the OEM.
12 R R S According to the procedure defined by the authorities, actions related to a

recall would be initiated.
R – Responsible, S – Support, I – Information
15
This reporting process can also be transferred to the n-tier in a similar
form. It correspondingly reports to its respective higher-level suppliers at
all times.
The figures and approaches described in this chapter relate to the sta-
tus at the date of publication of this volume. The manufacturer must
always independently keep themselves informed of the current country-
specific reporting obligations and times.
16
2 Organizational structure
2.1 Organization guideline

It is advisable that the top management defines clear responsibilities in
terms of a consistent quality management system. What form this takes
is particularly dependent on the size and organizational structure of the
relevant organization.
It can be useful, particularly in large organizations, to implement an or-

ganization guideline concerning the topic of product safety and conform-
ity which employees can access (for example, via an internal platform).

Furthermore, it must be ensured that at least the employees involved
are sensitized to the contents of the organization guidelines at regular
intervals.
The organization guidelines concerning product safety and conformity

should define both the process and the responsibilities, as well as roles,
including the supervisory duty of the management when delegating re-
sponsibilities within the process and supply chain.
2.2 Regulation of responsibility

The top management is responsible for product safety and conformity.
Tasks from the product safety process can be delegated. In the event of
transfer of responsibility, it is necessary to establish defined decision-
makers or for example a decision-making committee. This committee or
the decision-makers should generally evaluate potential nonconformities
concerning product safety and conformity and, if necessary, specify
measures. All process participants must have sufficient skills and oppor-
tunities for action for their tasks, in order that coordinated, focused, and
responsible processing is possible. If the organizational structure or
topic complexity requires it, a multi-level committee organization for fact
clarification, decision preparation, decision making, and, if necessary,
decision confirmation by organization management may be advisable.
17
This decision-making process must be clearly described in terms of
responsibilities within the organization and, if necessary, the internal
and external supply chain. Internal suppliers must be dealt with in line
with the relationship with external suppliers. This also includes docu-
mentation and communication.
In practice, it has been shown to be advisable, if possible, to staff a deci-

sion- making committee as follows.
 Quality
 Product development and release

 Product safety
 Production
 Sales, Aftersales
 Legal
If further departments are required to make a decision, experts can also

temporarily be consulted.
2.3 Communication and documentation

If a potential nonconformity that is relevant to product safety and con-
formity has been identified by a party involved within the supply chain,
the relevant parties involved, both external and internal, must be in-
formed about it. To this end, a previously defined, consistent reporting
process should be referred to in order to ensure that the necessary
reports are made consistently.
If possible, the interfaces in the supply chain should be defined in ad-

vance and the responsible contact persons in the organization should
be announced, in order to ensure smooth communication. Each report
should be neutral, purely fact-based, i.e. without subjective evaluation of
the effects. Relevant documentation is part of the reporting process
between the affected organizations.
18
If possible, it should include the following content:
 Date the nonconformity was identified
 Affected product
 Type of nonconformities
 Who reported the nonconformity
 Number of parts identified with the product nonconformity
 Containment of the production volume potentially affected

The report must be made immediately when the product nonconformity
is identified, following the process defined in the organization. If neces-
sary, open issues must be submitted or updated in a timely manner.
Relevant information must always be available for referral during each

process step. Structured, consistent, and appropriate documentation of
the processes is necessary for this purpose. Furthermore, all infor-
mation relevant for the decision should be documented in a comparable
manner. In doing so, it must be ensured that objective traceability of the
process is ensured.
Evidence of the entire product safety process, from identification of a

product nonconformity (this may affect both the availability and the se-
curity against manipulation of vehicle software or hardware) up to reso-
lution of the product discrepancy, must be documented. The recom-
mended guidelines for documentation of a verification management are
described in the VDA volume “Documentation and Archiving”.
19
2.4 Sensitization of the organization to product
safety and conformity
The overarching organization goal must be to ensure product safety and
conformity for all sales markets. In doing so, it is necessary to regularly
check that the established organization guideline is up-to-date and, if
necessary, to modify it. At least the employees involved must be made
aware of the correct handling of topics potentially relevant to product
safety and conformity at regular intervals, and the possible conse-
quences of improper handling.
20
3 Product safety process
Among the general demands of the IATF 16949 (International Automo-
tive Task Force) this chapter describes the special requirements for
product safety and product conformity in the automotive supply chain.
Fault correction process
no
Possible
Product monitoring safety/legal
in the market issue

yes
Product safety and compliance process
Identify Internally
Prepare
product report product Decision Carry out Effectiveness Lessons
topic
discrepancy discrepancy (3.4) action test learned
(3.2)
(3.1) (3.1)
Fault correction process
Figure 3: Process chart
3.1 Product monitoring and complaint reporting

Based on the regular failure elimination process, organizations should
install and maintain a system for product monitoring in the field.
The product monitoring system can fundamentally be divided into a

reactive and preventive section. Reactive product monitoring can be
understood as being informed of complaints about the product in the field,
e.g. customer complaints, warranty claims or inquiries from authorities.
Preventive product monitoring can be understood as, for example, tar-
geted analysis of possible nonconformities in the manufacturing or vali-
dation process, demand for spare parts, or media research of compara-
ble products.
A possible product nonconformity may be found during product monitor-

ing. Assessment of the nonconformities must take place in the course of
the failure elimination process. If a possible safety issue or nonconformi-
ty is present, this topic must be transferred into the product safety pro-
cess. Otherwise, the regular failure elimination process applies.
21
The scope of the obligations for product monitoring may differ for the
parties involved in the supply chain. In particular, the production moni-
toring obligation for the OEM relates to the overall vehicle; for suppliers
it generally only refers to the supplied product.
3.2 Analysis of the facts

After information concerning a product nonconformity have been report-
ed by a structure within the organization or by third parties, they must be
analyzed, prepared, and documented for the subsequent steps in the
process sequence. The resulting statement of facts forms the basis for

the subsequent evaluation of the situation, for deriving alternative ac-
tions and the resulting decision made by the decision-makers or in the
decision-making committee.
The statement of facts includes all the findings from the analysis pro-
cess carried out by the parties involved. The contents of the statement
of facts should follow a defined standard in order to ensure that all rele-
vant information is reported as completely as possible. With this in mind,
documentation should also be in a standard format.
The following contents provide a guideline as to what should be covered

in the statement of facts.
 Reported nonconformity or complaint

 What nonconformities/complaint has been identified?
 Cause
 What is the root cause of the nonconformity/complaint?
 What results are there with regard to analyses (component, sys-
tem, system environment)?
 Effect
 What effect does the complaint/nonconformity have during prod-
uct use?
 Likelihood of occurrence and risk assessment
22
 Containment
 Narrowing down of the affected components or vehicles (produc-
tion batch, production periods, etc.)?
 Amount affected
 How many components or vehicles are affected?
 Country distribution
 To which countries were the affected components or vehicles
supplied?
 Measures

 Which measures have been taken (immediate measures) or will
be taken (long-term solutions) in order that current series produc-
tion can be carried out without product nonconformities?
What options are there for correcting the components or vehicles
that have been manufactured and/or delivered?
 Is part correction in the supply chain (e.g. spare parts in the af-
termarket, parts in the plants) necessary?
The process cycle should take place in a period of time and to a level of
detail that is appropriate for the circumstances.
23
3.3 Risk assessment
Risk assessment is a fundamental component of the product safety
process.
3.3.1 Special characteristics

Critical and significant product and process characteristics can be used
for risk assessment. For this purpose, the handling of these characteris-
tics should be clearly defined and known to the persons concerned.

Established special characteristics are described in detail in the VDA
volume “Special characteristics”.
3.3.2 Risk assessment in the supply chain

A risk assessment must be carried out by the parties involved in the
supply chain with regard to their products. The vehicle manufacturer
carries out the final inspection of the overall vehicle system. Each of the
parties involved in the supply chain must individually determine which
criteria should be used for the risk assessment in their respective field of
reasonability. The legal regulations of the different countries should be
considered when doing so.
3.3.3 Methodological example in the course of

RAPEX
The guidelines for management of the community system for rapid in-
formation exchange “Rapid Exchange of Information System” (RAPEX)
were defined in the European Commission’s resolution of 16/12/2009
(reference number K (2009) 9843). The description of a guideline for the
risk assessment of consumer products is an integral component of the
resolution. This guideline also applies to risk assessment of circum-
stances in the automotive industry and is summarized in the following
section.
24
The RAPEX risk assessment is structured relatively simply (see Figure
4). First of all, a product’s consumer group is defined and a risk group is
derived from this. A potential injury scenario is now created using the
consumer and risk groups defined. Both the injury’s possible level of
severity and its likelihood of occurrence is then identified from this. The
groups are defined using RAPEX help tables. A RAPEX table also
shows the resulting risk. The help tables can be found on the German
Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Bundesanstalt für
Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin) (baua) site.
25
26
Figure 4: Schematic flow of the RAPEX risk assessment
3.4 Resolutions concerning further action
Decisions are made in the decision-making committee based on the
analysis of the facts. The range of options for decisions conforms to the
role that the relevant organization takes in the course of its business
activities. Examples of this are: Supplier for an OEM, supplier with direct
business (aftermarket sales), OEM, vehicle conversion or modification.
The legal obligations of the relevant organization must be considered
here.
Possible common scopes of measures are described in the following

section for the roles OEM and supplier, depending on the above-
mentioned risk assessment. The list includes but is not limited to:
Supplier for an OEM:

 No measures required
 Introduction of an appropriate internal corrective action
 Reporting of the circumstances to the affected OEMs in order to
agree the further approach
 Report to the authorities
OEM:
 No measures required
 Introduction of an appropriate internal corrective action
 Quality improvement measure (customer service campaign
without customer notification, during next repair shop/ gar-
age/dealer visit)
 Quality improvement measure (customer service campaign with
customer notification)
 Recall with customer notification and information sent to the rel-
evant authority
 Report to the authorities
27
A supplier with direct business takes over the role of an OEM in its obli-
gations for the direct business.
If a measure is defined resulting from the decision-making process, it

must be implemented in the affected markets in a period of time appro-
priate for the circumstances. However, business activity does not stop
when the measures are implemented. Product monitoring must continue
to be carried out in the field in line with the regular failure elimination
process, in order to assure that the success of the measure implement-
ed is monitored.
28
4 Examples
4.1 Example presentation of an organizational

process in a medium-sized organization
In the following section, a product safety system is presented as a whole
using the example of a medium-sized organization.
 The top management has decided to delegate the decision-

making process to a committee with regard to potential product
nonconformities.

 The delegation has been defined and established in an organi-
zation guideline.
 The decision-making committee is comprised of the following
employees:
o quality
o production
o product safety
o product conformity
o product development
o distribution
o customer service
o law
 The quality manager is chair.
 Absence management guidelines are defined for all participants.
 To this end, the job description for the employees affected has
been updated accordingly. The employees are provided with re-
sources, capacities and authorizations to fulfill their function.
 In the organization guideline it is specified that the decisions in
the committee must be unanimous. If an agreement is not
reached, the decision is escalated to the top management.
29
 The committee can only make decision if all skills are repre-
sented. This is determined by the chair at the beginning of each
meeting.
 The decision-making committee meets as required.
 All documents required for this process are defined as standard-
ized forms and are stored centrally.
 Storage of data, with regard to protection against tampering and
access rights, is managed internally.
 The agenda topics are discussed and decided by means of a
presentation that presents the circumstances in full.

 Each meeting must be recorded. The minutes are filed centrally
by the chair of the committee.
 The internal reporting process is defined and known to the rele-
vant employees and is part of the quality management system.
 The external reporting process is defined for the supply chain
and communication is standardized.
 The employees are continuously made aware of the issue of
product safety and conformity in the course of annual training.
30
4.2 Example case
The risk evaluation process and the reporting path is presented as a
whole with an example case.
 In the course of its business activities, a supplier supplies the

same liquid container to two different OEMs, hereafter called
OEM A and OEM B.
 OEM A receives leaky liquid containers in the course of its regu-
lar field monitoring and passes them to the suppliers for detailed
analysis.

 The supplier identifies in the course of its analysis that a differ-
ent raw material (granulate) has been used to manufacture the
component.
 The supplier verifies the results of its detailed analysis with its
sub-suppliers.
 The supplier compiles the following information in agreement
with the sub-suppliers:
o Which incorrect raw material was used?
o Why was it used (cause)?
o Which production period is affected?
o Has the failure already been corrected?
o If yes, using which measure? If no, which measure will cor-
rect the failure and when will it be implemented?
o Who in the supply chain is still affected?
o If yes, how does the correction take place and whose re-
sponsibility is it? If no, when was the first OK delivery and
how will the correction be carried out?
 The supplier evaluates the effect of the incorrect raw material
being used on the component. This shows that the temperature
resistance of the defective components is only given to a lower
value. This has an effect on the strength of the component dur-
ing vehicle operation.
31
These components thereby do not correspond to the originally
defined specification. A potential safety issue cannot be ruled
out in the case of a premature failure.
 The supplier informs both OEMs about the circumstances for

evaluating the component nonconformities in the relevant vehi-
cle system environment.
 OEM A determines in the course of its failure consequence
analysis that potential danger could result from operation of the
vehicle. OEM B comes to the conclusion in the course of its
analysis that no safety hazard could occur. Its component is in a

different, non-critical installation situation in comparison with
OEM A.
 OEM B transfers the circumstances into its regular failure elimi-
nation process.
 In the case of OEM A, the circumstance process is presented to
the decision-making committee with all available information.
The decision-making committee decides further action. In the
example case, OEM A prepares the steps for a safety recall and
the information to the relevant authorities.
 The whole supply chain is informed about the respective cir-
cumstances and the associated result.
 The whole process is communicated, documented, and ar-
chived in accordance with the internal organization guidelines.
Both OEM A and OEM B continue their field observation as part of the
regular failure elimination process. In doing so, OEM A also includes the
effectiveness check of the measure implemented (safety recall).
32
Quality management in the automotive industry
The current version of published VDA volumes regarding quality man-
agement in the automotive industry (QAI) can be found at
http://www.vda-qmc.de.
You can also place orders directly on this homepage.
Reference:
Qualitäts Management Center (QMC)
Behrenstraße 35, 10117 Berlin, Germany
Phone +49 (0) 30 8978 42-235, Fax +49 (0) 30 8978 42-605
33
34

VDA Volume Product Safety and Conformity - February 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VDA Volume Product Safety and Conformity - February 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

VDA Volume Product Safety and Conformity - February 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the purpose of this document?

What is the purpose of this document?

What is an example of a product nonconformity discussed in the document?

What is an example of a product nonconformity discussed in the document?

Quality Management

in the Automotive Industry

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

1st Edition, February 2018

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

1st Edition, February 2018

Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)

Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

If during use of the VDA recommendation, errors or the possibility of

In this context, the question arises as to which organizational structures

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

The answer to this question is subject to a certain level of complexity

The goal is to define a possible organizational structure and establish

1 Product safety system 9

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

3 Product safety process 26

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

In order to meet the country-specific obligations, it is essential that

Each organization should take suitable measures to monitor the product

A prerequisite for an effective approach is that the organization involved

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

The example process sequence in the automotive supply chain pre-

Moreover, all parties involved may (depending on the individual legal

Each individual organization must determine individually whether, and to

Irrespective of this, each manufacturer has the option of protecting itself

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

If a manufacturer or a distributing organization becomes aware of prod-

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

It must be ensured within the organization that internal and external

A possible structure and the associated processes, procedures and

Internationally operating organizations are faced with additional chal-

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

As a part of these activities, not only does the individual organization

Responsibility for product safety and conformity fundamentally lies with

The examples shown in the following section are intended to illustrate

For larger organizations, it is currently advisable to set up an internal

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

1.3 The flow of information within the supply

system, in order to exclusively have safe and legally-conform products

Figure 1: Reporting processes

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

4. The same or Yes

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

No; Further analysis

9. Supplier to check own reporting

11. Supplier reports to authorities and

12. Initiate recall actions

Figure 2: Example reporting process from the German-Chinese product

Step Authority OEM Supplier Remark

1 R R Possible incidents maybe triggered by following issues: abnormalities oc-

3 R/S R/S The incident is to be verified after the initial analysis.

© VDA QMC 2018 | Free version | www.vda-qmc.de/publikationen/download

11 I I R According to the provisions in article 13 of AQSIQ Order No. 176 regarding

12 R R S According to the procedure defined by the authorities, actions related to a

R – Responsible, S – Support, I – Information