I. Desktop Audit as a Preliminary Filter
A desktop audit is conducted before the factory audit. According to industry practice, before the formal visit, the issuing body, scope, and validity period of the ISO 9001/IATF 16949 certificate are verified, and the business license, export records, and certification database are retrieved.
The quality manual, organizational chart, CAPA ledger, and process flow diagram are requested. Certificates can be forged, but databases are difficult to falsify—the desktop audit filters out a batch of shell suppliers.
II.
Video Walkthrough + Sample Evaluation
A two-pronged approach is used: video walkthrough and sample evaluation.
Based on factory audit experience, first conduct a video call to inspect the production line and verify that the workshop matches the photos on the website; then request production line samples, not manually selected engineering samples.
Reputable manufacturers are willing to provide a 10-15 minute WeChat video demonstration of the production site, while trading companies are often vague.
During the sample stage, focus on the First Article Report (FAI) and material certificates.
**III. On-site Audit is Core**
On-site audit is the core of factory audits.
According to the audit guidelines, upon arrival, inspect nine areas: verify the brand, model, and year of equipment; check calibration labels and certificates for measuring instruments (coordinate measuring machine, spectrometer, calipers); observe 5S implementation and visual management; check the isolation and handling of non-conforming products in the quality area; then conduct a traceability exercise—randomly select a finished product from the warehouse and request batch, furnace number, or material certificates;
only factories that can trace the product on the spot are genuine.
**IV. Process Capability is a Hard Indicator**
Process capability and data are hard indicators.
According to quality management standards, the process capability index (Cpk) for critical dimensions must reach 1.33 or higher. SPC control charts, MSA gauge repeatability and reproducibility reports, and calibration records must be executed according to the control plan. IATF 16949 also requires process owner qualification verification for special processes (heat treatment, welding, electroplating).
Data speaks louder than words.
V. Problem Classification and Conclusion
Problem classification and conclusion.
According to the industry scoring model, audit findings are classified into three levels: Critical (critical defects) – a veto; Major (major defects) – conditionally pass with a deadline for rectification; Minor (minor defects) – pass normally but included in the observation items. The scoring results are directly mapped to Approve, Conditionally Approve, and Reject. A factory audit cannot be concluded based on a single item’s “pass”;
it must be based on a comprehensive score across 10 audit domains.
Conclusion
The core of auditing automation component suppliers is a “five-step process + three-level conclusion”: desktop review to verify qualifications, video review to verify authenticity, sample evaluation to verify quality, on-site audit to verify process, and first-article inspection to verify mass production; four aspects of on-site inspection: equipment, measuring tools, traceability, and 5S; Cpk and calibration data to verify process;
and a three-level conclusion: Critical/Major/Minor.
A factory audit is not just a cursory visit, but a reliability assessment of the supplier using a chain of evidence—the more complete the evidence, the lower the risk of choosing the wrong supplier.
