Flowdown Questions

Committed to Quality

AESQ™ standards address problem solving, inspection frequency, measurement systems, PFMEA, and process control.

AESQ Supplier Forum - AS13100 Overview (Flowdown Questions)



Will this standard be flowed down to suppliers who do not supply any physical parts or special processes, but rather provide business process services (e.g., data management, invoice management, records management, software development, etc.)?

There are requirements for Design Only suppliers included in AS13100. For a complete list of suppliers that are in scope for AS13100 then refer to table 1.

How will the requirements of AS13100 flow to suppliers?

By each OEM through the usual contractual arrangements.

Will it be mandatory to flow this down to all sub-tiers?

Yes. Tier 1 organizations are expected to flow it down to their tier 2s, etc. This has always been the requirement for the OEM requirements too but evidence suggests that it has not always been done effectively.

How will these requirements be flowed down by our customers? In the PO?

These requirements will be flowed by each OEM through the usual contractual arrangements.

If the intent is to take the common elements and apply them through AS13100, then why are Primes flowing down revised customer requirements (e.g., GE S-1000), that in this case, added 40 pages of content?

GE has relied on AS13100 common elements as much as possible. There will always be a need for some unique OEM requirements (e.g., IT interfaces), different acceptance threshold values, etc., but the goal of AESQ is to minimize these wherever possible. AS13100 is a major step in this direction, but the journey is not complete yet. For the record, GE did not add 40 pages of unique GE requirements. On January 1, 2023, S-1000 will evolve to less than 35 pages from the pre-AS13100 version of 70 pages.

Do you think all the suppliers should revise their quality manuals now to acknowledge the existence of AS13100 and the use of all the associated forms?

If they want to comply with the OEM requirements then they must update their QMS.

What we struggle with is when Tier 1 or Tier 2 come with manufacturing requirements flown down to distributors which are basically sales oriented people.

Please refer to Table 1 in AS13100 as you will see that there are very few requirements for distributors.

My company supplies product to about half of the engine organizations affiliated with AESQ, but our product lines are mostly not supplied to the engine-specific groups within those companies.  Therefore since we do not directly interact with these engine groups, we’re not sure if we’re going to be receiving updated flow-downs that will require compliance with AS13100.  Is there any guidance that you could provide as to how we can determine the applicability of the enforcement for this new specification for my organization?  We would like to be as proactive as possible (like working to the suggested timelines), but we also don’t want to exert excessive effort and energy complying with requirements that will never be required. 

Many companies will face the same issue i.e. some customers will flow down AS13100 and others will not.

When you look at the requirements of AS13100 some are easy to make ‘customer specific’. For example APQP & PPAP in section B can be switched on for customers who require it and not for others. Similarly with requirements such as Problem Solving using 8D, DPRV training, record retention, Design FMEA, etc.

However there are other requirements where an organisation will find it harder to only apply to certain customers. For example Quality Audit, Human Factors, certification requirements, mandated training, etc.

The expectation is that such requirements are built into the organisations management system, defining how they do business. 

Most of these requirements already exist today and have been flowed down by the engine manufacturers for many years. They represent our shared best practice and we strongly believe that they will add value to any organisation and produce a cost benefit.

The key approach to selling this to an organisation’s leadership is to link the defect prevention approaches of AS13100 to the cost of non quality of the business.