Each year, the International Automotive Oversight Bureau (IAOB) analyzes audit data to identify the most common major nonconformities raised during IATF 16949 audits. These recurring findings provide valuable insight into the areas where organizations most often face challenges—and where focused improvements can make the greatest difference.
To help organizations better understand these findings, the IAOB has developed resources covering the Top 5 Major IATF 16949 Nonconformities. These materials are designed to promote consistent understanding across the IATF 16949 community and support continual improvement.
IATF 16949 · IAOB audit data
The five clauses auditors write up most
One card per clause. Each one gives you the finding in a sentence, then the three stages behind it — what the auditor saw, why it happened, and what closed it out.
01
10.2.3
Problem Solving
Problems were closed without ever establishing the root cause or checking that the fix worked.
01What the auditor saw
Inadequate root cause analysis
Ineffective corrective actions
Documentation and change control failures
02Why it happened
Process and procedure gaps
Training and competency
Management oversight
03What closed it out
Procedure and documentation updates
Training and communication
Named responsibilities
02
8.3.5.2
Manufacturing Process Design Output
Process FMEAs and special characteristics were missing from the design outputs, or never carried through into the controls.
01What the auditor saw
Missing or incomplete documentation
Process control non-compliance
Specific process gaps
02Why it happened
APQP process and documentation deficiencies
FMEA-specific issues
Process capability and validation
03What closed it out
Process definition and control
Risk and failure analysis
Documentation and training
03
10.2.1
Nonconformity and Corrective Action
Corrective actions were raised and signed off without evaluating the cause or verifying the result.
01What the auditor saw
Root cause analysis deficiencies
Ineffective corrective action management
Implementation and follow-up gaps
02Why it happened
Procedural and documentation deficiencies
Weak monitoring and execution
Training and competency gaps
03What closed it out
Process documentation and control
Action plan monitoring
Management review and accountability
04
8.5.1.1
Control Plan
Control plans didn't match what happens on the floor, the FMEA, or the change that should have triggered a reissue.
01What the auditor saw
Missing process steps in control plans
Control plan versus actual practice
No alignment with the FMEA
02Why it happened
Unclear documentation and procedures
Change control
Unclear roles and ownership
03What closed it out
Control plan procedure update
Advanced Product Quality Planning
Training and communication
05
7.1.5.1.1
Measurement System Analysis
Measurement system studies weren't run across the equipment in scope, or were run outside the required methods.
01What the auditor saw
Analysis not carried out
Missing study components
Methodological inconsistencies
02Why it happened
Knowledge and training
Procedures and documentation
Execution and responsibility
03What closed it out
Scope expansion
Documentation and record updates
Training and competency
Four of the five come back to the same two things: documentation that doesn't reflect practice, and people who weren't trained or held accountable for it. Only 8.3.5.2 is a genuinely technical failure.
Source: IATF Oversight Office (IAOB) analysis of major nonconformities raised against IATF 16949. Each stage shows the three most frequently cited items. Sub-clause detail is summarised, not quoted from the standard.