Today we will review the top IATF 16949 Audit Findings of 2025 in the automotive sector. This will also give you guideline to prevent them before your certification/recertification or surveillance audit.
IATF 16949 Audit Findings- Problem Solving Weaknesses
One of the top major nonconformities the auditors came across in 2025 was weak problem-solving process. Root cause analysis carried on symptoms rather than true problem, causing repeat quality and delivery issues. FMEAs and control plans not considered as live documents and were not updated as corrective actions were devised. Missed regular review at specified intervals. Lessons learned not standardized and not shared across the organization and sites.
Why it matters & How to Fix It:
All this leads to 3rd party sort activities, and many organizations spend over $500,000 every year on third-party services. Further customer satisfaction decreases with weak problem-solving process. Below actions will help mitigate the issues from arising again.
- Treat PFMEA and CP as live documents.
- Train teams on 8D, 5-Why, problem solving, and containment standards.
- Make verification and validation part of the process.
- Standardize lesson learn process.
Ineffective Corrective Action System
After weak problem analysis the second major that goes hand in hand with it was ineffective Corrective action.
- Corrective actions were not validated and confirmed.
- Missed submission deadlines and no extension requested.
- Containment actions are not adequate.
- No ownership and responsibility not clearly defined between team members.
- Problem closed without corrective action implemented.
Why it matters & How to Fix It:
Poor corrective action process weakens the Quality Management System. Simultaneously a poor-Quality Management System leads to poor business performance. It leads to high repeat complaints and jeopardizes certification process.
- Make validation and verification part of the corrective action process.
- Eliminate repeat issue by focusing on true problem not the symptom.
- Define responsibilities between team member and define due date.
- Involve cross function team and update everyone on corrective action.
Gap in Control Plan & Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
The most common finding globally reported in 2025 was gap in the control plan process and poor MSA system. Control plans were not aligned with PFMEA. Controls for processes were not in place or were ineffective. Reaction plan column was missing. Process changes were not reflected on CP and operator weak knowledge on the parameters set on the CP. Along with CP issues, Outdated GR&R studies and out of calibrated equipment were found. Process capability data was missing.
Poor Contingency Plan & Supplier Management
The most common finding under this umbrella was missing documented information on contingency plan and were not tested. Poor backup plans for measuring devices, machines, operators, utilities and suppliers. Poor communication plans for emergencies. Many organizations fail to “prove” their contingency plans are effective. Further poor supplier control, and poor monitoring of supplier performance. Escalation rules not in place for poor performance. CSRs not communicated to suppliers and missing supplier development program.
How to Avoid These Findings and Prepare for Your Next Audit
- Define correct controls for process based on risk defined in PFMEA.
- Update PFMEA, Control Plan, and Work Instructions regularly.
- Define reaction plan if controls fail.
- Train team on 8D & Core Tools on CP.
- Calibrate equipment’s based on defined intervals.
- Conduct GR&R study to validate effectiveness of MSA system.
- Conduct process capability on the processes.
- Define and test contingency plan.
- Backup plan should be in place for processes, machines, suppliers, measuring devices, utilities. etc.
- Create robust supplier performance dashboards.
- Implement strong document control and revision discipline.
- Review CSR requirements quarterly.
- Conduct a pre-audit with an external expert.
FAQ Section
Q1: Why do organizations fail IATF 16949 audits?
A1: Organizations fail IATF audits as they consider IATF as a paper requirement not as a strategic tool that aligns their processes and organizations scope together.
Q2: How can I reduce audit findings in my IATF system?
A2: The best approach is strengthening your QMS, follow the standard and have strong controls in place to eliminate repeat issues.
Q3: What are the new focus areas for IATF audits in 2026?
A3: The new revision will come in Sep 2026. Signup for our newsletter to keep track of the new revision.
Q4: What is the cost of IATF consulting in Canada?
A4: Kadmar Consultants provides budget friendly prices that gives significant ROI.
Kadmar Consultants Can Help!
Kadmar Consultants specialize in:
- IATF 16949 Understanding & Internal Auditor Training.
- IATF 16949 Implementation.
- Automotive Core Tools Training (APQP, PPAP, FMEA, MSA, SPC).
- 8D Problem Solving Training.
- Gap Assessments & Pre-Audit Services.
- Supplier Development Programs.
- ISO 9001 & IATF 16949 Integrated Systems.
Our consultants have helped companies across Canada reduce:
Audit findings, Cost of poor quality, Customer complaints, Production downtime, Supplier issue
We’ll review your current challenges and provide a customized roadmap based on your organizations need.
Author: Asma Rashid
Kadmar Consultants helps Canada & America manufacturers achieve ISO 9001 and IATF 16949 certification through consulting, training & audit.