Skip to content

Free template

Updated

IATF 16949 internal audit checklist

An IATF 16949 internal audit checklist is the list of questions an internal auditor uses to check an automotive plant against IATF 16949, the quality standard of the International Automotive Task Force. It covers the quality system, the manufacturing processes and the products, against the standard, the plant's own procedures and each customer's specific requirements. The standard names three kinds of internal audit in clause 9.2.2: the quality management system audit, the manufacturing process audit and the product audit, and this checklist has one part for each. There are 20 system questions, 15 process questions to ask at the station on every shift the process runs, and 5 product audit questions for parts ready to ship, 40 in all. Each one names the IATF 16949:2016 clause it tests and the evidence to look for, is tagged with the core tool it draws on (APQP, PPAP, PFMEA, control plan, MSA or SPC) where one fits, and has a column for the customer-specific requirement that applies. The PDF has the audit plan, the three parts, a finding report, a findings log and a worked example; the Excel version grades each answer, works out conformance by part and by group, and keeps the findings log. The questions are our own words, not the standard's text. The checklist supports internal audits run beside your quality system; it does not make a plant compliant or certified.

Free to use: print it, copy it and edit it for your team. Enter your name and work email once to download.

Page 1 of the IATF 16949 internal audit checklistThe audit plan with header fields, the three audit types with their clauses, a shift coverage grid and the five grades.
40 questions in 3 partsSystem, process and product auditsIATF 16949:2016 clause for eachWhat to look forCore tool tagCustomer requirement columnFive grades definedEvery shift and the handoverFinding report and logWorked example
Filled-in IATF 16949 internal audit checklist: a weld cell audited on all three shifts
The same sheet filled in with the worked example (page 7 of the PDF, illustrative numbers). Open full size (opens the picture in a new tab)

When to use it

When to use an IATF 16949 internal audit checklist

  • Running the plant's internal audit program: a system process, one manufacturing process or a product audit, on the dates the program sets.
  • Before a surveillance or recertification audit, to find gaps on the floor and in the records while there is time to close them.
  • After a customer complaint, a new launch or a big process change, as a targeted audit of that process on every shift.
  • To train new internal auditors on what the three audit types look for, and what evidence counts.
  • Not in place of your layered process audits: those are short, frequent checks by every layer of leadership, and this is the planned, graded audit.

How to fill it in

  1. 1

    Plan the program from risk

    List every quality system process, every manufacturing process with the shifts it runs on, and every product family. Schedule them so each system and manufacturing process is covered within each three-year calendar period, more often where risk, complaints or changes call for it, and set product audits at the frequency your customers ask for.

  2. 2

    Read your customers' requirements first

    Before the audit, fill the customer-specific requirement column for the questions it touches: a required LPA frequency, a labeling standard, a problem-solving format, a process audit method such as VDA 6.3. Audit to those as well as to the standard.

  3. 3

    Pick auditors who meet your criteria

    The plant sets and records what each type of auditor must know: the process approach, the core tools and the customers' requirements for system auditors; the process's PFMEA and control plan for process auditors; the product's requirements and gauges for product auditors. Keep people off their own work.

  4. 4

    Run the process audit at the station, on every shift

    Take the PFMEA and control plan for the process with you. Watch the work, then check the records, on each shift the process runs, and read the handover sheets between them. A problem on night shift will not show on day shift.

  5. 5

    Pick the product audit sample yourself

    Take parts that have passed every check, from the dock or the last operation, and measure or test them with the audit's own gauges, not the line's results.

  6. 6

    Grade, write findings, follow up

    Grade each question conforming, opportunity, minor, major or N/A from the evidence you wrote down. Write each finding as condition, requirement, evidence and impact, give it an owner, and close it only after someone checks that the action worked, in the problem-solving format your customer asks for.

The three audits

System, process and product audits: what each one checks

IATF 16949 names three internal audits in clause 9.2.2 and asks for an audit program that covers all of them (9.2.2.1). The frequencies below are our summary of the standard; your copy of the standard and your customers' requirements set the details, and a customer's own method comes first where it prescribes one. A layered process audit is not one of the three, but many customers ask for it too.

  • System audit

    Clause
    9.2.2.2
    What it checks
    Every quality system process, checked with the process approach, sampling each customer's specific requirements.
    How often
    All processes within each three-year calendar period, on an annual program set by risk.
  • Manufacturing process audit

    Clause
    9.2.2.3
    What it checks
    One manufacturing process at the station: is the PFMEA and control plan in use, and does the process run as planned?
    How often
    Every manufacturing process within each three-year calendar period, on every shift it runs, sampling the shift handover. A customer's prescribed method, such as layered process audits, comes first.
  • Product audit

    Clause
    9.2.2.4
    What it checks
    Finished parts checked against every requirement by the audit, not the line, at the stages that make sense.
    How often
    At the stages and frequency the customer sets, or the plant sets where the customer does not.
  • Layered process audit

    Clause
    Customer-specific
    What it checks
    A few high-risk checks at the station, by every layer of leadership.
    How often
    Every shift for team leaders, less often for each layer above. See the LPA checklist.

What's on the checklist

The 40 audit questions: system, process and product

Groups 1 to 4 are the system audit, 5 to 7 the manufacturing process audit (asked at the station on every shift) and 8 the product audit. Every question ends with the IATF 16949:2016 clause number and short title it tests; the questions are our own words. On the sheet each one has room for the evidence you saw, the customer-specific requirement that applies, a grade and a finding number.

System audit: customer requirements and leadership

Sample: the customer-specific requirements of your 2 largest customers, the last management review and 2 contingency plans.

  1. 1Is there a current list of each customer's specific requirements, showing where each one is met in your own procedures? Look for: the CSR list or matrix with its revision dates, one requirement traced into a procedure. (4.3.2 Customer-specific requirements)
  2. 2Pick one requirement from a customer's CSR and follow it to the floor: is it done the way your procedure says? Look for: the requirement, the procedure, the record at the station. (4.3.2 Customer-specific requirements)
  3. 3Who can stop shipment or production to fix a quality problem, and do the leads on every shift know it? Look for: the named roles, a shift lead who can say what they would do and who they would call. (5.3.2 Responsibility and authority for product requirements and corrective actions)
  4. 4Are there contingency plans for the key equipment, supplier, utility and labor risks, and have they been tested? Look for: the plans, the date of the last test or exercise, what changed after it. (6.1.2.3 Contingency plans)
  5. 5Did the last management review cover the inputs the automotive standard adds, such as cost of poor quality, customer scorecards and field failures, and set actions? Look for: the minutes, the input data, actions with owners and dates. (9.3.2.1 Management review inputs)

System audit: people and measurement

Sample: 3 operators on stations with special characteristics, 2 internal auditors and 5 gauges named in control plans.

  1. 6Are operators on stations with special characteristics trained on the job, including what a mistake there means for the customer? Look for: training records, the skills matrix, a short talk with one operator. (7.2.2 Competence: on-the-job training)
  2. 7Do the internal auditors meet the competence the plant has set for each audit type, including the core tools and the customers' requirements? Look for: auditor records against the criteria, training on CSRs and core tools. (7.2.3 Internal auditor competency)
  3. 8Is there a measurement system study for each type of gauge named in the control plans, and was action taken where one failed? Look for: gage R&R or attribute studies, their dates, one failed study and what was done. (7.1.5.1.1 Measurement system analysis)
  4. 9Are calibration records complete, and when a gauge was found out of tolerance, was the product it accepted reviewed? Look for: the gauge register, one out-of-tolerance record and its product review. (7.1.5.2.1 Calibration/verification records)
  5. 10When a customer sends a new or changed engineering standard, is it reviewed and brought into production in the time the standard and the customer set? Look for: the log of standards received, review dates, the change in the work instruction. (7.5.3.2.2 Engineering specifications)

System audit: launch, suppliers and change

Sample: the last part launched, 3 suppliers and 2 recent process changes.

  1. 11For the last part launched, do the APQP outputs agree with each other: process flow, PFMEA, control plan and work instructions? Look for: the four documents with matching operation numbers and characteristics. (8.3.5.2 Manufacturing process design output)
  2. 12Are special characteristics marked with the customer's symbols in the drawing, the PFMEA, the control plan and the work instruction? Look for: one special characteristic traced through all four documents. (8.3.3.3 Special characteristics)
  3. 13Was the part approved by the customer before it shipped, and is the approval kept current after changes? Look for: the PPAP submission, the customer's approval, a resubmission after a change. (8.3.4.4 Product approval process)
  4. 14Are suppliers measured on delivered quality, delivery and disruptions to your plant, and do poor performers have a plan? Look for: supplier scorecards, one supplier below target and its actions. (8.4.2.4 Supplier monitoring)
  5. 15Is every process change assessed for risk, verified and, where the customer asks, approved by the customer before it is used? Look for: the change log, the risk review, the customer's approval where needed. (8.5.6.1 Control of changes)

System audit: monitoring, audits and improvement

Sample: the audit program, 3 months of customer scorecards, 2 closed problems and 1 warranty return if there is one.

  1. 16Is the internal audit program set by risk, performance and complaints, and does it cover all processes, activities and shifts? Look for: the program, a frequency changed after a complaint, the shifts covered. (9.2.2.1 Internal audit programme)
  2. 17Are all quality system processes audited within each three-year calendar period, with the customers' requirements sampled in those audits? Look for: the three-year plan, the audits done, CSRs sampled in them. (9.2.2.2 Quality management system audit)
  3. 18Are customer scorecards, delivered part quality, delivery performance and field returns tracked, with action on poor results? Look for: the last 3 months of scorecards, one action from a poor result. (9.1.2.1 Customer satisfaction)
  4. 19Does problem solving cover containment, root cause, corrective action and a check that it worked, in the format the customer asks for, such as an 8D? Look for: 2 closed problems, the containment record, the effectiveness check, the PFMEA and control plan updated. (10.2.3 Problem solving)
  5. 20If you supply warranty parts, are returns analysed, including parts where no fault is found? Look for: the warranty process, one return analysed and its result. N/A if the plant has no warranty parts. (10.2.5 Warranty management systems)

Process audit: set-up, instructions and people

Audit one manufacturing process on every shift it runs and sample the handover between shifts. Bring its PFMEA and control plan.

  1. 21Do the PFMEA and the control plan match how the process runs today, and is the control plan at the station the current revision? Look for: both revisions, recent changes and complaints reflected, one check watched against the plan. (8.5.1.1 Control plan)
  2. 22Are the operator instructions at the station current, readable from the work position and followed in the order shown? Look for: the revision level, the instruction compared with the job you watch. (8.5.1.2 Standardised work: operator instructions and visual standards)
  3. 23Was the set-up verified before the run, with a first-off part checked, and a last-off part kept where the plant uses one? Look for: the set-up sign-off, the first-off record with measured values, the last-off part tagged. (8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups)
  4. 24After the last planned or unplanned stop, was the process checked before production restarted? Look for: the restart record after the most recent stop. (8.5.1.4 Verification after shutdown)
  5. 25Is every operator on this process on this shift trained and signed off for it, cover and temporary staff included? Look for: the skills matrix against the names on the shift, the cover person. (7.2.2 Competence: on-the-job training)

Process audit: controls, error-proofing and equipment

Watch the checks being done, then look at the records for the last week on each shift.

  1. 26Are the special characteristics checked at the control plan frequency, with SPC charts or results kept, and the reaction plan followed when a result is out? Look for: the chart or check sheet, one out-of-control point and what was done. (9.1.1.1 Monitoring and measurement of manufacturing processes)
  2. 27Were the error-proofing devices tested for failure at the frequency in the control plan, on every shift, with a reaction plan for a failed test? Look for: the test record by shift, challenge parts marked and in good condition, the reaction plan. (10.2.4 Error-proofing)
  3. 28Are the gauges at the station the ones the control plan names, identified, in calibration and covered by a measurement study? Look for: gauge IDs at the station against the register. (7.1.5.1.1 Measurement system analysis)
  4. 29Is preventive maintenance on this equipment done on time, with critical spare parts available? Look for: the PM schedule and its status, the spare parts list for this machine. (8.5.1.5 Total productive maintenance)
  5. 30Is the production tooling identified and tracked, with its life and its last repair recorded? Look for: tool ID, tool life or shot count, the last tool repair record. (8.5.1.6 Management of production tooling)

Process audit: product flow, change and the shift handover

Follow the parts from the station to the next operation, and read the last 3 handover sheets.

  1. 31Is nonconforming and suspect product identified and kept apart, with its disposition recorded? Look for: the hold area, tags, the disposition record. (8.7.1.7 Nonconforming product disposition)
  2. 32Where product is reworked, is there an approved instruction, a re-check of the reworked part and a record? Look for: the rework instruction, the rework record, the re-inspection result. (8.7.1.4 Control of reworked product)
  3. 33Is any temporary change to a process control, such as a backup method or a bypassed device, on the approved list, with its time limit and the extra checks it needs? Look for: the list of approved alternative controls, the daily check while it runs. N/A if none was used. (8.5.6.1.1 Temporary change of process controls)
  4. 34Can the parts made here be traced to their material lot, shift and machine, as far as the customer and the risk require? Look for: the label or traveler, the lot record, a trace done in front of you. (8.5.2.1 Identification and traceability)
  5. 35Does the shift handover pass on open problems, containment, changes and equipment status, and does the next shift act on it? Look for: the last 3 handover sheets, one item followed up by the next shift. (9.2.2.3 Manufacturing process audit)

Product audit: parts ready to ship

Sample: 5 parts or boxes picked by the auditor from stock that has passed every check. Use the customer's method where it sets one.

  1. 36Do the sample parts meet every characteristic on the drawing and control plan when the audit measures or tests them, not the line? Look for: measured results against the drawing, the gauges used. (9.2.2.4 Product audit)
  2. 37Is the layout inspection and functional check done at the frequency the control plan sets, with the results on file? Look for: the last layout and functional test report, its date against the plan. (8.6.2 Layout inspection and functional testing)
  3. 38For appearance items, are the evaluation area, lighting, master samples and trained evaluators in place? Look for: the area, the masters and their date, the evaluator's record. N/A if the part has no appearance requirement. (8.6.3 Appearance items)
  4. 39Do the packaging and labels meet the customer's requirements, with the right part number, quantity and traceability on each? Look for: 5 boxes against the packaging specification and the label standard. (8.5.2.1 Identification and traceability)
  5. 40Is stock at the dock rotated first in, first out, kept in its packaging and free from damage? Look for: dates on stock, damaged or open boxes, obsolete stock marked. (8.5.4.1 Preservation)

A filled-in example

Illustrative, not a benchmark

An example (illustrative): a manufacturing process audit of weld cell 3, which MIG welds a seat bracket, on day, afternoon and night shift, plus a product audit of 5 brackets from the dock. These are questions 21 to 40, the same as the Excel example sheet and pages 7 and 8 of the PDF.

The example audit in one picture

  • Conforming: 13 questions
  • Opportunity: 1 question
  • Minor: 3 questions
  • Major: 1 question
  • N/A: 2 questions

Conformance = (conforming + opportunity) ÷ graded

20 questions, 2 N/A

  1. (13 + 1) ÷ 18= 77.8%
  2. Process audit, questions 21 to 35= 78.6%
  3. Product audit, questions 36 to 40= 75%
Conformance77.8%

20 questions on weld cell 3: 13 conforming, 1 opportunity, 3 minor, 1 major and 2 not applicable. Conformance is 13 plus 1, divided by 18, which is 77.8 percent.

The major was on night shift only. An audit of day shift alone would have graded that question conforming.
  • 20 questions, 2 N/A: no temporary change of a process control in the last 3 months, and the bracket has no appearance requirement. So 18 graded.
  • 13 conforming and 1 opportunity: a weld gauge in calibration but kept loose in a drawer with old gauges.
  • 1 major, on night shift only: the part presence sensor on fixture B was taped over, with no challenge test recorded for 3 nights. The cell was stopped, the sensor tested, and the parts from those nights held and checked.
  • 3 minor: night first-off parts signed with no measured values, a day to afternoon handover that left out the parts on hold, and 1 of 5 boxes with no shift code on the label.

Conformance = (13 + 1) ÷ 18 = 77.8%: the process audit 11 ÷ 14 = 78.6%, the product audit 3 ÷ 4 = 75%. Four findings, each with an owner; the major goes to an 8D. An audit of day shift alone would have missed it. Time on the floor: 45 + 45 + 50 minutes on the three shifts and 30 for the product audit, 170 minutes.

Common mistakes

  • Auditing day shift only

    The process audit has to see the process on every shift it runs. Most of what drifts, drifts where leaders and auditors are not: nights, weekends and the handover in between.

  • Reading the PFMEA in the office

    The process audit tests whether the PFMEA and control plan are in use at the station: the checks at their frequency, the error-proofing tested, the reaction plan followed. Start at the machine and work back to the documents.

  • Leaving the customers out

    A plant can meet the standard and still miss what a customer asked for. Fill the customer-specific requirement column before the audit, not after.

  • Using the line's own results for the product audit

    The product audit is a second, independent look. Pick the parts yourself and measure them with the audit's gauges.

  • Treating layered audits as the process audit

    Unless a customer prescribes them as the method, the layered audits do not replace the manufacturing process audit. They are shorter and test a few controls; the process audit tests the whole process against its PFMEA and control plan.

  • Closing a finding when the action is done

    Close it when someone has checked that the action worked. A finding closed early comes back at the next audit, or at the customer.

Download the template

Free to use: print it, copy it and edit it for your team. Enter your name and work email once to download.

Run this template in LeanSuite

Audit management in LeanSuite lets you build, schedule and run any shop floor audit or inspection, from layered process audits to gemba walks, and turn every finding into a tracked action.

See it in a 45-minute demo

FAQ

IATF 16949 internal audit checklist: common questions

  1. The quality management system audit (9.2.2.2), which covers every quality system process with the process approach; the manufacturing process audit (9.2.2.3), which checks each manufacturing process at the station on every shift; and the product audit (9.2.2.4), which checks finished parts against their requirements. The audit program (9.2.2.1) has to cover all three.

  2. In our reading of IATF 16949, every manufacturing process within each three-year calendar period, on every shift it runs, with the shift handover sampled, and more often where risk, complaints or changes call for it. A customer can ask for more, or for its own method. Check your copy of the standard and your customers' requirements.

  3. A manufacturing process audit is a planned, graded audit of one whole process against its PFMEA, control plan and requirements, done by a trained auditor. A layered process audit is a short check of a few high-risk controls, repeated every shift by team leaders and less often by each layer of management. Most automotive plants need both.

  4. A process audit standard from the German automotive industry association, with its own question catalogue and scoring. Some customers ask for it as the method for the manufacturing process audit. This checklist does not reproduce it; if a customer asks for VDA 6.3, use their version.

  5. No. It is a set of questions to run internal audits beside your quality system. Compliance comes from the system itself and is judged by your certification body. The clause numbers follow IATF 16949:2016; the questions are our own words, not the standard's text.

More free templates

All templates
Browse all 254 templates

Can't find the template you need?

Tell us what you're looking for. We'll make it and send it to your inbox, free.

A shift handover sheet, a red tag log, a changeover checklist for one machine: if your team uses it on the floor, ask.

By sending this form you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Pass it on

We want LeanSuite to be the best place on the internet for lean help. If this was useful, send it to someone on your team or in your network who needs it.