AltText

Registration Landscape


Describe the registration landscape of your TL 9000 implementation.

  • Alcatel

    Alcatel's US approach has been described as: one Company; one system; one registration:

    • There is one TL 9000 registration covering everything in the US and Mexico. The scope includes 4 locations, 10,000 employees and hardware, software and services for 18 product categories covering 76 products.
    • Canada will be merging in soon making it a North American registration
    • There's a Belgium TL registration.
    • Currently there are many ISO registrations in Europe, most on a country basis. Interest is starting to become hotter for TL registration in Europe. They are currently working a plan to get European Units registered to TL as a single entity, and will not have country-specific registrations.
    • TL 9000 registration was a follow-on from original ISO 9000 registrations for both Alcatel and Rockwell (later acquired by Alcatel). Alcatel used the single TL registration approach to facilitate the integration of these 2 widely desperate companies. It made sense economically (one set of audits, one common QMS to bring people together.)
    • The single registration also provides economies of scale and the use of sampling for registrar audits which is far more cost effective than the multiple registration approach.

    Alcatel's registration is more like an umbrella system.

    • Each local unit is allowed flexibility. The system is more concerned that something IS covered -not HOW it's covered.
    • There's lots of flexibility for implementation of the requirements-but from policy perspective, the QMS is the same.
    • There is an Alcatel USA quality manual that describes "WHAT" each unit must do to satisfy the TL requirements (e.g., for management review-a list of minimum review content and minimum schedule), but the unit/local quality manuals describe "HOW" those requirements will be implemented in the unit.
    • The detail of the Quality Manual is at the level that the standard requires for registration but does not get into the specific local practices that are used. Second level documents reference the Alcatel Quality Manual (which sections are being covered by which procedures)
    • There are local entities, which have their own documentation and tools, but they must meet the minimum requirements identified in the Alcatel quality manual.
    • They are moving to a single document numbering system but the local procedures will still be unique.
    • Alcatel's TL 9000 QMS documentation, while local in nature for lower level procedures, is done using a centrally developed document control system.

    Read the complete interview (PDF,21KB)

  • Lucent

    Lucent's REGISTRATION strategy was initially to follow customer requirements. This resulted in a registration landscape that was product-oriented with many registrations across the company. This became both costly with the need for overlapping and sometimes redundant registrar and internal audits and difficult to manage, (especially with metrics reporting and documentations). There were many different systems and practices used for TL-related areas, such as documentation, audit, corrective actions, etc. The landscape was a piecemeal approach. There has been significant initiatives to consolidate registrations globally, first for the supply chain organization and secondly for Lucent itself.

    From a supply chain perspective, the registration consolidation served as a tool to help transform the organization and accelerate a restructure. The current supply chain organization is the consolidation of groups that were originally in the product units. There were different processes, tools and practices. Pulling together all the TL registrations and implementing a consistent approach to QMS helped evolve to common processes, streamlined the organization to run more efficiently and thus, facilitated the reorganization efforts.

    Read the complete interview (PDF,19KB)

  • Lucent

    Dwarak was involved with the Lucent registration for a wireless product line. Initially there were already multiple registrations existing for some of the involved functions when the decision was made to apply for a HW/SW registration for the whole product line. The other complication was that the locations with the existing registrations were organizationally in different units. The need was to be able to keep the existing registrations in tact, but be able to register the full product line, to unify and to drive improvement and efficiency through consistency and integration of common practices and processes. The solution was to create an "umbrella" registration over the existing and new separate registrations that would cover the whole product line and designate those processes, policies and practices that would be common across all the subordinate registrations.

    The "umbrella" concept does not carry with it the registrar audit sampling practice as the large multi-site registration, and thus does not result in reduced registrar audits and associated expenses. The umbrella system does, however, facilitate driving for common processes, consistency of policies and practices, while still allowing for local flexibility. The AMPS/PCS TL 9000 Core Team determined which processes needed to be common, e.g., management review, corrective action, etc, and which were more efficient and effective if common across the locations and functions. Beyond the common process requirements, the system is more concerned that something IS covered-not HOW it’s covered. There's lots of flexibility for implementation of local processes as makes sense-but from policy perspective, the QMS is the same.

    There is an umbrella AMPS/PCS quality manual that describes "WHAT" each unit must do to satisfy the TL requirements (e.g., for management review-a list of minimum review content and minimum schedule) and the design of the processes that were deemed common, but the unit/local quality manuals describe "HOW" those requirements will be implemented in the unit. Second level documents reference the AMPS/PCS Quality Manual (which sections are being covered by which procedures)

    With the umbrella system, minimal changes were made to local procedures that were not common and for metrics data gathering, documentations, etc. Thus allowing the existing registrations to be able to come under the "umbrella" with as minimal disruption as possible.

    Read the complete interview (PDF,51KB)

  • Lucent Poland

    The scope of registration is very easy to determine when you attempt to answer a fundamental requirement taken from Section 7 TL 9000 standard, which states: "7.1.C.1 Life Cycle Model - The organization shall establish and maintain an integrated set of guidelines that covers the life cycle of its products. This framework concept shall contain, as appropriate, the processes, activities, and tasks involved in the concept, definition, development, production, operation, maintenance, and (if required) disposal of products, spanning the life of the products."

    Lucent Poland used the requirement and decided to put all business processes under the registration.

    Read the complete interview (PDF,35KB)

  • Nortel

    Nortel currently has over 30 separate TL 9000 registrations covering hardware, software and services. This approach was due to easy transition from CSQP (Bell Core standards: ISO + GR standards) to TL. In the early days, Nortel implemented TL 9000 where they had CQSP. If a unit/product group was already committed to CSQP, the transition to TL9000 was easier (actually ended up with a net reduction in requirements).

    Nortel took a fragmented approach in the early days: Other reasons for registration fragmentation were:

    • The success of the "sale" to convince organizations to register. If a unit said yes to TL registration, they implemented quickly.
    • There was also no requirement for registration from enterprise customers. As a result there was a view that registration was not necessary for these units.
    • Customer requirements for TL registration.

    Numerous registrations create some issues for Nortel, e.g., there are no economies of scale or audit sampling to reduce registrar costs. They are moving toward consolidation of registrations (taking a major portfolio approach). They are organized by:

    • Enterprise business (multiple portfolios within)
    • Optical business
    • Wireless
    • Wireline

    The idea is to ultimately roll into 4 single global registrations matching the portfolios.(Nortel calls them Leadership Categories). The reasoning behind this strategy (as opposed to a single registration for the entire company) is:

    • Driven by metrics (product categories)-their metrics are bucketed by the portfolios
    • Taking an organizational approach to registration landscape (rather than a design, build, service, functional kind of model) because that is how they really do business and the ownership is really at the portfolio executives.

    To do the consolidations, Nortel will need to:

    • Determine the needs/requirements/desires for common processes (at first the bare minimum and then in the longer term, those processes that would add value if common)
    • Integrate the processes within the portfolio organizations
    • Eventually migrate to a common QMS from a process perspective

    Read the complete interview (PDF,27KB)