Service feedback & service agreements (IATF only)
Plain-language summary
Information from service must flow back into manufacturing and design (including analysis where the customer requires), and where you have a service agreement with the customer, its centres must meet the agreed requirements.
What the clause is really asking
Ensure a process for communicating service-concern information to manufacturing, engineering and design activities — service failures are design and process data. With customer service agreements: verify the relevant service centres comply.
What auditors look for
Auditors ask how field/service issues reach your FMEA and control plan reviews, sample a recent field concern through the loop, and where service agreements exist, check the verification of service centre compliance.
Typical evidence
Field concern reports flowing to engineering; FMEA updates from service data; service agreement compliance checks.
How to comply — recommendations
Route every field concern through the same intake as customer complaints, with one extra mandatory field: 'FMEA/control plan reviewed?'. The loop, evidenced.
Common nonconformities
Service issues handled commercially with no technical feedback; FMEAs never updated from field data; service agreement obligations unverified.
Related clauses
Builds on ISO 9001 8.5.5; links IATF 10.2.5/10.2.6
Qlause provides interpretive guidance only and is not a substitute for the standard. Refer to your licensed copy of ISO 9001 / IATF 16949 for the authoritative text.