7 Quality Basics in Development

7 Quality Basics in Development
FRASER June 17
th
, 2011
Jean-Michel RENAUDIE
FRASER June 17
th
, 2011
Opening Comments
Introduction
Ken SATO
4
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
One reminder
Please switch off your
mobile phone and
close your laptop
5
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
"Breakthrough Quality Plan" start from Oct.1, 2006
Practical instead of conceptual
Preventive action instead of fire-fighting
FES Quality
( 7 Quality Basics !!
in Production & Development )
Customer
Quality
Breakthrough !!
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
Breakthrough Quality Plan
6
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
2008
0 S/R Alert
15 Customer PPM
I am expecting this plan to give lasting results and
will closely track its implementation by all concerned
in our company.
I am counting on your responsiveness and rigor
The plan does not introduce any
new tools aims to build a
new quality mindset
7
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
From 6 Quality Basics
to 7 Quality Basics in Production
Supplier Partnership
Employee Empowerment
Variability Reduction
Quality
7 Quality Basics
Quality
Wall
Final
Inspection
Self
-Inspection
OK
1st piece
Rework
under Control
Poka
Yoke
Red
Bins
QRCI
Quick Response
Quality Control
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
e
d
W
o
r
k
5
S
Includes Stop at Defect
Includes Temporary Quality Wall
4
2
3
1
5
9
1
0
7
8
6
If not OK
Repair
Scrap
Scrap
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Criteria
OK - NOK sample
+0,2 mm
Go - No go gauge
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Check point By
Deformation Visual
Dimension A Micrometer
Dimension B
Gauge
... ...
... ..
.
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
... ...
Frequency
100%
1/120
100%
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
8
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
Functional Milestones,
Program Steering Committee
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
9
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Mandatory Program Deliverables
Sales
Agreed prototype prices
Outstanding payments Pre-series parts paid
Updated series price with PO Customer Contract Agreed tool & pre-series & series prices
Prototypes paid
Sales
Prototypes paid
Human
Resources
Product support team staffed Program Teams staffed Plant Start-up team planned
Human
Resources
4 44 4 LAUNCH 1 11 1 ACQUISITION 2A 2A 2A 2A DESIGN 3 33 3 PRODUCTION SET-UP 2B 2B 2B 2B DESIGN VERIFICATION
5 Series
PRODUCTION
5 Series
PRODUCTION
Purchasing Supplier PPAP * Expert suppliers contracts signed BOPs, tools, gauges, equipment ordered Designers suppliers contracts signed Purchasing Supplier PPAP * Expert suppliers contracts signed BOPs, tools, gauges, equipment ordered Designers suppliers contracts signed
Design Validation Plan *
Design FMEA *
Product
Engineering
Key characteristics *
Product definition for DV *
Production Validation test results successful *
Initial product concept Product definition freeze*
DVP test results successful
BOPs definition released
Design FMEA Actions implemented
Prototypes approved
Design FMEA *
Product
Engineering
Prototypes approved
Detailed SOW Lessons Learned *
Program
Management
S/R concerns solved (SLI) *
ECM for pre-series & series in place
Program internal contract
(program objectives)
Master schedule *
Single List of Issues in place
ECM for development In place
Single List of Issues managed *
Control of
process &
design
change *
Activities during ramp-up *
Make or Buy finalized (Subcontractors)
Prototype build plan CAR approved Pre-series build plan
Program
Management
Master schedule *
Control of
process &
design
change *
Initial process capability study plan *
Facilities / Footprint specifications
Manufac-
turing
Process definition
Production System definition
EMPT Run @ Rate
Initial supply chain concept
(internal/external MIFD*)
Initial process concept
Prel. Manufacturing footprint
Initial equipment concept
Facilities definition released
Equipment & tooling specs * released
Logistic& Packaging definitions released *
Process FMEA * actions launched Process FMEA
Process capability achieved *
Mass Production Trial Run @ Rate *
Logistic & packaging in place *
Process flow realized *
Production process Instruction *
Process definition released
Manufac-
turing
Process definition
EMPT Run @ Rate
Actual BP Initial Business Plan Actual BP Finance Actual BP Initial Business Plan Actual BP Finance
END OF
PRODUCTION
CUSTOMER
INQUIRY
PROGRAM
AWARD
CUSTOMER
TOOL RELEASE
CUSTOMER
PRODUCTION
PART APPROVAL
START OF
PRODUCTION
END OF
PRODUCTION
CUSTOMER
INQUIRY
PROGRAM
AWARD
CUSTOMER
TOOL RELEASE
CUSTOMER
PRODUCTION
PART APPROVAL
START OF
PRODUCTION
GR 1 GR 2B GR 3
GR 4
CAR Approval
Program
Quote Review
GR 2A Go/No Go
Program
Target Review
GR 1 GR 2B GR 3
GR 4
CAR Approval
Program
Quote Review
GR 2A Go/No Go
Program
Target Review
Quality
Quality Management Plan Quality Target Study * Gauges requirements *
Prototype control plan
Production Control Plan * Pre Production control plan implemented *
Pre Production control plan
Prototype control plan implemented *
Initial Samples Submitted to Customer * I.S. for additional capacity
Quality
V1.0
10
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
PDCA in Program
Plan
Do Check
Action
<Policeman>
Audit
FES Program Audit
Reaction to Audit &
Feedback to standard
Implementation
Excellent Program Plan
KPI - Reporting System
<Teacher>
Standardization & Training (coaching)
7 Quality basics in Dev - FES School
Background: Bad launches come from bad execution of:
Costing,
Engineering key deliverables
Quality deliverables etc
Today Quality responsible in program for:
Training
Audit
Need to audit not
only on Quality
FES Program audit
11
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Objective
Confirm rigor and discipline in programs.
Level of execution must be deep enough
Timing of execution must be respected
System audit for Programs after GR3, GR 2B and GR1 from
each R&D center (Start from 1/2008).
Check evidences : real documents, real processes,
real products
Check organization, timing of implementation, level
of evidence
12
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Scope
Mandatory Program Deliverables & Reporting
Level of completion of the 72 PMS Key Deliverables
Program reporting system
Seven Quality Basics in Development
Capitalization and Transversalization
Key Characteristics
FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis)
Strict Control Plan
Validated Engineering Change
Program QRCI
Functional Milestones, Program Steering Committee and Gate Reviews
Acquisition Process
Target definition with PLM, Acquisition phase staffing, Concept validation,
Costing robustness, Program Quote Review, Program Kick-off meeting with
Core Team staffing, Acquisition debriefing, Operating Margin.
13
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example: results summary
77%
70%
76%
53%
72%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
TOTAL PROG PROD PROC COST
PROCESS
INDICATOR
Its Good level overall.
But, some of deliverables in Product validation are not so good. (For
example, (1).Design FMEA actions were not well implemented
before 2b (2)Results of DVP tests were not formalized before
RO)
14
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example of Bad answer for Program Quote Review
15
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example of Good answer for Program Quote Review
16
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
15 items of "Good & Bad answers on Faurecia
Do you organize internal Program Quote Review with your top
managements before RFQA submission to customer ?
- There is only Price estimation with assumptions
- There is no Description of vehicle & targeted business no Competitor
study, no Customer decision making timeline no Business plan (OI, IRR),
no Risk analysis
- Finally, RFQA submission without top managements approval
Price estimation with assumptions
base-price add. Value VW250 AU353 AU210
expected Target 90,00 120,00 90,00
First BP Sittard
acc. group values
(3,7%SG&A)
120,00 170,00 tbd
long distance JIT price Brussels 107,00 155,80 n.a.
First BP Sittard
acc. group values
(3,7%SG&A)
120,00 170,00 tbd
RFQ First
Offer
Expected
Award
CS
Polo / A3
w 18/07 w 22/07 w 34/07
CS
A1
w 20/07 w 24/07 w 34/07
RFQA submission with top managements approval by clear presentat ion
Risks analysis Risks analysis
will be
competitor on
market position Comments
JCI JCI JCI JCI - CS
- JCI is very aggressive because they
want to cover the lost Golf business
- JCI is current suppli er of VW
Brussels
- Audi requests to keep the current
supplier-structure--> no JCI business
Lear Lear Lear Lear - CS
- no signals for aggressi ve behaviour
due to low volume
Intier Intier Intier Intier - CS
- generally very agressive behaviour
- but not appreciate due to bad R&D
performance and to low volume
Sitech Sitech Sitech Sitech - CS
due to low volume
!
will be
competitor on
Brussels
due to low volume
due to low volume
!
excellent excellent good good average average limited limited
The TOP Risks, if we are awarded
Capacities for additional AU210 project is not part of Faurecia
MTP and target low in TBL
problems in long-distance JIT concept (120km Sittard
Brussels)
Higher requirements on quality than Mitsubishi Colt
Business plan
(OI,IRR)
Audi A3
OEM: Audi AG Market Code: AU353
Current Production (Faurecia)
location: Neuburg (Germany)
SOP: 2004 EOP: 2011
Prod. Volume total: 770.000
Description of vehicule & targeted business
Competitor study
Customer decision making timeline
Targeted business AU353 VW250 AU210 comments
O Complete Seat targeted fromSittardor long distance JIT
O Metal incl. Mechanisms
Front seats PQ35 PQ25 PQ25 COP
Rear seats AU350 PQ25 PQ25 Magna-Intier / Sitech
Turnover 136.180 k
OI 6.918 5,0%
IRR 70,30%
CAPEX 1.361 k
R&D 300 kcash payment
Tooling 200 k cash payment
Launch cost 943 k
Turnover 136.180 k
OI 6.918 5,0%
IRR 70,30%
CAPEX 1.361 k
Launch cost 943 k
PMS Portal
Good Answer for Program Quote Review
Bad Asnwer for Program Quote review
- There is only Price estimation with assumptions
- There is no Description of vehicle & targeted business no Competitor
study, no Customer decision making timeline no Business plan (OI, IRR),
no Risk analysis
- Finally, RFQA submission without top managements approval
First BP Sittard
acc. group values
(3,7%SG&A)
120,00 170,00 tbd
First BP Sittard
acc. group values
(3,7%SG&A)
120,00 170,00 tbd
RFQ First
Offer
Expected
Award
CS
Polo / A3
w 18/07 w 22/07 w 34/07
CS
A1
w 20/07 w 24/07 w 34/07
RFQA submission with top managements approval by clear presentat ion
Risks analysis Risks analysis
will be
competitor on
Brussels
due to low volume
due to low volume
!
will be
competitor on
Brussels
due to low volume
due to low volume
!
excellent excellent good good average average limited limited
The TOP Risks, if we are awarded
Capacities for additional AU210 project is not part of Faurecia
MTP and target low in TBL
problems in long-distance JIT concept (120km Sittard
Brussels)
Higher requirements on quality than Mitsubishi Colt
Business plan
(OI,IRR)
Audi A3
OEM: Audi AG Market Code: AU353
Current Production (Faurecia)
location: Neuburg (Germany)
SOP: 2004 EOP: 2011
Prod. Volume total: 770.000
Description of vehicule & targeted business
Competitor study
Customer decision making timeline
Targeted business AU353 VW250 AU210 comments
O Complete Seat targeted fromSittardor long distance JIT
O Metal incl. Mechanisms
Front seats PQ35 PQ25 PQ25 COP
Rear seats AU350 PQ25 PQ25 Magna-Intier / Sitech
Turnover 136.180 k
OI 6.918 5,0%
IRR 70,30%
CAPEX 1.361 k
Launch cost 943 k
Turnover 136.180 k
OI 6.918 5,0%
IRR 70,30%
CAPEX 1.361 k
Launch cost 943 k
PMS Portal
Good Answer for Program Quote Review
Bad Answer for Program Quote review
Intranet
Intranet through PMS Portal Good&Bad examples
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Results (Image)
Result Indicators
better
b
e
t
t
e
r
4
1
2
3
b c
A: Excellent
B: Satisfactory
C: Marginal ok
D: Not ok
d
0% 60% 70% 80%
0%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Program Z
X
Program Y
X
100%
a
FR1t
Red Alert S/R
Warranty
PPM
Customer Quality indicators
Misdeliveries
IRR
Operating Income
Program Management
Product Validation
Process validation
Cost Management
Process Indicators
(Checked by FES program audit)
18
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
5 Mandatory Rules added to the 15 existing MRs
19
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
5 Mandatory Rules added to the 15 existing MRs
20
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Machine Evaluation
Form
21
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
2. 2011 Plan
22
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Overall 2011 Plan
0
20
40
60
80
100
GR1 GR2 GR3
Toledo
System audits
0
20
40
60
80
100
GR1 GR2 GR3
Mru
0
20
40
60
80
100
GR1 GR2 GR3
Brieres
0
20
40
60
80
100
GR1 GR2 GR3
Shangha
3 Programs after GR3, GR2b and GR1
2 days per site => 93 programs
23
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
2011 plan: R&D centers involved
Sites
Jan : Shangha (S), Peine-Hagenbach
Feb: Stadthagen, Neuburg, Bavans
March: Mru, Shangha(FIS), Brieres
April: Columbus, Auburn hills, Troy
May: Augsburg, Audincourt, Gamersheim-Weissenburg
Jun: Neuburg, Mouzon, Stadthagen
Jul : Brieres, Peine-Hagenbach
Sep: Bavans, Mru, Limeira
Oct: Quatro-Barras, Diadema, Augsburg, Audincourt,
Gamersheim-Weissenburg
Nov: Troy, Columbus, Auburn Hills, Stadthagen, Neuburg
Dec: Mouzon
24
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
2010 Certified Auditors
Netwk PG Name Certified
SATO Kiichiro Yes
SOULA Paul-Louis Yes
FAS YGOUT Jacques
FIS BROGNIART Eric
CANIVAL J. Sebastien
FECT MAJCHROWICZ Christian 1
FAE ROTHAN Marie-Noelle 2
KLINGAUF Lutz
KUSIAK Jacek
THURET Gauthier
GIELATA Pawel
MESNARD Pierre Yes
KWIATKOWSKI Frank Yes
LACOUX Philippe 1
BECKER Rolf 1
MANSKE Carsten
FECT REBOURS Olivier 1
JACQUOT Eric Yes
FAE PATA Martial
PMS
Program
Quality
FAS
FIS
Group
Legend:
1: Only for GR1
2: For GR1 and 2
Netwk PG Name Certified
FAS DUDDLES Mark Yes
KERSUZAN Olivier
HAWLEY Brian
OBERHAUS Serena
HACK Thomas
MURRAY Todd 2
FIS OLIVEIRA Clodoaldo
FAS VILLARINHO Elessandra
FECT
FAS-FIS LI Li
LEE YW
GAO FENG Eva
China
FECT
FIS
FECT
Brazil
US
25
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Agenda
7:45 Welcoming coffee
8:00 Opening comments J.M. Renaudie
8:20 Introduction K.Sato
8:35 Capitalization & Tranversalization K.Sato
9:00 Key Characteristics & Strict Control Plans V.Garcia Parra
10:10 FMEA PL.Soula
11:10 Break
11:25 Validated Engineering Changes E.Jacquot
12:05 Lunch
12:45 Program QRCI J.Burke
15:45 Break
16:00 Functional Milestones & Gate Reviews PL.Soula
16:55 Conclusion K.Sato
17:00 End
26
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
Lets start!
Capitalization & Transversalization
Ken SATO
7 Quality Basics in 7 Quality Basics in 7 Quality Basics in 7 Quality Basics in Development Development Development Development
28
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
29
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Examples
30
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
- Mistake the connection of
harness
- Risk the immobility of
the vehicle due to the
problem of injection
pump
Check similar problem
of all harness
- Same size of terminals
- Same color of harness
Terminal (A) Bad
Harness (2.5mm)
Harness (0.5mm)
Same
size
Terminal (B)
Same
color
Terminal (A)
OK
Terminal (B)
Harness (0.5mm)
Harness (2.5mm)
2.1 Example (Blockage 1.1)
31
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Car maker Uni t Harness
T yp e of p ro bl em Cou ntermeasure Date
1 2 3 4 5 6
a OK OK OK Bad OK OK
A b Bad
c Bad
R ENAUL T d OK
B ... ... ... ...
C ... ... ... ...
... ... ... ... ... ...
- Capitalization : Change Design Standard
- Transversalization : Apply all same products (programs, plants)
Ask to check, not only exact same problem, but also similar potential risk
- Found 11 exact same problems & 45 similar problems and took
countermeasure
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
= OK
= Bad
Mistake of parts drawing,
after design change
Heater of seat doesnt work
properly
No heat
Over heat
Standardize the validation
process after design change
SEAT
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Design Review by
past quality concerns
Supplier
Design
Change
Validation
Parts
design
Design Validation
for
the trial parts
Production Validation
for
Mass production
OK OK OK
Check
Renault
ANPQP
Design
change
Request
Parts submission
warrant
Good
parts
delivery
Not OK
- Capitalization : Validation Process Standard for Design Change
- Transversalization : Apply to all programs (products, plants)
34
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Capitalization
&
Transversalization
35
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
2. Program Quality 2. Program Quality
Acquisition Design Validation Production
1. 1. Group Quality Group Quality
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

S
y
s
t
e
m

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

S
y
s
t
e
m

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

S
y
s
t
e
m

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
1 1- -A A 1 1- -B B
T
o
o
l
s
T
o
o
l
s
T
o
o
l
s
2 2- -D D Program Management System
Program Management System Program Management System
2 2- -B B
Process Engineering Manual
Process Process Engineering Engineering Manual Manual
2 2- -C C
Supplier Management System
Supplier Supplier Management System Management System
2 2- -A A
Design Standard
Design Standard Design Standard
3. Customer Quality 3. Customer Quality
Customer Quality Standard
Customer Quality Standard Customer Quality Standard
3 3- -A A
Customer PPM Data base (8D)
Customer PPM Data base (8D) Customer PPM Data base (8D) 3 3- -B B
Turning PDCA for Capitalization & Turning PDCA for Capitalization & Transversalization Transversalization
S & R Alert / Warranty Data base (8D)
S & R Alert / Warranty Data base (8D) S & R Alert / Warranty Data base (8D) 3 3- -C C
(
L
e
s
s
o
n
s
L
e
a
r
n
e
d
)
( (
L
e
s
s
o
n
s
L
e
s
s
o
n
s
L
e
a
r
n
e
d
L
e
a
r
n
e
d
) )
( (Lessons Lessons Learned Learned ) )
Lessons Lessons Learned Learned is source of Standards is source of Standards
> >Each Each function function department department is is accountable accountable of of Lessons Lessons Learned Learned in in its its respective area respective area
36
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
> Access through Faurecia intranet
Group Intranet Homepage -> Quality ->
8D S&R Logistics -> FAU-F-LSG-0230
Lessons Learned Template is the last
sheet of standard 8D
In 60 working
days
D8. Lessons learned
_ D7. Effectiveness of action plan
In 10 working
days
D6. Countermeasure to non
detection and non conformance
_ D5. Root cause of non
conformance
_ D4. Root cause of non detection
In 1 day D3. Containment
_ D2. Risk on similar products and
processes
_ D1. Description & Sketch
8D problemsolving report for Quality
8D and Lessons learned
37
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Lessons Learned: Practice
<4 Key points for Before/After>
1).Need picture, drawing or photo
2).Need quantitative value
3).<After> needs to prevent same or similar
problembeforehand
4).Need to understand easily even by your
wife, husband (or partner)
All BGs use the Spider System
under names of LOLA,
I-Know & Knowledge Mgt
38
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Lessons Learned: 2 examples
08/02/2006
BG/Div/Site: Detection Logistics
UAP/Line: Occurrence Internal
Author : Management Suppliers
What happened?
Plant:
Division:
BG's/Group:
Plant Geiselhring
SMPG / Frames / Plant Geiselhring
How has it been detected?
Potential Applicability
WHAT WE LEARNED
BEFORE AFTER
FACTOR
CONTROL POINT
(What to do?, how?, when?, who?)
ECE-R14 test
UAP 1 AU 716 2nd row
ECE-R14 test on rear seat 2nd row high variante NOK on fixed
SDS Validation Stadthagen and Design Engineering
Jan 24th 06
Faurecia Stadthagen / Validation
Relevant factors of ECE-R14 test
what: SDS Validation Stadthagen
how: ECE-R14 test
when: see crash-test schedule
who: SDS Validation Stadthagen
result crash test (COP)
LESSON LEARNED SHEET
SMPG /Frames-Div. / Geiselhring T
y
p
e
Application date :
UAP 1 / AU 716
Willibald Dimpfl
STANDARD / REACTION RULES
1 part
How many ?
Buckling of Boomerang door- and tunnelside
All materials inside drawing specifications
Materials in N.O.K validation ca. 10%-15% weaker
Seat is on the borderline between dynamic and static requirements
-
Parameters of materials are changing
-
Boomerang must absorb the energy in crash test
-
DIN allowed these changes

Boomerang must be weak to fullfill the dynamic specification
Who has detected it ?
Where has it been detected ?
WHAT IS THE CAUSE? WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM? (5W + 2H)
Why it is a problem?
When did it happen ?
The side members (bumerang) were deformed under laod
and so that horizontal displacement of the H-point was not
meeting specification
without additional wire
ET
4448124 A
ZSB
4448718 A
with additional wire
8.05.2006
Author : Management Suppliers
What happened?
Plant:
Division:
BG's/Group:
Aplicable
N/A
N/A
Following NOK procedure countinously
NOK procedure audit for every employee
Every 3 months
Done by Quality Inspector
Confirmed in Training Records
"Confirm'"is when bad part is proceed by
operator according NOK procedure
"Not Confirm" is when it is not proceed
acurately
Potential Applicability
Workstation could have been reset by conventional key by
anyone who copied it.
Bucket position sensor allowes to start process even when
was out of order
Possible uncontrolled unscrew operation (quick rework)
Workstation can be reset only by electronic key which cannot be
copied without controll.
Bucket position sensor allowes to start process only when position
OK.
Unscrew operation not possible. This function is blocked in
screwdriver.
WHAT WE LEARNED
FACTOR
CONTROL POINT
(What to do?, how?, when?, who?)
STANDARD / REACTION RULES
How many ?
1 piece
BEFORE AFTER
Where has it been detected ?
At Customer site
How has it been detected?
Visually
WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM? (5W + 2H) WHAT IS THE CAUSE?
Sensors NOK, Uncontrolled resetting
Gap between side member and crossmember
Why it is a problem?
Wrong position of parts
When did it happen ?
4.11.2005
Who has detected it ?
Customer JCI Geel
SMPG, Wabrzych Frames T
y
p
e Wojciech Mazgis
Wojciech Mazgis
Application date :
39
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
FAS
40
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
FIS
41
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
7 Quality basics in Development Evaluation form
NAME :_____________________________Session:_____________________________________
1 2 3 4
Introduction
Capitalization &
Transversalisation
Key Characteristics
FMEA
Strict control plans
Program QRQC
Validated Engineering
Changes
Functional milestones
& Progr Steering Com
& Gate Reviews
How to accelerate
Conclusion
Rating: 1 = Poor 2=Average 3=Good 4= Excellent
General Appraisal 1 2 3 4 Comments:
Value added of
the module Comments
Evaluation Form
to fill in
Key Characteristics &
Strict Control Plans
Victor GARCIA PARRA
43
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
44
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Agenda
How to manage Key characteristics 20 mn
How to build a Control Plan 20 mn
Workshop 25 mn
Debriefing 5mn
45
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Xy
1 11 1
Aa Bb Cc Dd
Slide
Sub-Assy
Critical dimension X = S/R =
Which dimension is critical as well? => A, B, C, D or All ?
1 11 1
Introduction
46
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Xy
1 11 1
Aa Bb Cc Dd
Assy
Objective: determine which dimensions are critical and which have
to be kept under control!
Use Tolerance Chain Management (TCM)
For an appropriate answer => apply Key Characteristics Management:
Introduction
47
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Reality is more complex
Introduction
48
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Transform key customers requirements into a
manageable list of key characteristics
Drive focus on priorities during product & process
development
Allow early warning for non quality due to
capabilities not met on customers priorities
Key characteristics management is a process which
contributes to build an efficient control plan
Objectives
Aa Bb Cc Dd
49
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Understand interactions between product and
process characteristics.
Know guidelines to minimize the initial control size.
Implement 3 step process to define & monitor Key
Characteristics.
How to manage Key Characteristics
50
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Characteristics.
51
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Characteristics
Product
Characteristics
Process
Characteristics
Need to be controlled
to ensure minimized
variation of product
characteristics
* Key Process Characteristics = Key Control Characteristics / KCC
Product & Process Characteristics
Key Product
Characteristics
KPC KPC KPC KPC
Product Product Product Product
Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic
which affects which affects which affects which affects
2 1
Non-Key
Product
Characteristics
Key Control *
Characteristics
KCC
Non-Key Control
Characteristics
Process Process Process Process
Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic Characteristic
which affects which affects which affects which affects
2 1
52
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Measure Environment
Method Material Manpower
Machine
KCC
KCC
KCC
KCC
KCC
KCC
KCC
KCC KCC
EFFECT EFFECT EFFECT EFFECT CAUSE CAUSE CAUSE CAUSE
KPC
Interactions between KPC & KCCs
Many KCCs factors can affect a KPC
=> e.g. changes in material can affect the KPC
Once KCCs are defined and in place, KPC checks may be
reduced and performed during design or production validation
Ongoing control of KPC is required if KCCs are not determined Control of KCCs will ensure that the variation of the related
KPC is minimized
53
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
EFFECT EFFECT EFFECT EFFECT CAUSE CAUSE CAUSE CAUSE
Measure Environment
Machine
KPC
H - Point
Humidity
Cushion foam
density
Suspension
Deflection
Inspection
measurement
Qualified
operator
Training
Conditioning
Example : H-Point / Seat
D
Ch
S
G
H
M
P
C
E
V
Y
Metrology
hard &
software
Mannequin
Test Protocol
54
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Characteristics.
55
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
PMS
Initial
Control
Size
Verification Pre-Series/
Series Production
Design
Series
Control
Size
KCC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KCC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KCC
KCC
KCC
KPC
KPC KCC KCC KCC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
The series control size of KPC can be reduced or eliminated along the
development phases as following:
1. KPC which is validated and fulfill the requirements in DV & PV (e.g. ECE,
FMVSS, etc) can be reduced to zero or few numbers of the Continuous
Compliance Testing Requirements
2. KPC which can be controlled automatically through its KCC because
Its process is stable (process variation is under controlled)
Poka-Yoke is in place
3. KPC which needs to be controlled regularly because there is no related
KCC or Poka-Yoke in place. The control size has to be defined
accordingly.
Control of Process Characteristics ( KCC) will ensure that the
variation of the Product Characteristics is minimized
Non Conformity Cost = ppm x called
volume
Customers
called volume
Initial
Control
Size
PMS
Verification Pre-Series/
Series Production
Design
Series
Control
Size
KCC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KCC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KCC
KCC
KCC
KPC
KPC KCC KCC KCC
KPC
KPC
KPC
KPC
Guidelines to minimize control size
56
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Characteristics.
57
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d

Customer
Inquiry

Program
award
Customer
tool release
Customer
production
part approval
SOP
GR 3 GR 3 GR 3 GR 3

GR 2 GR 2 GR 2 GR 2

INVESTMENT
APPROVAL

GR 4 GR 4 GR 4 GR 4

GR 1 GR 1 GR 1 GR 1

GO / NO GO QUOTATION PROGRAM
DECISION CONFIRMATION

4 4 4 4 5 55 5 3 3 3 3 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 1 11 1
Management decisions

Max 2 Months
Min 3 Months Max 6 Months
SERIES SERIES SERIES SERIES
PRODUCTION PRODUCTION PRODUCTION PRODUCTION
PRODUCTION SET- UP
& PRE-SERIES
PRODUCT & PROCESS PRODUCT & PROCESS PRODUCT & PROCESS PRODUCT & PROCESS
DESIGN & DEVELOPMEN DESIGN & DEVELOPMEN DESIGN & DEVELOPMEN DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT TT T

PROPOSAL PROPOSAL PROPOSAL PROPOSAL
LAUNCH

3 step process
Non-KPCs
FIT
FUNCTION
DRAWINGS
KPC KPC KPC KPC
PRODUCT CHARACTERISTICS
SPECS
R
S
Step1 : Designate KPCs
KPCs list
Cust. requirements (CtC)
Warranty data
Suppliers concerns
Control Plans
Process Flow Diagram
Record KPCs
Record KCCs
INPUT
OUTPUT
Responsible: R&D Engineer
Support: Program/Acquisition Manager, PQL, Buyer,
Supplier, Quality, Sales, Product Manager
Recommended Tools: FA, D-FMEA, TCM, FEA
C.t.C = Critical to customer lists, TCM = Tolerance Chain Management, FEA = Finite Element Analysis
58
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d

Customer
Inquiry

Program
award
Customer
tool release
Customer
production
part approval
SOP
GR 3 GR 3 GR 3 GR 3

GR 2 GR 2 GR 2 GR 2

INVESTMENT
APPROVAL

GR 4 GR 4 GR 4 GR 4

GR 1 GR 1 GR 1 GR 1


4 4 4 4 5 55 5 3 3 3 3 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 1 11 1

Max 2 Months
PRODUCTION SET- UP
& PRE-SERIES

LAUNCH
DoE = Design of Experiment
3 step process
Non-KPCs
FIT
FUNCTION
DRAWINGS
KPC KPC KPC KPC
SPECS
R
S
PROCESS CONTROL PLAN
CONTROL KCC KPC
KP
C
KCC
KCC KCC
KCC
Cause
Effect
Step2 : Monitor KPCs,KCCs
KCC
KCC
S/R list
Fit & Function list
Product Drawings
Industrial Drawings
Product Specs.
Control Plans
Process Flow
Diagram
Record KPCs
Record KCCs
Recommended Tools: P-FMEA, Process Flow Diagram, Control Plan, DoE,
Cause-Effect Diagram, Pareto Analysis, Capability Study
Responsible : PQL
Support : Program Manager, Supplier Quality, Validation Engineer, Proto
Lab, Plant Quality, R&D, Process Pilot, Plant Launch team (Launch Mgr.)
Input
Output
59
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d

Customer
Inquiry

Program
award
Customer
tool release
Customer
production
part approval
SOP
GR 3 GR 3 GR 3 GR 3

GR 2 GR 2 GR 2 GR 2

INVESTMENT
APPROVAL

GR 4 GR 4 GR 4 GR 4

GR 1 GR 1 GR 1 GR 1


4 4 4 4 5 55 5 3 3 3 3 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 1 11 1

Max 2 Months
PRODUCTION SET- UP
& PRE-SERIES

LAUNCH

Action steps along PMS
Non-KPCs
FIT
FUNCTION
DRAWINGS
KPC KPC KPC KPC
SPECS
R
S
Reduction of Variation
VARIABLES CONTROL
CHART
KCC KCC KCC KCC
Initial
CP
Series
KPC
KCC
KCC
KCC KPC
KPC
Step3 : Improve KPCs,KCCs
controls
PROCESS CONTROL PLAN
CONTROL KCC KPC
KP
C
KCC
KCC KCC
KCC
Cause
Effect
Step2 : Plan & Apply control
system KPCs,KCCs
KCC
KCC
1
st
:Designate KPCs during the ph.1 & 2
- Design team collects input data/Lessons learned
of relevant characteristics, e.g. customer KPC list,
Spec.,
C.t.C, Warranty, supplier concerns,
- Define KPCs, Non-KPCs of designed product
- The respective program team members (R&D, PQL,
Buyer, )
identify the S/R or Fit/Function
2
nd
:Plan & Apply control systems KPCs/KCCs during the ph. 2 & 3
- Each KPCs related KCCs are determined (shown in cause-effect
diagram)
- Planning ways to control KCCs or KPCs if no related KCCs are
identified
- Record the tests results (dimension, functional, )
3
rd
:Improve KCCs controls during the ph. 3&4 (&5)
- Planning methods for reducing the
variation within the targeted value
- Monitoring the results
- Maintain/improve control plan size &
frequency

Customer
Inquiry

Program
award
Customer
tool release
Customer
production
part approval
SOP
GR 3 GR 3 GR 3 GR 3

GR 2 GR 2 GR 2 GR 2

INVESTMENT
APPROVAL

GR 4 GR 4 GR 4 GR 4

GR 1 GR 1 GR 1 GR 1


4 4 4 4 5 55 5 3 3 3 3 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 2 a&b 1 11 1

Max 2 Months
PRODUCTION SET- UP
& PRE-SERIES

LAUNCH

Non-KPCs
FIT
FUNCTION
DRAWINGS
KPC KPC KPC KPC
SPECS
R
S
PROCESS CONTROL
PLAN
CONTRO
L
KC
C
KP
C
KP
C
KCC
KCC KCC
KCC
Caus
e
Effect
Step2 : Monitor KPCs,KCCs
KCC
KCC
Control Plans
Process Flow
Diagram
Record KPCs
Record KCCs
Instructions
Control records
Responsible : Plant Launch Team Leader (Launch Manager)
Support : Program Manager, Plant Manager, PQL, Supplier Quality, Plant Quality, Process Pilot
Recommended Tools: DoE, SPC, DVP&R, P-FMEA, Control Plan, QRCI, QSE, R@R
DoE = Design of Experiment, SPC = Statistical Process Control, DVP&R = Design Verification Plan & Report,
QRCI = Quick Reaction Quality Control, R@R = Run at Rate
INPUT
OUTPUT
Reduction of Variation
VARIABLES CONTROL
CHART
KCC KCC KCC KCC
Initial
CP
Series
KPC
KCC
KCC
KCC KPC
KPC
Step3 : Improve KPCs,KCCs
controls
60
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Messages: Key Characteristics:
Improves better understanding of customer
requirements
Helps to focus on product & process priorities to
reduce & permits control size reduction
Allows early warning on capabilities not met &
prevents S/R issues in the field & customer
recalls
Can ensure robust designs
Is a prerequisite to define efficient control plans
61
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
62
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Agenda
How to manage Key characteristics 20 mn
How to build a Control Plan 20 mn
Workshop 25 mn
Debriefing 5mn
63
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Introduction: Session Objectives
Ensure a Global Understanding of Control Plans
Improve the Content and Execution of Control
Plans
Clarify the Contribution of each Function
Be aware of incurred risks if not properly deployed
and applied
64
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Bad Control Plan can kill People!
Renault Vel Satis Renault Vel Satis Renault Vel Satis Renault Vel Satis
Red alert NOK COP test
Field campaign
Aug/2003:
16 cars NOK/400 in the
field.
Root Root Root Root cause cause cause cause
1. Why: IP insert broken
2. Why: Material brittel
3. Why: NOK glass fiber and PU rate
4. Why: Not checked at OK first part
5. Why: Not a KPC (absent in drawing & control plan)
65
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Introduction: Control Plan Objectives
Protect Internal & External Customers
(Safety / Fit & Finish / Function)
Efficiently ensure Product Conformity in spite
of Supplier and Process Variability,
Define Reaction Rules in case of deviations
Reduce Variability
66
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Written Description of Activities for Process Controlling Written Description of Activities for Process Controlling Written Description of Activities for Process Controlling Written Description of Activities for Process Controlling
List of Planned Tasks to be applied by Defined Responsible Peopl List of Planned Tasks to be applied by Defined Responsible Peopl List of Planned Tasks to be applied by Defined Responsible Peopl List of Planned Tasks to be applied by Defined Responsible People e e e
(Operators, GAP Leaders, Maintenance, Quality, Lab (Operators, GAP Leaders, Maintenance, Quality, Lab (Operators, GAP Leaders, Maintenance, Quality, Lab (Operators, GAP Leaders, Maintenance, Quality, Lab ) to ensure Product ) to ensure Product ) to ensure Product ) to ensure Product
Conformity Conformity Conformity Conformity
=> Who does what, when, where and why ? => Who does what, when, where and why ? => Who does what, when, where and why ? => Who does what, when, where and why ?
Control Plan lists all Process Parameters and Product Characteri Control Plan lists all Process Parameters and Product Characteri Control Plan lists all Process Parameters and Product Characteri Control Plan lists all Process Parameters and Product Characteristics stics stics stics
that require Specific Quality Actions that require Specific Quality Actions that require Specific Quality Actions that require Specific Quality Actions
3 levels exist according to the Programs Phases 3 levels exist according to the Programs Phases 3 levels exist according to the Programs Phases 3 levels exist according to the Programs Phases
Introduction: Control Plan Definition
Prototype
Control
Plan
Pre-
Production
Control Plan
Production
Control
Plan
5
PRODUCTION
4
LAUNCH
GR4
GR3
1
ACQUISITION
2A
DESIGN
2B
DESIGN
VERIFICATION
3
PRODUCTION
SET-UP
GR1 GR2B GR2A
67
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Prototype Control Plan Layout
0p 1 0p 2
Suppliers
-100% Visual Inspection & Measurement
of Key Characteristics @ Supplier &
Faurecia Locations
Prototype Phases
PT
100% KC
Measurement
100%
Visual Inspection
100% Visual Inspection
100% Measurement on
Key Characteristics
0p 3
Customer
Internal &
External
Customer
Satisfaction
Prototype Shop
-Complete Design Validation Plan
-Initiate Production Validation Plan
68
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Pre-Production Control Plan Layout
PT
Target: achieve 15 Ppm &
100% Efficiency @ SOP
0p 1
0p 2 0p 3
Final
Inspection
Supplier
-Quality Wall @ Supplier & Faurecia
Locations
Sorting of BOP
on selected Key
Characteristics
Quality Wall
Quality Wall
Sorting of
Finished Goods
on selected Key
Characteristics
Incoming
Goods
Inspection
Manufacturing Plant
Customer
Internal &
External
Customer
Satisfaction
No Non-Conformity on Critical Characteristics
allowed on Saleable Cars
S
R
-Incoming Goods Inspection
- Higher Frequency & Sampling Size on
Key Characteristics Monitoring
- Initiate SPC on Key Characteristics
- Complete Production Validation Plan
69
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Production Control Plan Layout
Final
Inspection
0p 1 0p 2 0p 3
-Adjust Frequency & Sampling Size on
Key Characteristics monitoring
according to Product & Process
Variability
-Drive Continuous Improvement through
SPC on Key Characteristics
-Product Audit
-Lessons Learned to Programs
Target: achieve 15 Ppm &
100% Efficiency @ SOP
Supplier
BOP
delivered in
Self-Certification
Status
Manufacturing Plant
Customer
Internal &
External
Customer
Satisfaction
70
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Process
is stable
Could be checked by sampling
with basic rules:
Need 100% check for
Key Control Characteristics
<Rule 1> : Suspected lot must be checked
100% with traceability
OK OK OK
OK OK NOK
OK OK OK
Time
OK Lot
Suspected
Lot
100% check
Yes
No
<Rule 2> : SPC control with action rule
UPR limit
Action limit
Nominal
Action limit
LWR limit
X
X X
X
ACTION !!
-Clear decision rules
How to apply Control Plan ?
(Sample Check)
Natural Process Limits
Natural Process Limits
71
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Parts name (process : final check)
N Check point By Frequency Criteria If not OK
1 Deformation Visual 100% OK - NOK sample Repair
2 Dimension A Micro meter 1/120 + 0,2 mm Scrap
3 Dimension B Gauge 100% Go - No go gauge Scrap
4 ... ... ... ... ...
5 ... ... ... ... ...
6 ... ... ... ... ...
7 ... ... ... ... ...
8 ... ... ... ... ...
9 ... ... ... ... ...
10 ... ... ... ... ...
4
2
3
1
5
9
10
7
8
6
Maxi 10 Points to be Checked per Work Station
How to apply Control Plan ? (Instructions Sheet)
Pictures or Schemes
to position the Criteria
Clear Decision Rules No Subjective
Criteria
72
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Control Plan Good Practices
Pre-Production CP
Production CP
Reaction Rules
defined
Higher Sampling
Size
Key Characteristics
defined with
Nominal + Tolerances
73
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Responsibilities
Plant Manager Plant Manager Plant Manager Plant Manager
Program Manufacturing Leader Program Manufacturing Leader Program Manufacturing Leader Program Manufacturing Leader
+ Plant Quality Manager + Plant Quality Manager + Plant Quality Manager + Plant Quality Manager
Production Control Production Control Production Control Production Control
Plan Plan Plan Plan
Program Manager Program Manager Program Manager Program Manager
Plant Manager Plant Manager Plant Manager Plant Manager
Program Manufacturing Program Manufacturing Program Manufacturing Program Manufacturing
Leader+ Program Quality Leader+ Program Quality Leader+ Program Quality Leader+ Program Quality
Leader + Leader + Leader + Leader +
Plant Quality Manager Plant Quality Manager Plant Quality Manager Plant Quality Manager
Pre Pre Pre Pre- -- -Production Production Production Production
Control Control Control Control
Plan Plan Plan Plan
Program Manager Program Manager Program Manager Program Manager
Product Development Leader Product Development Leader Product Development Leader Product Development Leader
+ Program Quality Leader + Program Quality Leader + Program Quality Leader + Program Quality Leader
Prototype Control Prototype Control Prototype Control Prototype Control
Plan Plan Plan Plan
Validator Validator Validator Validator Actor Actor Actor Actor
Program Managers and Plant Managers are responsible
for the strict application of the Control Plans
Control Plan is the Safety Belt to protect us about
Past Quality Concerns
74
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
How to write a control plan ?
General Information
Process / Tools
Description
KPC KCC
To be Monitored
Checking / Monitoring
Methods
Reaction Rules
Product characteristics only:
-dimension,
-appearance,
-function,
-part number
-physical & chemical
properties (temperature, fiber
glass content, porosity,
crack, adhesion, etc.)
Process parameters only:
-temperature
-pressure
-velocity
-torque
-force
-handling
-positioning
-labeling
-scanning
-packaging
-etc.
Poka-yoke identification nber
75
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Built production control plan related to Built production control plan related to Built production control plan related to Built production control plan related to
shoot channel 8 nuts screwing shoot channel 8 nuts screwing shoot channel 8 nuts screwing shoot channel 8 nuts screwing
operation : operation : operation : operation :
Documents provided: Documents provided: Documents provided: Documents provided:
Drawing Drawing Drawing Drawing
KPC/KCC Ishikawa diagram KPC/KCC Ishikawa diagram KPC/KCC Ishikawa diagram KPC/KCC Ishikawa diagram
DFMEA/PFMEA DFMEA/PFMEA DFMEA/PFMEA DFMEA/PFMEA
SR fastening mandatory points SR fastening mandatory points SR fastening mandatory points SR fastening mandatory points
Blank control plan format Blank control plan format Blank control plan format Blank control plan format
Share by table conclusions Share by table conclusions Share by table conclusions Share by table conclusions
Workshop : Practical exemple (30)
76
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
EFFECT EFFECT EFFECT EFFECT
Proposed answer
Example : Chute channel assembly
to Airbag Flap Reinforcement
CAUSE CAUSE CAUSE CAUSE
Measure Environment
Machine
KPC
Torque
(6+/-1
Nm)
Torque & angle
Calibration
Dirt or painting
free
Poka Yoke
part blocked at
Torque Station
S/R rules
Faurecia (eg : 2
remaining
threads / stud
)
Nut Alloy
Backup
procedure if
Poka Yoke
Inoperative
Speed / Angle /
Torque ramp-up
programming
method
Training
Torque range
Grease
free
Ergonomics
(tools angle,
overview, ...)
Stud Alloy
Maintenance
Self-locking
nut P/N
Screwdriver accuracy
in acc. with torque.
77
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
T5 Airbag shoot channel assembly
control plan
Prototype Pre-launch Production
Key Contact / Telephone
Demmy Yoosuf / 0044 7787
516731
Signature (Quality)
Date (Original)
12/03/03
Date (Revision)
17/03/2005
Part Number / Latest Change Level
FAB500150XXX (LHD NoNav), FAB500140XXX (RHD NoNav)
FAB500160XXX (RHD Nav), FAB500170XXX (LHD Nav)
Core Team D. Yoosuf, T. Giraud, L. David, Richard
Cornick Stephane Beaupere, Michael Levasseur, Fadel
Wade, , Manuel Ventura, Dave Herrington
Customer Engineering Approval / Date (If Required)
28/11/03
Part Name / Discription
TOPPER PAD ASSY NO NA V & NO NAV LH&RH
Supplier / Plant Approval / Date

Customer Quality Approval / Date (If Required)
28/11/03
Supplier / Plant
Faurecia / FRADLEY
Supplier Code
CXVNA
Other Approval / Date (If Required)

Other Approval / Date (If Required)

Part/ Process Name/ Machine, Device
Characteristics
Specia Product / Process Evaluation/
Sample
Control Reactio Resp.
Process
Number
Operation Description
Jig, Tools for Mfg.
No. Product Process
Char.
Class.
Specifications / Tolerance
Measurement
Technique
Size Frequence
Method
Plan

78
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
300 Assembly Line - Post-Welding
300
Fixation of Airbag Chute to
Topper Pad Assembly
Georges Renault Driver
System
1 - Torque CC 6NM +/- 1NM
Screw driver with
inbuilt torque
transducer
1 Shift Start Up
a) Follow Poka Yoke validation
Instruction
b) Record results on Poka Yoke
validation record sheet
c) Record on start up sheet set & actual
torque for 1st off part
300
Fixation of Airbag Chute to
Topper Pad Assembly
Georges Renault Driver
System
2 - Torque CC 6NM +/- 1NM
Screw driver with
inbuilt torque
transducer
1 Every Part a) Automated check.
310 Traceability Recording Scanner, Manual backup 3
Airbag Chute
Batch, Chute
fixation nuts
batch number
- CC
Critical components
are traceable to
manufacturing batch
Recorded
electronically or
manually held
logs
1 Every Part
a) Follow Standard Operation
FIS-F-PS-241/EN V2
a) Record batch information on manual
traceability sheets.
a) Inform GAP Leader & Supervisor if
Poke Yoke system fails.
b) Inform maintenance to rectify
problem.
a) Inform GAP Leader & Supervisor if
Poke Yoke system fails part.
b) Inform maintenance to rectify
problem.
c) Backup driver to be used if original
cannot be repaired otherwise stop
production.
T5 Airbag chute channel assembly
control plan
and additionally , electrical fastener initial torque calibration
and then regular checking !
79
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Messages
Control Plan is a living document!
Continuously upgraded
Information should be shared
Control Plan is a contractual document!
Strict application is mandatory
Any deviation or modification must be submitted to
Customer before release
Control Plan is a confidential document!
Control Plan is requested also from our Suppliers!
80
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
NAME :_____________________________Session:_____________________________________
1 2 3 4
Introduction
Capitalization &
Transversalisation
Key Characteristics
FMEA
Program QRQC
Changes
& Gate Reviews
How to accelerate
Conclusion
Value added of
the module Comments
Evaluation Form
to fill in
81
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Agenda
10:10 FMEA PL.Soula
11:10 Break
12:05 Lunch
15:45 Break
17:00 End
FMEA Training Module FMEA Training Module FMEA Training Module FMEA Training Module
Paul-Louis SOULA
83
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
84
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
1. Reasons for FMEAs
2. Objective of FMEAs
3. Types of FMEAs
4. How to build a Design FMEA
5. How to build a Process FMEA
6. Workshop
Failure Mode and Effect Analysis
85
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
1. No product poka yoke ; estimated nonnecessary by mechanisms
2. New operator (2 days of experience) without the good sensibility
D5 - Root Causes of Occurrence
Install ation of the handle bar
Guidi ng at 225
Sl ide
Female profile
Male profil e
Lock
Red Alert with Customer impact
nov- 09
Author :
Management Suppliers
WHAT IS THE CAUSE? WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM? (5W + 2H)
Why it is a problem? No-relocking of one of the 2 sl ides.
What happened? Bad hafting of the handle bar insi de the sl ide :
handl ebar assembly i nside the leg for r ecal l of the handle bar.
When did it happen ? Detected the 29th Apr il of 2009.
Cr eated the 24th April of 2009 at 12AM07.
CRITERIA
How many ? 1 case
Possibility to assembly the handle bar in the slides but in a
bad position in the slide's locking spring.
Where has it been det ect ed ? Detected dur ing tr imi ng of the seat in
Who has det ect ed it ? Detected by operator i n SOTEXO.
Nogent s ur Verniss on
T
y
p
e
Application date :
Quali ty Depart
All an GOURET
Assembly in t he good hole of the slide' s
locking spring
Product poka yoke
I mpossibility of assembling the handle bar in
another hole t hat necessary to it s function
How has it been detected? Detected duri ng tri ming of the seat : not
WHAT WE LEARNED
BEFORE AFTER
ITEM (Control Factor) METHOD
Possi bility toput the handle bar i n this hole of the locki ng spr ing
New design of the locking spring with adding
of a product's poka-yoke
D4 - Root Causes of Non-Detection
No specific inspection concerning this point in the control plan and
FMEA cotation at 32.
1. Assembly of the handle bar without visibility
2. FMEA Gravity at 8 : Missing of hierarchisation at 1 on the drawing
and preconisation from Flers
3. FMEA detection and occurence at 2 : No case before this one.
4. Detection : potentialy sensitive but depending of the operator
D:\maniae\A Perso\
SRC\Alertes Qualit\X95\JR95\Mauvais ass palonnier glissires \Prco montage palonnier. pdf
D:\maniae\A Perso\
SRC\Alertes Qualit\X95\JR95\Mauvais ass palonnier gliss ires\Workshop R ed alerts JR-K95 JL Daudon 2009-05-07.ppt
Defect: No-relocking of one of the 2 slides. Bad hafting of the handle bar
inside the slide : handle bar assembly inside the leg for recall of the handle bar.
9700 slides checked out of which
2000 vehicles checked at customer place
86
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Background
Application date : 26-oct Design
BG/Div/Site: SMPG Nompatelize Process Link to AMS
UAP/Line: Backrest T7 Mix OK/NOK
Author : T.Delattre/A.Moussad Testing
Supplier
SR Alert Re-Occurrence prevention Memo # 6442
6442
WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM? (5W + 2H) Cause
NC freeplay on backrest and potential recliner
unlcking.
36 NC parts segregated on July 12th by resident
at customer PSA during function test.
Unclear definition of cable tension neither
efficient tool to set it right (gap setting)
Not OK (Before) OK (After)
No clear instruction for the operator who was
left alone to decide correct fitting
Gages in place to garantee repeatable cable and
recliner positionning as well as proper cable
tension
Consequently the backrest was partially unlocked and there was
a noticeable freeplay
D 5 Root cause of non conformance D 5 Root cause of non conformance D 5 Root cause of non conformance D 5 Root cause of non conformance
The backrest unlocking cable was set up too short.
Control method was not defined with clear criteria
Risk was wrongly evaluated during FMEA Study and no precise
action was defined to prevent defect to be stopped
D 4 Root cause of non Detection D 4 Root cause of non Detection D 4 Root cause of non Detection D 4 Root cause of non Detection
Defect detected during
Preproduction, 405 seats
checked at customer
87
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
87
Before to start
At which stage of the PMS
should be performed:
A Design FMEA ?
A Process FMEA ?
1 1 1 1
Proposal Proposal Proposal Proposal
2A 2A 2A 2A
Design Design Design Design
3 3 3 3
Production Production Production Production
Set Set Set Set- -- -up up up up
4 4 4 4
Launch Launch Launch Launch
5 S 5 S 5 S 5 S ries ries ries ries
2B 2B 2B 2B
Verification Verification Verification Verification
88
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
u
s
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
u
s
u
p
d
a
t
i
n
g
u
p
d
a
t
i
n
g
FMEA: At what stage of PMS ?
1 1 1 1
Proposal Proposal Proposal Proposal
2A 2A 2A 2A
3 3 3 3
Set Set Set Set- -- -up up up up
4 4 4 4
Launch Launch Launch Launch
5 S 5 S 5 S 5 S ries ries ries ries
2B 2B 2B 2B
Verification Verification Verification Verification
FUNCTIONAL FUNCTIONAL FUNCTIONAL FUNCTIONAL Analysis Analysis Analysis Analysis
KPC (Key Product KPC (Key Product KPC (Key Product KPC (Key Product Characteristics Characteristics Characteristics Characteristics) ) ) ) identified identified identified identified fromcustomer Requirements
Product and Process Product and Process Product and Process Product and Process FMEAs FMEAs FMEAs FMEAs review and feed back
Production Control Plan Production Control Plan Production Control Plan Production Control Plan Implemented Implemented Implemented Implemented
Lessons Lessons Lessons Lessons learned learned learned learned
Process Process Process Process FMEA FMEA FMEA FMEA completed
Pre Pre Pre Pre- -- -Production Control Plan Production Control Plan Production Control Plan Production Control Plan Implemented
PVP tests PVP tests PVP tests PVP tests results results results results successful
Mass Production Trial Mass Production Trial Mass Production Trial Mass Production Trial Successful
Process Process Process Process Capability Capability Capability Capability achieved
Product FMEA Product FMEA Product FMEA Product FMEA initiation
KPC KPC KPC KPC list list list list completed
Expert/Designer Expert/Designer Expert/Designer Expert/Designer suppliers product KPCs identified on 2D and BOM
Process Process Process Process FMEA FMEA FMEA FMEA initiation
KCC List KCC List KCC List KCC List identified
Product FMEA Product FMEA Product FMEA Product FMEA completed
Expert/Designer Expert/Designer Expert/Designer Expert/Designer suppliers suppliers suppliers suppliers KPCs KPCs KPCs KPCs validated
KPC/KCC KPC/KCC KPC/KCC KPC/KCC included included included included in Pre-production control plan
BOPs BOPs BOPs BOPs, tools, gauges, , tools, gauges, , tools, gauges, , tools, gauges, equipments equipments equipments equipments ordered
89
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
FMEA Objectives
1. 1. 1. 1. Reduce risks related to the Product and the Reduce risks related to the Product and the Reduce risks related to the Product and the Reduce risks related to the Product and the
process definition and improve reliability and be process definition and improve reliability and be process definition and improve reliability and be process definition and improve reliability and be
documented documented documented documented
2. 2. 2. 2. Drive focus on priorities (Safety, reliability and Drive focus on priorities (Safety, reliability and Drive focus on priorities (Safety, reliability and Drive focus on priorities (Safety, reliability and
functionality) during product & process functionality) during product & process functionality) during product & process functionality) during product & process
development after criticality ranking development after criticality ranking development after criticality ranking development after criticality ranking
3. 3. 3. 3. Identify the key needed verifications during the Identify the key needed verifications during the Identify the key needed verifications during the Identify the key needed verifications during the
product/process development phase and during product/process development phase and during product/process development phase and during product/process development phase and during
the production cycle the production cycle the production cycle the production cycle
4. 4. 4. 4. Reduce Reduce Reduce Reduce costs costs costs costs and and and and Development Development Development Development time time time time
5. 5. 5. 5. D DD D- -- -FMEAs FMEAs FMEAs FMEAs and P and P and P and P- -- -FMEAs FMEAs FMEAs FMEAs are the links between are the links between are the links between are the links between
Key Characteristics and Control Plans Key Characteristics and Control Plans Key Characteristics and Control Plans Key Characteristics and Control Plans
Risks
90
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
FMEA Definitions
Failure Mode & Effect Analysis
The FMEA is a preventive analysis tool FMEA is a preventive analysis tool FMEA is a preventive analysis tool FMEA is a preventive analysis tool aimed at reducing risk during reducing risk during reducing risk during reducing risk during
definition and validation of the Product and the Process designs definition and validation of the Product and the Process designs definition and validation of the Product and the Process designs definition and validation of the Product and the Process designs against a
functional specification. It is a way of improving product reliability
The Design FMEA Design FMEA Design FMEA Design FMEA identifies potential failures of the product design potential failures of the product design potential failures of the product design potential failures of the product design
during the complete life cycle of the product during the complete life cycle of the product during the complete life cycle of the product during the complete life cycle of the product ( part manufacturing,
subcomponents assembly, part handling, car assembly, final customer use, product end of life
etc) It applies to all products designed by and for Faurecia.
After program is completed, the Design FMEA is updated every time there is a change in product
design that could affect the validation of the product.
The Process FMEA Process FMEA Process FMEA Process FMEA identifies potential failures of the product due to the potential failures of the product due to the potential failures of the product due to the potential failures of the product due to the
manufacturing process manufacturing process manufacturing process manufacturing process from raw material transformation up to customer use i.e.
subcomponent manufacturing ( press, injection, machining etc), subcomponents assembly,
transportation, part handling, car assembly etc It applies to all products manufactured inside or
outside Faurecia.
After program is completed, the process FMEA is updated every time there is a change in product
or process that could affect quality of the product.
Ref: FAU-S-DSG-3040
91
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
REDUCE THE COST OF MODIFICATIONS
Drawing
modifications
Tooling
modifications
Slide version 02
92
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
The FMEA Types and Teams
Design-FMEA
(Product-FMEA)
Process-FMEA
Object When
Product
(System, Component)
Responsible
Starts at End of
Concept Phase
Product Design
engineer or
System architect
Production process
After first process
definition
Process & Tool
Engineer
Design-FMEA
Team
Quality
Product
Design
Validation
Process
Engineering
Support
Functions
Teams
People with experience
Process-FMEA
Team
Quality
Product
Design
Manufacturing
Process
Engineering
Support
Functions
93
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
How to performa FMEA
FMEA Number:
FMEA Date:
Design
FMEA
Type of vehicle or device : FAU-f-DSG-4040/en Drawing reference : Updated on :
Product : Engineering level/index: PILOT-leader :
Line and Plant (PFMEA) : Part or Device or Item : Life situation (DFMEA):
MODE Prevention Detection N Description S O D RPN S O D RPN
Class can be S/R ( or "1") or "2" (function) or no value S : Severity D : Detectability O : Occurence RPN : Risk Priority Number
D-FMEA or P-FMEA
R
P
N
D
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
Recommended Corrective Actions
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
K
C
C

n
b
K
P
C

n
b
O
c
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
c
e
N
Process Step
definition
(PFMEA)
Product Function
definition studied
(DFMEA) C
l
a
s
s
Potential Cause of
failure
Design validation (D-FMEA)
Process controls (P-FMEA)
Responsible
RPN checked after
actions implemented
Target completion
date
Action taken
Forecasted new RPN
DESIGN PROCESS
1- Product function (DFMEA)
or Process step (PFMEA)
2- Potential failure Mode
3- Potential Effect
4- Severity
1- Potential cause of failure + occurence
2- Key Characteristics number
3- Design Validation (DFMEA)
4- Process control (PFMEA) + Detection
5- RPN calculation
1- Recommended Corrective Actions
2- Responsible & target date
3- Action taken
4- Forecasted RPN
5- RPN checked after actions implemented
94
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
1st Step: Identify Failure mode (1/2)
Type of vehicle or device : FAU-f-DSG-4040/en
Product :
Line and Plant (PFMEA) : Part or Device or Item :
MODE K
P
C

n
b
N
Process Step
definition
(PFMEA)
Product Function
definition studied
(DFMEA) C
l
a
s
s
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
D-FMEA or P-FMEA
1- Which function to study (DFMEA)
(for each life situation)
2 - What can go wrong?
- No function
- Partial/over function or
degraded over time
- Intermittent function
- Unintended function
3 - What are the worst effects
for each failure mode?
4 How bad is it ?
Identify a severity rating
95
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
S : SEVERITY GRADING CHART (Design and Process)
96
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Drawing reference :
Engineering level/index:
Life situation (DFMEA):
Prevention Detection
O
c
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
c
e
Potential Cause of
failure R
P
N
D
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
K
C
C

n
b
DESIGN
PROCESS
3- The actions already performed during Product design
Prevention: Which checks have been made or standards used
in order to make the design more robust
Detection: Which checks or tests are currently included
in the DVP design validation plan
1- Identify the associated cause
(first level and root)
2- The estimated occurrence
2nd step: Evaluate Root cause and Current Controls (1/2)
4- Detection rating: How confindent are we
with current definition of the DVP to detect
a potential defect
5- RPN calculation
DFMEA
97
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
1st Step: Identify Failure mode (2/2)
Type of vehicle or device : FAU-f-DSG-4040/en
Product :
Line and Plant (PFMEA) : Part or Device or Item :
MODE K
P
C

n
b
N
Process Step
definition
(PFMEA)
Product Function
definition studied
(DFMEA) C
l
a
s
s
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
D-FMEA or P-FMEA
1- Which process to study (PFMEA)
2 - What can go wrong?
See below types of defects
(for function consider degraded
or intermittent due to process)
3 - What are the worst effects
for each failure mode?
4 How bad is it ?
Identify a severity rating?
Is it a KPC ?
98
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
O : OCCURRENCE GRADING CHART (Design & Process)
99
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
D : DETECTION GRADING CHART (Design)
100
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Drawing reference :
Engineering level/index:
Life situation (DFMEA):
Prevention Detection
O
c
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
c
e
Potential Cause of
failure R
P
N
D
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
K
C
C

n
b
DESIGN
PROCESS
3- The actions already performed during Process design
Prevention: Which controls are included in the process in order
to reduce the defect to occur
Detection: Which controls are included in the process in order
to detect the defect when it occurs
1- Identify the associated cause
(first level and root)
2- The estimated occurrence
2nd step: Evaluate Root cause and Current Controls (2/2)
4- Detection rating: How confindent are we
with current definition of the Process to
detect a potential defect
5- RPN calculation
PFMEA
KCC identified as a contributor
to achieve the KPC
101
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
D : DETECTION GRADING CHART (Process)
If a later operation (same plant) can stop a defect like a double visual check, rating could be reduced by 1
102
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Risk priority number ( or RPN)
RPN= : RPN= : RPN= : RPN= : S SS S x x x x O OO O x x x x D DD D
Slide version 02
Probability that the Probability that the Probability that the Probability that the
cause/mode will cause/mode will cause/mode will cause/mode will
occur occur occur occur
Probability that Probability that Probability that Probability that
it won't be it won't be it won't be it won't be
detected detected detected detected
Severity or Severity or Severity or Severity or
Probability that Probability that Probability that Probability that
the failure will be the failure will be the failure will be the failure will be
serious serious serious serious
103
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
FMEA Number:
FMEA Date:
Updated on :
PILOT-leader :
N Description S O D RPN S O D RPN
Responsible
RPN checked after
actions implemented
Target completion
date
Action taken
Forecasted new RPN Recommended Corrective Actions
4- When action has been taken ( if action is
different from initial, please mention it)
5- New RPN after actions are implemented
Is action sufficient ?
3- Forecasted new RPN Action taken ?
Is action sufficient ?
What can be done for
- Design changes,
- Standard changes,
- Process changes
- Special controls ?
3rd step: Corrective Actions
1- Recommended Corrective Actions for
Prevention and Detection:
2- Responsible & target date
104
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
PREVENTIVE ACTIONS
Once critical failures are identified preventive or corrective Once critical failures are identified preventive or corrective Once critical failures are identified preventive or corrective Once critical failures are identified preventive or corrective
actions are decided for the actions are decided for the actions are decided for the actions are decided for the highe highe highe highes ss st t t t RPNs RPNs RPNs RPNs
RPN > allowable limit (*) => ACTION RPN > allowable limit (*) => ACTION RPN > allowable limit (*) => ACTION RPN > allowable limit (*) => ACTION

The future of our
company depends on
risk control
Once actions are in place the RPN should be recalculated it Once actions are in place the RPN should be recalculated it Once actions are in place the RPN should be recalculated it Once actions are in place the RPN should be recalculated it
becomes: becomes: becomes: becomes: RPN RPN RPN RPN' '' '
Slide version 01
(*) may depend on customer requirement if more stringent than Fa (*) may depend on customer requirement if more stringent than Fa (*) may depend on customer requirement if more stringent than Fa (*) may depend on customer requirement if more stringent than Faurecia rules urecia rules urecia rules urecia rules
105
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
What have we learned on Design FMEA
Formalise a critical
examination of product
design
Ensure that the product
design conforms to
customer and legislative
requirements
Functional Functional Functional Functional
analysis analysis analysis analysis
feedback feedback feedback feedback
Warranty, returns Warranty, returns Warranty, returns Warranty, returns
and rejects and rejects and rejects and rejects
Design validation plan Design validation plan Design validation plan Design validation plan
(product tests) (product tests) (product tests) (product tests)
Prototype Prototype Prototype Prototype control control control control
plan plan plan plan
INPUTS INPUTS INPUTS INPUTS
OUTPUTS OUTPUTS OUTPUTS OUTPUTS
List of product List of product List of product List of product
special special special special
characteristics characteristics characteristics characteristics
modifications modifications modifications modifications
Programme goals Programme goals Programme goals Programme goals
( (( (ppm ppm ppm ppm, reliability, , reliability, , reliability, , reliability,
maintainability, maintainability, maintainability, maintainability,
Corrective actions Corrective actions Corrective actions Corrective actions
plan plan plan plan
Regulations Regulations Regulations Regulations
Measurement Measurement Measurement Measurement
concepts, gages and concepts, gages and concepts, gages and concepts, gages and
instructions instructions instructions instructions
FAU FAU FAU FAU- -- -S SS S- -- -PM PM PM PM- -- -3040 3040 3040 3040
Product requirement Product requirement Product requirement Product requirement
Design Design Design Design Poka Poka Poka Poka Yok Yok Yok Yok
Slide version 02
106
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
What have we learned on Process FMEA
Formalise a critical
examination of process design
Ensure that the process
design allows products made
conforming to customer and
legislative requirements
ensure that products are not
damaged in handling
(transports, storage, )
including on and off site
DFMEA
Process flow
chart
Process
assumptions
Serie control plan
(included Process
Poka Yok)
Inputs
Outputs
List of process
special caracteristics
Plant Lay out
Capitalization
Modifications
Program goals (ppm,
reliability,
maintainability,)
Corrective actions
plan
Warranty, returns
and rejects
FAU FAU FAU FAU- -- -S SS S- -- -PM PM PM PM- -- -3042 3042 3042 3042
Process
functional
analysis
Assembly and use
instructions
Measurement and
checking instructions
Slide version 02
107
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Group owners & PG Referent / Experts
March 18th, 2011
Group Group Group Group FECT FECT FECT FECT FAE FAE FAE FAE FIS FIS FIS FIS FAS FAS FAS FAS 7 Basics
J.Burke Th.Rochard
A. Selbach/
M.Schafbauer
J.Robineau
Ph.Cossonnir
e
Supplier
Quality
P.Mesnard Ch.Sarda
F.Selb/
M.Stefan-
Weber
Ph.Lalagu
TBD Cap & Trans
PL. Soula Ch.Majchrowicz MN.Rothan E.Brogniart J.Ygout
Funct Miles
tone
Program St
g
&
Gate Reviews
L.Klingauf E.Jacquot
Y.Schneider/
JF.Wyrwas
P.Mesnard L.Klingauf QRCI
E.Jacquot F.Abadie
JP.Gehin/
M.Kherbache
R.Hilpert TBD
Validated Eng
g
changes
E.Jacquot V.Gosatti
Y.Schneider/
JF.Wyrwas
P.Mesnard TBD
Strict Control
Plans
PL. Soula V.Gosatti
F.Selb/R.Mary/M.
Stefan-Weber
C.Desplanque M.Jordan FMEA
P.Mesnard F.Lueder
P.Renoit/
R.Mary
Ph.Lalagu L.Klingauf
Key
characteristics
108
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
108
Workshop on P-FMEA 20 mn
Slide version 02
Nut and L-profile assembly by resistance welding
1. Choose 3 failure modes
2. Establish a P-FMEA for these 3
failure modes
3. Each group to report
FMEA Number:
FMEA Date:
Design
FMEA Type of vehicle or device : FAU-f-DSG-4040/en Drawing reference : Updated on :
Product : Engineering level/index: PILOT-leader :
Line and Plant (PFMEA) : Part or Device or Item : Life situation (DFMEA):
MODE Prevention Detecti on N Description S O D RPN S O D RPN
D-FMEA or P-FMEA
RPN
Detection
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
Severity
K
CC
nb
K
PC
nb
O
ccur-
rence
N
Process Step
definition
(PFMEA)
Product Function
definition studied
(DFMEA) C
lass Potential Cause of
failure
Process controls (P-FMEA) Responsible
RPN checked after
actions implemented Target completion
date Action taken
Forecasted new RPN
DESIGN PROCESS
109
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Nut & L-profile assembly by resistance welding
L-profile
Nut M10
After electrical welding
110
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
FMEA Number: J84-P-RSS-G
FMEA Date: 15/07/2004
Type of vehicle or device : J84 Renault Megane Scenic Drawing reference : Updated on : 16/03/2010
Product : Rear Seat Metal Structure Engineering level/index: G PILOT-leader : ME / YOKE P.
Line and Plant (PFMEA) : UAP 3 / Nogent Part or Device or Item : Nut and L-Profile assembly Life situation (DFMEA): -
40 Resistance welding of
NUT on L-PROFILE
Missing NUT 8 NUT forgotton to insert
(Operator failure)
4 Operator qualification level L
or higher
Automatic machine stop
during clamping operation
(Poka Yoke no. J84/27)
1 32
D-FMEA or P-FMEA
5155436/38
R
P
N
D
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
K
C
C

n
b
K
P
C

n
b
O
c
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
c
e
N
Process Step
definition
(PFMEA)
Product Function
definition studied
(DFMEA)
C
l
a
s
s
Potential Cause of
failure
Responsible
RPN checked after
actions implemented
Target completion
date
Action taken
Forecasted new RPN
No welding possible, machine
stop, fastening operation
stopped if by pass, process
interuption
DESIGN
PROCESS
1
111
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
FMEA Number: J84-P-RSS-G
FMEA Date: 15/07/2004
Type of vehicle or device : J84 Renault Megane Scenic Drawing reference : Updated on : 16/03/2010
Product : Rear Seat Metal Structure Engineering level/index: G PILOT-leader : ME / YOKE P.
Line and Plant (PFMEA) : UAP 3 / Nogent Part or Device or Item : Nut and L-Profile assembly Life situation (DFMEA): -
40 Resistance welding of
NUT on L-PROFILE
Missing NUT 8 NUT forgotton to insert
(Operator failure)
or higher
1 32
Missing L-PROFILE 6 L-PROFILE forgotton to
insert (Operator failure)
or higher
1 12
Wrong NUT (material,
diameter, threat,....)
8 1 Wrong NUT reference at
welding station
(Logistical failure)
2 1 Label scan of every new box
with NUTs at welding station
1st piece OK check 2 32
Wrong PROFILE (LH/RH) 6 Wrong welding fixation
plate used
(Tool change failure)
or higher
NUT incorrect inserted in
fixation plate (Operator
failure)
or higher
1 40 To be confirmed
Tooling damaged / worn
out (Maintenance failure)
2 2 Preventive Maintenance plan
no. J84/40)
NUT assembled from
wrong side
6 NUT incorrect inserted in
L-PROFILE (Operator
failure)
or higher
1 24 To be confrimed
Wrong welding parameter
(technician failure)
2 3, 4, 5 Restricted machine &
parameter access, parameter
change documentation
1st piece OK check
(resistance torque
measurement)
2 40 Do we need to do something else
can we let Firs part Ok at 1 JY
Loreau what can vwe do more ?
Machine defect or tooling
defect ( tips not Ok)
(Equipment failure)
2 Preventive Maintenance plan
no. J84/40)
1st piece OK check 2 40 Jean-Yvs is it Ok ?
Changed material
properties (Supplier
failure)
4 6, 7 Yearly supplier part re-
qualification
1st piece OK check
(resistance torque
measurement)
4 160 40-1 Check of Supplier measurement
protocols (material properties) for
every NUT and L-PROFILE batch
within incoming inspection
Q / SERIOUS V. 18/09/2004 100% protocol
check for NUT and
L-PROFILE
integrated in CP J84-
RSS-G at
20.09.2004
10 2 2 40 10 2 2 40
Machine defect
(Equipment failure)
no. J84/40)
Damaged delivered part
(Supplier failure)
4 8 Yearly supplier part re-
qualification
1st piece OK check
(resistance torque
measurement)
every NUT batch within incoming
inspection
check for NUT
RSS-G at
20.09.2004
7 2 2 28 7 2 2 28
Welding spatters in threat
of NUT
(defect for example)
7 4 Machine defect
(Equipment failure)
no. J84/40)
1st piece OK check 2 14 Do we keep it or not ?
NUT not correctly clamped
/ gap between nut and
profile
10 3 Machine defect
(Equipment failure)
no. J84/40)
1st piece OK check 2 40 Defect on part geometry considered
?
3
4 Threat of NUT or PROFILE
damaged
No Belt Buckle assembly
possible
8
Bad welding connection
(insufficient penetration)
Insufficient torque resistance,
risk of stability loss during final
assembly and endurance
10
NUT turned by a few
degrees
10 2
possible
Machine stop, no welding
possible
interuption
stop, process interuption
No Belt Buckle fastening
possible (threat diameter too
small)
Wrong assembly reference
produced but part is Ok
Responsible
RPN checked after
actions implemented Target completion
date
Action taken
Forecasted new RPN
K
P
C

n
b
O
c
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
c
e
N
Process Step
definition
(PFMEA)
Product Function
definition studied
(DFMEA) C
l
a
s
s
Potential Cause of
failure R
P
N
D
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
K
C
C

n
b
D-FMEA or P-FMEA
5155436/38
DESIGN PROCESS
1
1
2
2
1
2
3
To be confirmed
Need to have a picture of the machine and how it works
Contacter Jean-Yves Loreau
2
2
1
1
4
5
5
6
6
7
112
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
MODE Prevention Detection N Description
Missing NUT 8 NUT forgotten to insert
(Operator failure)
or higher
1 32 Transfer the detection on machine stop
Missing L-PROFILE 6 L-PROFILE forgotten to
insert (Operator failure)
or higher
1 12 Transfer the detection on machine stop
Wrong NUT (material,
diameter, threat,....)
8 1 Wrong NUT reference at
welding station
(Logistical failure)
2 1 1st piece OK check 5 80 Label scan of every new box with
NUTs at welding station
Wrong PROFILE (LH/RH) 6 Wrong welding fixation
plate used
(Tool change failure)
or higher
NUT incorrect inserted in
fixation plate (Operator
failure)
or higher
1 40
Tooling damaged / worn
out (Maintenance failure)
no. J84/40)
NUT turned by a few
degrees
10 2 Insufficient torque resistance,
interruption
stop, process interruption-
frame cannot be assembled
No Belt Buckle fastening
possible (threat diameter too
small)
Wrong assembly reference
produced but part is Ok
K
P
C

n
b
O
c
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
c
e
C
l
a
s
s
Potential Cause of
failure R
P
N
D
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
K
C
C

n
b
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
113
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
MODE Prevention Detection N Description
NUT assembled from
wrong side
6 NUT incorrect inserted in
L-PROFILE (Operator
failure)
or higher
1 24
Wrong welding parameter
(technician failure)
2 3, 4, 5 Welding parameters vaidated
with 30 parts
1st piece OK check
(resistance torque
measurement)
2 40 Restricted machine & parameter
access, parameter change
documentation
Machine defect or tooling
defect ( capsnot Ok)
(Equipment failure)
no. J84/40)
1st piece OK check 2 40 Imporved Preventive Maintenance plan
by checking nets and pipes
Changed material
properties (Supplier
failure)
1 6, 7 Yearly supplier part re-
qualification
1st piece OK check
(resistance torque
measurement)
Machine defect
(Equipment failure)
no. J84/40)
Damaged delivered part
(Supplier failure)
4 8 Yearly supplier part re-
qualification
1st piece OK check
(resistance torque
measurement)
inspection
3
4 Threat of NUT or PROFILE
damaged
possible
8
Cold Weld (insufficient
penetration)
10
Machine stop, no welding
possible
K
P
C

n
b
O
c
c
u
r
-
r
e
n
c
e
C
l
a
s
s
Potential Cause of
failure R
P
N
D
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
EFFECT
POTENTIAL FAILURE
S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y
K
C
C

n
b
1
1
2
2
4
5
5
6
N Description S O D RPN S O D RPN
Restricted machine & parameter
access, parameter change
documentation
Imporved Preventive Maintenance plan
by checking nets and pipes
40-1 Check of Supplier measurement
check for NUT and
L-PROFILE
RSS-G at
20.09.2004
10 1 2 20 10 2 2 40
40-1 Check of Supplier measurement
inspection
check for NUT
RSS-G at
20.09.2004
8 2 2 32 7 2 2 28
Responsible
RPN checked after
actions implemented
Target completion
date
Action taken
Forecasted new RPN Recommended Corrective Actions
114
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Agenda
10:10 FMEA PL.Soula
11:10 Break
12:05 Lunch
15:45 Break
17:00 End
115
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
NAME :_____________________________Session:_____________________________________
1 2 3 4
Introduction
Capitalization &
Transversalisation
Key Characteristics
FMEA
Program QRQC
Changes
& Gate Reviews
How to accelerate
Conclusion
Value added of
the module Comments
Evaluation Form
to fill in
116
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Break
Validated Engineering Changes Validated Engineering Changes Validated Engineering Changes Validated Engineering Changes
Eric JACQUOT
118
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
119
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Agenda
Introduction 15 mn
Module objectives
Validated Engineering Change
3 examples of Engineering Changes
Workshop 15 mn
Debriefing 5 mn
Key messages 5 mn
120
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Why this basic ?
If not validated Engineering Change, potential disturbances
repeat tests with additional prototypes due to t repeat tests with additional prototypes due to t repeat tests with additional prototypes due to t repeat tests with additional prototypes due to test failures est failures est failures est failures
creation of a new problem to solve due to lack of impact creation of a new problem to solve due to lack of impact creation of a new problem to solve due to lack of impact creation of a new problem to solve due to lack of impact
analysis analysis analysis analysis
rework even line stoppage rework even line stoppage rework even line stoppage rework even line stoppage due to non compatibility with due to non compatibility with due to non compatibility with due to non compatibility with
overall system (other parts, BOPs, gauges, manufacturing overall system (other parts, BOPs, gauges, manufacturing overall system (other parts, BOPs, gauges, manufacturing overall system (other parts, BOPs, gauges, manufacturing
system, packaging, system, packaging, system, packaging, system, packaging, ) )) )
Severe human injuries in case of accidents Severe human injuries in case of accidents Severe human injuries in case of accidents Severe human injuries in case of accidents
recall + Business hold recall + Business hold recall + Business hold recall + Business hold
=> Any short-cut in Engineering Change Process will sooner or
later cost the company !
=> Validated Engineering Change is a basic
121
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Module objectives
Understand the sequence of the various steps to achieve a Understand the sequence of the various steps to achieve a Understand the sequence of the various steps to achieve a Understand the sequence of the various steps to achieve a
proper validation. proper validation. proper validation. proper validation.
Better understand consequences and causes of non Better understand consequences and causes of non Better understand consequences and causes of non Better understand consequences and causes of non
validated engineering change. validated engineering change. validated engineering change. validated engineering change.
Know the contributors for the validation of engineering Know the contributors for the validation of engineering Know the contributors for the validation of engineering Know the contributors for the validation of engineering
changes. changes. changes. changes.
122
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Engineering Change by Customer, supplier or internal
Reject Reject Reject Reject
ECO : Engineering Change Order
ECO ECO ECO ECO
Define EC Define EC Define EC Define EC
+DVP & PVP +DVP & PVP +DVP & PVP +DVP & PVP
Execute Execute Execute Execute
DVP & PVP DVP & PVP DVP & PVP DVP & PVP
Implement Implement Implement Implement
EC EC EC EC
EC validation
Design
Review
Design
Validation
Production
Validation
Change Change Change Change
Submitted Submitted Submitted Submitted
Assess Assess Assess Assess
ECR * ECR * ECR * ECR *
Reject Reject Reject Reject
ECR : Engineering Change Request
Less than 5 days
* Use of checklist enables being exhaustive enough in the assessment
QCD assessment *
123
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Engineering Change in PMS phases
The later it happens,
the more it costs and the higher the risk is for bad launch
Customer
PPAP
1
ACQUISITION
2A
DESIGN
2B
DESIGN
VERIFICATION
SOP
3
PRODUCTION
SET-UP
4
LAUNCH
5
PRODUCTION
Tool Launch
Design
Review
Design
Validation
Production
Validation
ECO ECO ECO ECO
ECO ECO ECO ECO
DVP & PVP DVP & PVP DVP & PVP DVP & PVP
Implement Implement Implement Implement
EC EC EC EC
ECO ECO ECO ECO
DVP DVP DVP DVP
124
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example 2 : wiring fixture of ECS
Consequences : Car recall due to radiator leakage (1 M)
Causes ?
After modification
Two metal clips but not
positioned as requested
Before modification
Two plastic binders
Design review : lack of design review (only 2 binders to change)
Design validation : lack of prototype (Customer platform solution).
Production validation : no PPAP (by customer and Faurecia)
Customer request
OEM : metal clips
Instead of plastic binders
125
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example 3 : Seat locking mechanism
Consequences : failure in rear crash test very close to 1520 cars recall
Causes ?
Before modification
Locking mechanism
secured by a washer
After modification
No more washer
Design review : lack of robust standards
Design validation : test done too late (during launch phase)
126
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example 4 : YA5 headrest insert spring
Causes ?
Consequences : ejection of headrest during ECE 17 test 35,000 vehicles
to rework = ? M + 2 months task force + a lot of additional tests
Design review : risk underestimated (small modification)
Production validation : no ECE 17 test performed
Supplier : lack of capitalization and transparency
Before
noise, scratches,
sliding effort
Spring
After
Spring with Rilsan
Coating + bigger bending
127
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Validated Engineering change
Workshop
ECR based on internal VA VE in Serial Phase
Passenger Airbag Chute Channel Material change from PA 6
30% GF to 10%GF
128
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Define the tests of the DESIGN VALIDATION PLAN and the
PRODUCTION VALIDATION PLAN
Select the tests to be performed to validate the change taking
into account :
Is it relevant with the change ?
Is it necessary to do the test in DVP (prototype or virtual CAE ,
test criticality )
Is it relevant to do the test in PVP ?
Is the set of tests adequate to represent the failure mode ?
Is it necessary to produce additional test even if not in
Customer specs ( Faurecia component test / guide lines )?
WORKSHOP : Define DVP and PVP
20 min 20 min
Let Let Let Let
Let Let Let Let

s ss s
s ss s
do do do do
do do do do
it! it! it! it!
it! it! it! it!
!! !! !! !!
!! !! !! !!
129
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
X XX X X XX X No bag damage No bag damage No bag damage No bag damage
SDS PB SDS PB SDS PB SDS PB- -- -0028v2 0028v2 0028v2 0028v2
Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment
X XX X X XX X No sharp edge No sharp edge No sharp edge No sharp edge PB PB PB PB- -- -0004v2 0004v2 0004v2 0004v2 Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment
Module requirement Module requirement Module requirement Module requirement
(fragment compliant with DVM 24331) (fragment compliant with DVM 24331) (fragment compliant with DVM 24331) (fragment compliant with DVM 24331)
ES ES ES ES- -- -F2DB F2DB F2DB F2DB- -- -54044A74 54044A74 54044A74 54044A74- -- -AA AA AA AA
Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment
X XX X X XX X
deployment trajectory deployment trajectory deployment trajectory deployment trajectory
( +/ ( +/ ( +/ ( +/- -- - 9 99 9up up up up- -- -down) down) down) down)
(+/ (+/ (+/ (+/- -- - 4 44 4side to side) side to side) side to side) side to side)
DVM DVM DVM DVM- -- -0052 0052 0052 0052- -- -AB / SDS PB AB / SDS PB AB / SDS PB AB / SDS PB- -- -0025v2 0025v2 0025v2 0025v2 Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment
X XX X X XX X No bag damage No bag damage No bag damage No bag damage SDS PB SDS PB SDS PB SDS PB- -- -0028v2 0028v2 0028v2 0028v2 Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment Airbag deployment
COCKPIT
X XX X MA0018 (rating 2 max) MA0018 (rating 2 max) MA0018 (rating 2 max) MA0018 (rating 2 max) DVM DVM DVM DVM- -- -0014 0014 0014 0014- -- -MA/ SAE J1351 MA/ SAE J1351 MA/ SAE J1351 MA/ SAE J1351 Odor Odor Odor Odor
X XX X RES 30 MS 302 RES 30 MS 302 RES 30 MS 302 RES 30 MS 302 Taiwan specification Taiwan specification Taiwan specification Taiwan specification Flammability Flammability Flammability Flammability
X XX X MA0019 MA0019 MA0019 MA0019 DVM DVM DVM DVM- -- -0016 0016 0016 0016- -- -MA/ SAE J1756 MA/ SAE J1756 MA/ SAE J1756 MA/ SAE J1756 Fogging Fogging Fogging Fogging
Topper Pad Foam
METHOD METHOD METHOD METHOD TEST TEST TEST TEST
DEVIATION DEVIATION DEVIATION DEVIATION
NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
PVP PVP PVP PVP DVP DVP DVP DVP
REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENT REQUIREMENT
TEST TEST TEST TEST TYPE OF TYPE OF TYPE OF TYPE OF
FACIA ASSY COVERED UPPER
PART NAME PART NAME PART NAME PART NAME Faurecia Meru Faurecia Meru Faurecia Meru Faurecia Meru NAME OF LABORATORY NAME OF LABORATORY NAME OF LABORATORY NAME OF LABORATORY
FAB10172PVJ + FAB10162PVJ +
FAB500052PVJ + FAB500042PVJ
PART NUMBER PART NUMBER PART NUMBER PART NUMBER
Faurecia Faurecia Faurecia Faurecia
SUPPLIER SUPPLIER SUPPLIER SUPPLIER
ECR process : Design & Production Validation Plan
130
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Organization, tool and documents
Product Data Management (PDM) = ECM tool
DESIGN REVIEW
Design Approved Design Approved Design Approved Design Approved status in PDM status in PDM status in PDM status in PDM
DESIGN VALIDATION
Engineering Approved Engineering Approved Engineering Approved Engineering Approved status in PDM status in PDM status in PDM status in PDM
PRODUCTION VALIDATION (Off Tool / Off Process) (Off Tool / Off Process) (Off Tool / Off Process) (Off Tool / Off Process)
Manufacturing Approved Manufacturing Approved Manufacturing Approved Manufacturing Approved status in PDM status in PDM status in PDM status in PDM
Weekly reviews of the ECRs and ECOs by ECM
workgroup
New version of all related documents based on ECO
results:
Drawings, BOM, FMEAs, KPCs , KCCs, control plan,
suppliers documents, End of Life Vehicle Regulations
131
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
NO COMPROMISES
No trade-off with S/R validation even despite Customer even despite Customer even despite Customer even despite Customer
Always Always Always Always PPAP even if not requested by the customer even if not requested by the customer even if not requested by the customer even if not requested by the customer
No small change rigorous assessment : rigorous assessment : rigorous assessment : rigorous assessment :
Sales, Sales, Sales, Sales,
Product performance, Product performance, Product performance, Product performance,
Bought Out Parts, Bought Out Parts, Bought Out Parts, Bought Out Parts,
Production performance, Production performance, Production performance, Production performance,
Production Control & Logistics Production Control & Logistics Production Control & Logistics Production Control & Logistics
132
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example of Bad and Good answer
Engineering Change Management
133
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example of Bad answer for Engineering Change
Management
How do you manage your Engineering changes with the customer ?
- There is no single list to manage ECR
- Ex 1 : Separate tables to monitor the various aspects of the technical
changes
- Ex 2 : One table for the customers changes and one for the internal
changes
- Ex 3 : Part price modification and tooling costs are monitored separately
- There is an incomplete single list to manage ECR:
-Ex 1 : There is no link between ECR customer number and internal number
-Ex 2 : The three steps of validation ( Design Review, Design Verification
Plan and Production Validation Plan) are monitored in a separate tables
134
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example of Good answer for Engineering Change
Management
How do you manage your Engineering changes with the customer ?
Technical changes in process
Technical changed closed AFTER TOOL ORDER Feasability and Quotation
Request
Number
Date
received
Sender
Customer
request
reference
Return date
requested
Part Mold number Modification
Feasabil
GO / noGO
Requested
date for
quotation
Tool cost Part price
00C250098IP 04/05/2006 J. BARON Mail 30/09/2006 Base VU / VP
37993M-
59220/5922
Customer Design wants to modify the two bases after tools
debugging
GO 19/09/06 250k NA
00C250100IP 04/05/2006 J. BARON Mail 14/05/2006 Platic cover of electrical plug
Tooling has been worn out after a fire. Tooling is not able to deliver
the expected quality. Quotation for refubishing of the tool.
no GO 14/05/06 35k 0
00C250101IP 04/05/2006 J. BARON Mail 05/05/2006 IP+ Module
39012M-
59031
On cost for multi-graining - add-on separate tool drawer GO 05/05/06 330k 3,35
00C250112IP 11/10/2006 A. CHOPLIN Mail 18/10/2006 Faade a2/a3 37342X
Mistake on ATAX staples hangers: hangers are too thick and prevent
to perform the isostatism study for z axis.
no GO 18/10/06 45k 0,80
00C250176IP 14/10/2006 COUPE C letter 03/11/2006 Fuse drawer Add a fuse compartment coverpliers GO 15/01/07 85k 5,45
-There is a single list to manage ECR
Feasability and Quotation
Part price
Date for
quotation
Customer
reference
Quotation
Requested
date for
implementon
DR:Design
Review date
Launching
date
Purchasing
request
number
Drawing
index
Delivery
date and
batch
FMEA
update
DVP=Design
Validat
on
Plan
PVP=
Production
Valid
on
Plan
Closing
date
Comments
NA 16/10/06 FEX61-IP98 Agreed 30/11/2006 02/11/2006 05/12/2006
DA
10062929
A
RDV 2
07/02/07
NA 20/12/2006 20/01/2007
Waiting from RSA on final graining spec- Caution:
New quotation could be necessary - Wk 47
0 05/06/06 FEX61-IP84 Refused 15/09/2006
3,35 05/05/06 FEX61-IP81 Agreed 01/01/07 01/01/07 Not done --- RDV 3 NA Not done Not done Waiting for JB supplier quotation
0,80 16/11/06 FCIA N/A N/A S01/07 Redesign the ATAX staple
5,45 20/01/07
FE X61-IP-
118
Negociation Wk06
Technical change validation Customer Agreement Technical change release
One signle table for
various aspects
3 steps validation
135
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
NAME :_____________________________Session:_____________________________________
1 2 3 4
Introduction
Capitalization &
Transversalisation
Key Characteristics
FMEA
Program QRQC
Changes
& Gate Reviews
How to accelerate
Conclusion
Value added of
the module Comments
Evaluation Form
to fill in
136
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Lunch
137
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Agenda
10:10 FMEA PL.Soula
11:10 Break
12:05 Lunch
15:45 Break
17:00 End
Program Quick Response Continous
Improvement (QRCI)
John BURKE John BURKE John BURKE John BURKE
139
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
140
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Program QRCI - Agenda
Presentation and video 30 mn
Workshop 2 h 30 mn
Practical QRCI 2 h
Debriefing 30 mn
141
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Lets start to be PRACTICAL !
Watch the VIDEO
Compare the BAD to the GOOD
142
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Observation Part 1 What went wrong?
Detection
Communication
Analysis
Verification
no real place (talking mainly in the office)
no real parts (no parts in hand,.)
no quick response ( We ll look into it on Monday , 2 months for
solving issue at SOP period)
Insufficient real data (testing conditions ?, dimension ?,)
Insufficient in depth logical thinking (I think its the spring thats
,)
Insufficient verification (successive test failures)
Management: Insufficient on-the-job coaching (No quick communication ,
no regular review , no involvement , no team work , no risk monitoring
,)
143
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Observation Part 2 What contributed to this success?
Detection
Communication
Analysis
Verification
Management
Failures observed on the Gemba
Bad event immediately displayed on board and introduced in Single List of
Issues
Where and when it happens (16.11 in Lab , at end of cycle,)
Real parts available in QRCI review
No bla-bla and fact based (data collection)
Data (Testing conditions records ,photo , radius measurements,) shared with all
team members the day after problem raised)
What is the problem? (use of 5W 2H)
What are the countermeasures and risks on similar programs? (PDCA approach)
What is the root cause? (use of FICS , OK/ NOK parts 5Why , ,)
How do I prevent reoccurrence? (capitalization through lessons learned and
guidelines review )
Real place verification through testing in laboratory
Quick escalation
Monitoring and Effective support
Recognition
144
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
What is QRCI ?
A MANAGEMENT attitude to
solve ANY KIND OF PROBLEM
On the REAL PLACE
By Focusing on Our Priorities
Quick Response Continous
Improvement
145
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
QRCI foundation: the 3 REALS
San means "3" Gen means "real" or "actual"
Shugi means "ideology"
San Gen Shugi
Understand what is behind
1. Real Place (Gen-ba) Where is Genba?
Where it happens, when it happens
2. Real Parts (Gen-butsu) What is Genbutsu?
Objects which we compare: bad and good
3. Reality (Gen-jitsu) What is Genjitsu?
Speak the facts with data
146
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
The basic tools.
My eyes and my legs to.
What are the
Most important
Quality Tools
see/ measure/ observe/ analyze/ record
147
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Example of Example of Example of Example of GOOD answer for answer for answer for answer for Single List of Issues Single List of Issues Single List of Issues Single List of Issues
(SLI) (SLI) (SLI) (SLI)
How do you manage the important issues of your program ?
Program: Program mgr: SCHMITT Jean-Pierre
Product Ref.: SLI creation date 24-11-06
Award PPAP SOP List updated 20. december 2006
NA (Div SLI) NA (Div SLI) NA (Div SLI)
A76 DP 24-11-06 1 Division 3 Quality Supplier issues
Feuille d'tanchit fournisseur
DANA toujours tat WE1
N
Demander appui quipe Q-Achats
J. CABERO pour acclrer la
clture et la leve des derniers
points durs
MC. ILUNGA 06-12-06 11-12-06 Do
T7 IP/DP 24-11-06 2 Division 1 Process PRC
Relevs de temps de maquettage
pas remonts par les usines
(rel/prvisionnel + pareto)
N
Faire mettre jour les indicateurs
de convergence temps de
maquettage avec dcroissance
prvisionnelle en temps
E. PINTO 22-12-06 Check
T7 IP/DP 24-11-06 3 Division 1 Quality PRC
Difficult de lisibilit des indicateurs
validation et CTF sur PNO
N
Faire regrouper les indicateurs PNO
par silhouette + clarification pour
lisibilit
P. LABORDE 22-12-06 Check
A515 IP 24-11-06 4 Division 2
Product /
R&D
Function
review
TF1 et TF1-GR1 toujours rouges N
Visibilit sur clture / gate review
assurer
R. TOMCZAK 18-12-06 Plan
Tous
programmes
24-11-06 5 Division 1
Project
organisation /
Project
PRC
Absence de suivi TTP pour clture
des jalons PMS
N
Proposition de synthse jalon +
status + TTP/target Div
MC. ILUNGA 22-12-06 05-12-06 Check
B58 IP/GLC 24-11-06 7 Division 3 Quality
Customer
issues
Reconception vide-poche N
Dcision sur communication client
de l'engagement rflexion sur
reconception VA/VE
R. TOMCZAK 21-12-06 Plan
A76 DP 24-11-06 9 Product Group 3 Economics
Function
review
Certification CE (360) exige par
outillage
N
Interprtation de la Directive
Europenne par les Autorits
Espagnoles
Note cosigne FS/JPS vers
Lansade/Leroy copie JMV/I.
Lopez/C. Alberte sur fait que pas
possible prendre en compte
posteriori
JP. SCHMITT 22-12-06 Plan
NA (Div SLI) NA (Div SLI) NA (Div SLI)
NA (Div SLI)
GR1 GR2a
GR2b GR3
PROGRAM QRQC
DIVISION QRQC SLI
Single List of Issues (SLI)
Customer: PSA Division: PSA Customer Division
Dev./Prod. Site (s): Mru Platform/Model (s): PSA Programs - all platforms
Les volutions apparaissent en bleu, les sujets clos sont hachurs sur la prochaine diffusion puis masqus
Program
concerned
( If several
within the SLI
)
Opening Date
(DD.MM.YY)
No
Responsibility /
Escalation level
( Program Core
team or Division
or PRC)
Program
risk level
4: S/R
3: High
2: Medium
1: Low
Impacted
Area -
Function - Pb
category
Needed
Experts
Problem description
( 5W = 2 H ?)
D
e
e
p

a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t

n
u
m
b
e
r
QRQC
number
or NA
Root Causes Countermeasure (C/M)
PDCA
Action Planned
Action Done
Success Checked by
evidence
Activity for capitalization
done (LL)
Leader
Scheduled End
(Check) date
Real Check Date
Sold au niveau Division
le 15/12/06
Not various lists
Before Gate
1
Closing Date
All S/R issues
to be closed
before Gate 3
Updated
frequently
If applicable QRCI
reference
Priorities
defined
Program
risk level
4: S/R
3: High
2: Medium
1: Low
148
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
What is a red bin in programs ?
Typical unsolved issues for Program QRCI
Customer complaint product not meeting expectation
FMEA unsolved critical issue
Design review unsolved critical issue
Prototypes unexpected test failure
Initial samples not right first time
PVP not passed
Run and rate PT / MPT / EMPT failed
Supplier IS rejected
Tooling / gages not specified or not ready at due date
Program QRCI issues are:
ABNORMALITIES/ UNEXPECTED EVENTS
within program time frame
And not all Program Open points
QRCI subjects
Link with SLI
149
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
If
unsolved
issues,
action
assigned
to
management
Permanently , every Core team member (PQL, PDL, Buyer,.) will raise
issues and disclose them in SLI at Core team level if unsolved.
Program Risk level
3
2
4
1
0
Top 5 daily Core team meting
Escalated to QRCI
Leader : Program manager
Division Program QRCI
Daily
Leader : Customer Division Director
PG Program Regional
QRCI
Weekly meeting
Leader : Region customer VP
Group/PG
Steering
Committee
Monthly
QRCI Organization: All levels contribute
Immediate
action
mandatory
150
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Conclusion Key messages
Quick reaction/ Daily meeting/ Logical thinking
3 Reals: Real part/ Real data/ Real Place
Red bin is abnormalities versus program schedule
Escalation to require appropriate management support
and awareness
Get the right people assigned - cross functional actions
Visual display area- Single List of Issues (SLI)
Lessons learned are used as input for Control Plans,
Core Procedures, Standards and Guidelines to prevent
reoccurence
151
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Plan
Do
Exercice
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
D7
D8
Check
Act
N
Re- occurrence Re- occurrence Re- occurrence Re- occurrence
N Resp. Resp. Resp. Resp. Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line
N V VV V V VV V V VV V V VV V V VV V
O OO O = OK, X XX X= NOK, = Doubt, V VV V= Verification (To be used in D4 &D5 at columns "Real vs Std" and "Std OK?" and Validation of each Why)
Validated retained Validated retained Validated retained Validated retained
factor factor factor factor
N N N N
Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line Responsible Responsible Responsible Responsible
Risk Risk Risk Risk
Assessment Assessment Assessment Assessment
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
Effectiveness Effectiveness Effectiveness Effectiveness
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
New risk New risk New risk New risk
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
Resp. Resp. Resp. Resp. Dead-line/ Done Dead-line/ Done Dead-line/ Done Dead-line/ Done Check Check Check Check
(Y / N) (Y / N) (Y / N) (Y / N)
Validated retained Validated retained Validated retained Validated retained
N N N N
Responsible Responsible Responsible Responsible
What is the problem(customer view): What is the problem(customer view): What is the problem(customer view): What is the problem(customer view):
Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line
Who found the problem? Who created the problem ? Who found the problem? Who created the problem ? Who found the problem? Who created the problem ? Who found the problem? Who created the problem ?
Where was the problem found? Where was the problem Where was the problem found? Where was the problem Where was the problem found? Where was the problem Where was the problem found? Where was the problem
created? created? created? created?
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
New risk detected New risk detected New risk detected New risk detected
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
IS IS IS IS
(is the problem) (is the problem) (is the problem) (is the problem) QRCI-8D QRCI-8D QRCI-8D QRCI-8D
Ref: FAU-F-PSG-0287 Ref: FAU-F-PSG-0287 Ref: FAU-F-PSG-0287 Ref: FAU-F-PSG-0287
D6: QRCI QRCI QRCI QRCI Pilot: UAP Mgr. / HSE Mgr. /Logistic Mgr.
etc.
Name/ Signature
(In case customer does not exist & Program early (In case customer does not exist & Program early (In case customer does not exist & Program early (In case customer does not exist & Program early
phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit) D
1
-
P
r
o
b
l
e
m
d
e
s
c
r
ip
t
io
n
D
1
-
P
r
o
b
l
e
m
d
e
s
c
r
ip
t
io
n
D
1
-
P
r
o
b
l
e
m
d
e
s
c
r
ip
t
io
n
D
1
-
P
r
o
b
l
e
m
d
e
s
c
r
ip
t
io
n
5W/ 2Hs 5W/ 2Hs 5W/ 2Hs 5W/ 2Hs
1st ProblemDefinition 1st ProblemDefinition 1st ProblemDefinition 1st ProblemDefinition
(Faurecia View) (Faurecia View) (Faurecia View) (Faurecia View)
What is the problem ? What is the problem ? What is the problem ? What is the problem ?
When the problemhappened? When was the problem When the problemhappened? When was the problem When the problemhappened? When was the problem When the problemhappened? When was the problem
Why is it a problem? Why is it a problem? Why is it a problem? Why is it a problem?
Quick Response Quick Response Quick Response Quick Response
Continuous Improvement Continuous Improvement Continuous Improvement Continuous Improvement
IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT
(Is not the problem) (Is not the problem) (Is not the problem) (Is not the problem)
Team: Team: Team: Team: Opened: Opened: Opened: Opened:
D3 Containment actions D3 Containment actions D3 Containment actions D3 Containment actions
(Including retained factor containment based on evidence) (Including retained factor containment based on evidence) (Including retained factor containment based on evidence) (Including retained factor containment based on evidence)
D3: Quality Manager / PILOT / HSE / UAP Mgr.
Definition of incident clear ?
Name/ Signature
phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit)
How many? How many? How many? How many?
(HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others) (HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others) (HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others) (HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others)
Classification: Classification: Classification: Classification:
(HSE: By physical cause) (HSE: By physical cause) (HSE: By physical cause) (HSE: By physical cause)
Meeting dates Meeting dates Meeting dates Meeting dates
D
4
-
D
4
-
D
4
-
D
4
- C
a
u
s
e o
f n
o
n
-d
e
te
ctio
n
o
f D
e
fe
ct / R
isk
C
a
u
s
e o
f n
o
n
-d
e
te
ctio
n
o
f D
e
fe
ct / R
isk
C
a
u
s
e o
f n
o
n
-d
e
te
ctio
n
o
f D
e
fe
ct / R
isk
C
a
u
s
e o
f n
o
n
-d
e
te
ctio
n
o
f D
e
fe
ct / R
isk
(W
h
y n
o
t fo
u
n
d
?)
(W
h
y n
o
t fo
u
n
d
?)
(W
h
y n
o
t fo
u
n
d
?)
(W
h
y n
o
t fo
u
n
d
?)
(In
ca
se
cu
sto
m
e
r d
o
es
n
o
t e
xist, D
4 co
m
e
s a
fte
r D
5 to
sh
o
w

(In
ca
se
cu
sto
m
e
r d
o
es
n
o
t e
xist, D
4 co
m
e
s a
fte
r D
5 to
sh
o
w

(In
ca
se
cu
sto
m
e
r d
o
es
n
o
t e
xist, D
4 co
m
e
s a
fte
r D
5 to
sh
o
w

(In
ca
se
cu
sto
m
e
r d
o
es
n
o
t e
xist, D
4 co
m
e
s a
fte
r D
5 to
sh
o
w

W
h
y co
u
ld
n
't de
te
ct th
e
ca
u
se
o
f O
ccu
rre
n
ce
)
W
h
y co
u
ld
n
't de
te
ct th
e
ca
u
se
o
f O
ccu
rre
n
ce
)
W
h
y co
u
ld
n
't de
te
ct th
e
ca
u
se
o
f O
ccu
rre
n
ce
)
W
h
y co
u
ld
n
't de
te
ct th
e
ca
u
se
o
f O
ccu
rre
n
ce
)
IS/ IS NOT influence retained factor of
non- detection
Standard Standard Standard Standard Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR
Comments/ Conclusions Comments/ Conclusions Comments/ Conclusions Comments/ Conclusions
D4 to D6 D4 to D6 D4 to D6 D4 to D6
(10 workdays in case (10 workdays in case (10 workdays in case (10 workdays in case
Customer exist Customer exist Customer exist Customer exist * ** * & & & &
HSE) HSE) HSE) HSE)
Problem Problem Problem Problem 2nd definition 2nd definition 2nd definition 2nd definition
(Scope reduction) (Scope reduction) (Scope reduction) (Scope reduction)
Retained Retained Retained Retained
Factors Factors Factors Factors
Need to warn other plants/R&D
D2 - Risks on similar D2 - Risks on similar D2 - Risks on similar D2 - Risks on similar Products, Products, Products, Products,
processes, machines, plants? processes, machines, plants? processes, machines, plants? processes, machines, plants?
Risky process or conditions to report. Risky process or conditions to report. Risky process or conditions to report. Risky process or conditions to report.
Investigation actions Investigation actions Investigation actions Investigation actions
Real vs. Real vs. Real vs. Real vs.
Std. Std. Std. Std.
Std. Std. Std. Std.
OK ? OK ? OK ? OK ? NOK NOK NOK NOK OK OK OK OK
Real situation Real situation Real situation Real situation Standard Standard Standard Standard
D
4
5
W
h
y
's
D
4
5
W
h
y
's
D
4
5
W
h
y
's
D
4
5
W
h
y
's
(M
in
im
u
m
5 tim
es o
r
(M
in
im
u
m
5 tim
es o
r
(M
in
im
u
m
5 tim
es o
r
(M
in
im
u
m
5 tim
es o
r
m
o
re
to rea
ch

m
o
re
to rea
ch

m
o
re
to rea
ch

m
o
re
to rea
ch

m
an
ag
e
m
e
n
t is
su
e
s)
m
an
ag
e
m
e
n
t is
su
e
s)
m
an
ag
e
m
e
n
t is
su
e
s)
m
an
ag
e
m
e
n
t is
su
e
s) Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?
Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a RETAINED FACTOR
Result Result Result Result
Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?
D
5
5
W
h
y
's

D
5
5
W
h
y
's

D
5
5
W
h
y
's

D
5
5
W
h
y
's

(M
in
im
u
m
5
tim
e
s o
r
(M
in
im
u
m
5
tim
e
s o
r
(M
in
im
u
m
5
tim
e
s o
r
(M
in
im
u
m
5
tim
e
s o
r
m
o
re
to
rea
ch

m
o
re
to
rea
ch

m
o
re
to
rea
ch

m
o
re
to
rea
ch

m
a
n
a
g
em
en
t issu
e
s)
m
a
n
a
g
em
en
t issu
e
s)
m
a
n
a
g
em
en
t issu
e
s)
m
a
n
a
g
em
en
t issu
e
s) Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?
Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? )
Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?
Actions Management (or escalated to Sr. Management) Actions Management (or escalated to Sr. Management) Actions Management (or escalated to Sr. Management) Actions Management (or escalated to Sr. Management)
Lessons learned (LL) Lessons learned (LL) Lessons learned (LL) Lessons learned (LL) created created created created
Lessons learned shared Lessons learned shared Lessons learned shared Lessons learned shared
Actions Technical Actions Technical Actions Technical Actions Technical
Follow up by Core teams Follow up by Core teams Follow up by Core teams Follow up by Core teams
Action Action Action Action
FMEA / Risk assessment updated FMEA / Risk assessment updated FMEA / Risk assessment updated FMEA / Risk assessment updated
Standardized work created / updated Standardized work created / updated Standardized work created / updated Standardized work created / updated
Std. Std. Std. Std.
Std. Std. Std. Std.
OK ? OK ? OK ? OK ?
All actions validated and implemented All actions validated and implemented All actions validated and implemented All actions validated and implemented
D8 - Lessons learned D8 - Lessons learned D8 - Lessons learned D8 - Lessons learned
D6 Corrective actions D6 Corrective actions D6 Corrective actions D6 Corrective actions
(Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls) (Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls) (Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls) (Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls)
Control Plan updated Control Plan updated Control Plan updated Control Plan updated
Operators / teammembers informed Operators / teammembers informed Operators / teammembers informed Operators / teammembers informed
Steps Steps Steps Steps Milestone review Milestone review Milestone review Milestone review
(24 h in case (24 h in case (24 h in case (24 h in case
Customer exist Customer exist Customer exist Customer exist * ** * & && &
HSE) HSE) HSE) HSE)
What is the rule for risk
Prevention / Detection ?
D8: Responsible Mgr: Plant / Program etc.
Name/ Signature
phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit) phase, no time limit)
(60 workdays in case (60 workdays in case (60 workdays in case (60 workdays in case
Customer exist* & Customer exist* & Customer exist* & Customer exist* &
HSE) HSE) HSE) HSE)
How the problem was found ? How the problem was found ? How the problem was found ? How the problem was found ?
H
SE
H
SE
H
SE
H
SE
O
nly
O
nly
O
nly
O
nly
Action Action Action Action PILOT PILOT PILOT PILOT
Category: Category: Category: Category:
(HSE: Near Miss, FR2t, FR1t & FR0t) (HSE: Near Miss, FR2t, FR1t & FR0t) (HSE: Near Miss, FR2t, FR1t & FR0t) (HSE: Near Miss, FR2t, FR1t & FR0t)
* In case Customer exist like Logistic, Quality, Program pre-production & launching phase * In case Customer exist like Logistic, Quality, Program pre-production & launching phase * In case Customer exist like Logistic, Quality, Program pre-production & launching phase * In case Customer exist like Logistic, Quality, Program pre-production & launching phase
Real situation Real situation Real situation Real situation
Retained Factor Retained Factor Retained Factor Retained Factor
validated ? validated ? validated ? validated ?
Control point Control point Control point Control point
How to measure/ characterize the retained factor
RETAINED FACTOR -D4- RETAINED FACTOR -D4- RETAINED FACTOR -D4- RETAINED FACTOR -D4-
D
5
- C
a
u
se
o
f o
ccu
rre
n
ce
D
5
- C
a
u
se
o
f o
ccu
rre
n
ce
D
5
- C
a
u
se
o
f o
ccu
rre
n
ce
D
5
- C
a
u
se
o
f o
ccu
rre
n
ce
(W
h
y h
a
p
p
e
n
s th
is tim
e &
n
o o
th
e
r tim
e
)
(W
h
y h
a
p
p
e
n
s th
is tim
e &
n
o o
th
e
r tim
e
)
(W
h
y h
a
p
p
e
n
s th
is tim
e &
n
o o
th
e
r tim
e
)
(W
h
y h
a
p
p
e
n
s th
is tim
e &
n
o o
th
e
r tim
e
)
(In
case
cu
s
to
m
e
r d
o
e
s n
o
t ex
ist, D
5
com
e b
e
fore D
4
)
(In
case
cu
s
to
m
e
r d
o
e
s n
o
t ex
ist, D
5
com
e b
e
fore D
4
)
(In
case
cu
s
to
m
e
r d
o
e
s n
o
t ex
ist, D
5
com
e b
e
fore D
4
)
(In
case
cu
s
to
m
e
r d
o
e
s n
o
t ex
ist, D
5
com
e b
e
fore D
4
)
IS/ IS NOT influence retained factor of
occurrence
Prevention
/ Occurrence?
How to measure/ characterize the retained factor
RETAINED FACTOR -D5- RETAINED FACTOR -D5- RETAINED FACTOR -D5- RETAINED FACTOR -D5- Control point Control point Control point Control point
Retained Factor Retained Factor Retained Factor Retained Factor
validated ? validated ? validated ? validated ? NOK NOK NOK NOK OK OK OK OK
D3 &D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented D3 &D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented D3 &D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented D3 &D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented
Y
NO YES
NO YES
YES NO
N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Before incident
(3 months minimum history)
After the incident & counter measure applied
Detection:
Occurrence:
What is the problem?
Do I have same problem elsewhere?
How to contain?
What is the root cause
(non detection and occurrence)
What are corrective actions plan?
How to check efficiency?
What did we learn?
(How to capitalize and transversalize ?)
Logical thinking is essential
152
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
N
Re- occurrence Re- occurrence Re- occurrence Re- occurrence
O OO O = OK, X XX X= NOK, = Doubt, V VV V= Verification
Validated Validated Validated Validated
N N N N
Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line Dead-line Responsible Responsible Responsible Responsible
Risk Risk Risk Risk
Assessmen Assessmen Assessmen Assessmen
t tt t
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
New risk New risk New risk New risk
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
Resp. Resp. Resp. Resp. Dead-line/ Done Dead-line/ Done Dead-line/ Done Dead-line/ Done
Check Check Check Check
(Y / N) (Y / N) (Y / N) (Y / N)
How many? How many? How many? How many?
(HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others) (HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others) (HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others) (HSE: Accident, Environment, Fire, Others)
Who found the problem? Who created the problem ? Who found the problem? Who created the problem ? Who found the problem? Who created the problem ? Who found the problem? Who created the problem ?
Where was the problem found? Where was the problem Where was the problem found? Where was the problem Where was the problem found? Where was the problem Where was the problem found? Where was the problem
How the problem was found ? How the problem was found ? How the problem was found ? How the problem was found ?
Real situation Real situation Real situation Real situation
Factor validated ? Factor validated ? Factor validated ? Factor validated ?
QRCI-8D QRCI-8D QRCI-8D QRCI-8D
Meeting dates Meeting dates Meeting dates Meeting dates
D6: QRCI Pilot: UAP Mgr. / Hse Mgr. /Logistic Mgr.
etc.
Name/ Signature
PILOT PILOT PILOT PILOT
Steps Steps Steps Steps Milestone review Milestone review Milestone review Milestone review
24 h 24 h 24 h 24 h
D8: Responsible Mgr: Plant / Program etc.
Name/ Signature
Team: Team: Team: Team: Opened: Opened: Opened: Opened:
D3 Containment actions D3 Containment actions D3 Containment actions D3 Containment actions
D3: Quality Manager / PILOT / Hse / UAP Mgr.
Definition of incident clear ?
Name/ Signature
Category: Category: Category: Category:
(HSE: FR2t, FR1t & FR0t) (HSE: FR2t, FR1t & FR0t) (HSE: FR2t, FR1t & FR0t) (HSE: FR2t, FR1t & FR0t)
Comments/ Conclusions Comments/ Conclusions Comments/ Conclusions Comments/ Conclusions
10 workdays 10 workdays 10 workdays 10 workdays
60 workdays 60 workdays 60 workdays 60 workdays
All actions validated and implemented All actions validated and implemented All actions validated and implemented All actions validated and implemented
D8 - Lessons learned D8 - Lessons learned D8 - Lessons learned D8 - Lessons learned
D6 Corrective actions D6 Corrective actions D6 Corrective actions D6 Corrective actions
(Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls) (Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls) (Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls) (Process, Machines, Standards, Hazard identification, risk assessment and determining controls)
Lessons learned shared Lessons learned shared Lessons learned shared Lessons learned shared
Follow up by Core teams Follow up by Core teams Follow up by Core teams Follow up by Core teams
Actions Actions Actions Actions
FMEA / Risk assessment updated FMEA / Risk assessment updated FMEA / Risk assessment updated FMEA / Risk assessment updated
Lessons learned (LL) Lessons learned (LL) Lessons learned (LL) Lessons learned (LL) created created created created
Operators informed Operators informed Operators informed Operators informed
Instructions at WS updated Instructions at WS updated Instructions at WS updated Instructions at WS updated
Std. Std. Std. Std.
Std. Std. Std. Std.
OK ? OK ? OK ? OK ?
Result Result Result Result How to measure/ characterize the factor
Prevention / Detection ?
NOK NOK NOK NOK OK OK OK OK
Std. Std. Std. Std.
Std. Std. Std. Std.
OK ? OK ? OK ? OK ?
Standard Standard Standard Standard Control point Control point Control point Control point Real situation Real situation Real situation Real situation
D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D4 Root cause ( Management issue ? )
Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) D5 Root cause ( Management issue ? ) Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?
D
5

5

W
h
y
'
s

D
5

5

W
h
y
'
s

D
5

5

W
h
y
'
s

D
5

5

W
h
y
'
s

FACTOR -D4- FACTOR -D4- FACTOR -D4- FACTOR -D4-
FACTOR -D5- FACTOR -D5- FACTOR -D5- FACTOR -D5- Control point Control point Control point Control point
Prevention
/ Occurrence?
How to measure/ characterize the factor
Factor validated ? Factor validated ? Factor validated ? Factor validated ?
NOK NOK NOK NOK OK OK OK OK
Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR
D
5

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

D
5

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

D
5

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

D
5

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

o
c
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
o
c
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
o
c
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
o
c
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
(
W
h
y

h
a
p
p
e
n
e
d

?
)
(
W
h
y

h
a
p
p
e
n
e
d

?
)
(
W
h
y

h
a
p
p
e
n
e
d

?
)
(
W
h
y

h
a
p
p
e
n
e
d

?
)
D
4

5

W
h
y
s
D
4

5

W
h
y
s
D
4

5

W
h
y
s
D
4

5

W
h
y
s
IS/ IS NOT influence factor of occurrence
Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?
Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR Investigation plan to validate/ eliminate a FACTOR
D
4

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

n
o
n
-
D
4

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

n
o
n
-
D
4

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

n
o
n
-
D
4

-

F
a
c
t
o
r

o
f

n
o
n
-
d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

(
C
a
u
s
e

o
f

n
o
n
-
d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

(
C
a
u
s
e

o
f

n
o
n
-
d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

(
C
a
u
s
e

o
f

n
o
n
-
d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

(
C
a
u
s
e

o
f

n
o
n
-
d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

D
e
f
e
c
t

/

R
i
s
k
)
D
e
f
e
c
t

/

R
i
s
k
)
D
e
f
e
c
t

/

R
i
s
k
)
D
e
f
e
c
t

/

R
i
s
k
)
IS/ IS NOT influence factor of non-
detection
Standard Standard Standard Standard
D2 - Risks on similar processes, D2 - Risks on similar processes, D2 - Risks on similar processes, D2 - Risks on similar processes,
machines, plants? machines, plants? machines, plants? machines, plants?
Risky process or conditions to report. Risky process or conditions to report. Risky process or conditions to report. Risky process or conditions to report.
2nd Problem Redefinition 2nd Problem Redefinition 2nd Problem Redefinition 2nd Problem Redefinition
(Scope reduction) (Scope reduction) (Scope reduction) (Scope reduction)
IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT Retained Retained Retained Retained
Factors Factors Factors Factors
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
New risk detected New risk detected New risk detected New risk detected
(Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N)
Need to warn other plants/R&D
D
1
-

P
r
o
b
l
e
m

d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
D
1
-

P
r
o
b
l
e
m

d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
D
1
-

P
r
o
b
l
e
m

d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
D
1
-

P
r
o
b
l
e
m

d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
5W/ 2Hs 5W/ 2Hs 5W/ 2Hs 5W/ 2Hs
1st Problem Definition 1st Problem Definition 1st Problem Definition 1st Problem Definition
(Faurecia View) (Faurecia View) (Faurecia View) (Faurecia View)
What is the problem? What is the problem? What is the problem? What is the problem?
When the problem happened? When was the problem When the problem happened? When was the problem When the problem happened? When was the problem When the problem happened? When was the problem
Why is it a problem? Why is it a problem? Why is it a problem? Why is it a problem?
IS IS IS IS
Classification: Classification: Classification: Classification:
(HSE: By physical cause) (HSE: By physical cause) (HSE: By physical cause) (HSE: By physical cause)
D3 & D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented D3 & D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented D3 & D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented D3 & D7. Indicators follow-up by date of Manufacture / Occurrence / Action implemented
Y
NO YES
NO YES
YES NO
N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N
QRCI
form
to use
D1
D2
D3
D3&D7
D4
D5
D6
D8
153
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Program QRCI Workshop
Build the QRCI (one
per table) with your
trainer on the QRCI
Form. Performall 8D
steps (60 mn)
Trainer will give to
each group necessary
available information
Debriefing (30 mn)
Brazed
connection
Leak test values higher than
internal specification found during prototype assembly
154
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Exhaust pipe assembly with brazing
1 - Process Flow in Prototype Shop
WASHING
RING
2 Leak Testing Results
Nok parts
Ok parts
RAW
MATERIAL
TUBE MILL
BENDING
DIAMETER
SIZING
BRAZING
LEAK TESTING
Ok
WASHING
NOk
RING
END
FORMING
Bubles detected with soap
155
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Agenda
10:10 FMEA PL.Soula
11:10 Break
12:05 Lunch
15:45 Break
17:00 End
156
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Break
Functional Milestones +
Program Steering Committee & Gate Reviews
Paul-Louis SOULA
158
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
Capitalization &
Transversalization
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
159
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Why this basic?
Too many bad launches:
Red SOP status (Mar 2011): 27% Red Programs
( Jun 2011 25%)
Delay for passing gates:
Time To Pass Gate (Mare 2011): 41 days
(Jun 2011=>33 days)
160
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Module objectives
Understand basics of Functional Milestones , QVR
(Quality Validation Reviews), TVR (Team validation
Reviews) and Gate Reviews
Highlight factors for successful program steering
and Gate Reviews
Remember: Delayed event has consequences
(efficiency, costs) and comes from malfunctioning
161
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Video Part 1
162
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Live exchange What went wrong?
Consequences
Gate red for 4 months
Airs shipment of 120 k
Gate Review
PSC members late + 3 function heads
missing
Product definition freeze is borderline
Packaging not validated by plant
Late contribution of functions
Core team:
No precise lead time to recover 2 wks
delay on knee impact
Risks identified but not treated
163
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Video Part 2
164
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Live exchange What went well ?
Core team:
Driven by SLI - weekly meetings- On time escalation -
Early experts involvment Shopfloor review
Early escalation to customer
Preventive measures taken during meeting
Functional Milestones
Function Management engagement
Priorities driven by SLI and anticipation
Review with evidence, facts and data
Gate Review
Green at 1st review Key Deliverables
Key Deliverables Detailed validation
Proactive management for next gate review
165
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
166
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Objectives of Functional Milestones
Make sure that Functional Managers are committed and
involved in key decisions concerning programs
Up to date FAURECIA knowledge is used in programs
Program risks are well-evaluated and treated
Improve resource management
Increased standardization and carry over
Enable continuous improvement
Improve the robustness of Gate Review decisions
Improve our global Time To Pass Gate
Validate the program progress against
Standards & Guidelines and internal expertise while taking
Into account Customer Requirements
167
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Functional Milestone Definition
in PMS Overview FAU-P-DSC-2200
Occur during each phase and involve Core Team members
presenting to a group of Experts, i.e. Functional Managers, and
Technical Experts.
Cover Engineering, Manufacturing, Purchasing, and any other
functions to assess the content and the quality of deliverables
Performed before
QVR QVR QVR QVR (Quality Validation Review lead by Quality Director) or (Quality Validation Review lead by Quality Director) or (Quality Validation Review lead by Quality Director) or (Quality Validation Review lead by Quality Director) or
TVR TVR TVR TVR (Team Validation Review co (Team Validation Review co (Team Validation Review co (Team Validation Review co- -- -lead by Program and Quality Directors) lead by Program and Quality Directors) lead by Program and Quality Directors) lead by Program and Quality Directors)
Gate Review happens after a Green QVR or TVR
Note: For more details on Functional Milestones see also FCP Manage Gates and Functional Milestones (FAU-P-DSC-2240)
168
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
1 2A 3 4 5
ACQUISITION PRODUCT
&
PROCESS
DESIGN
PRODUCTION SET-
UP
LAUNCH
2B
PRODUCTION
DESIGN
VERIFICATION
CUSTOMER
INQUIRY
PROGRAM
AWARD
CUSTOMER
TOOL RELEASE
CUSTOMER
PRODUCTION
PART APPROVAL
START OF
PRODUCTION
END OF
PRODUCTION
GR 1 GR 2B GR 3
GR 4
GR 2A
Program Management System
169
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
PMS Functional Milestones and Gate Reviews
Gate Reviews
Managements commitment and support of program for next phase
Program risks agreement
Prepared by Functional Milestones and Quality Validation Reviews
Ensure Faurecia best knowledge is used
Identify technical risks and build subsequent corrective actions
Ensure propagation of technical and design best practices
Acquisition Design Design Verification Customer
RFQ Award
TL PPAP SOP
Production Setup Launch
Concept Proposal
Validation
GR 1 GR 2A GR 2B GR 3 GR 4
Executives
Milestones
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
M
i
l
e
s
t
o
n
e
s
Engineering
Manufacturing
Purchasing
Quality
Finance
FM1A FM1 FM2A FM2B FM3
QVR* TVR** QVR* TVR** QVR* TVR** QVR* TVR**
QVR* : Quality Validation Review TVR** : Team Validation Review
170
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Roles of function versus program
What When
QCD performance
Coordination
Global budget
Decision/ Escalade
Reporting towards customer
How
Resources
Standards
Expertise
Stick with commited cost
Veto
Validate and dive
PROGRAM
FUNCTION
171
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
PSA OEM Benchmark
Function Objectives
e.g. R&D Director, Purchasing
Director, ME Director
Q R T and Communication (int. / ext.)
Quality System
Definition of way of working,
functional objectives
and organization
Resources/People
Quantity and Competence
Technical
Standards State of the art
Program Objectives
e.g. Program Manager
Q C D and
Performance
Results
172
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Functional Milestone Review Attendees
Status: E2B
Review Date:
Attempt: 1st
ASPG
Engineering Functional
Milestone Review
VW 250
Function: Invited: M/O:
JIT complete seat
Attended:
QPS-Manager
PQL VW 250
Division:
Program:
Product:
EFM Review Committee Members:
VW Group
Owner: J.Schnabel
O
SA VW 250
M
M
M
R. Oberbeck
J.Etzel
J.Schnabel J.Schnabel
R. Oberbeck
J.Etzel
M: Mandatory - O: Optional
SSD - SECI Manager O R. Deppe R. Deppe
Programmdirector O K.Schlueter K.Schlueter
SSD - SSA Manager SEC O
SSD - DFA Manager O
R&D Vice President M T.Ludewig R.Hanauske
Director SSD - NEC M R.Hanauske R.Hanauske
SDS - Manager M T.Collette
SSD - PCA Manager O D.Kraft D.Kraft
SSD - SSA Manager O A.Spormann A.Spormann
SSD - CTCM Manager O S.Kroener S.Kroener
F.Meyer Joachim Mai
A. Buddensiek
173
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Functional Milestone Checklists
Owned and maintained
by BG Functions
174
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
&
Gate Reviews
175
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
PMS: Levels of control
FAURECIA
MANAGEMENT
Program Steering
Committee
PROGRAM
OBJECTIVES
LINE MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM MANAGER
PROGRAM
PROGRESS
MGMT
DECISIONS
GATE REVIEW
#1-4
FUNCTIONAL
MILESTONES
DETAILED REPORTS
BY FUNCTION
PRODUCT
Readiness
PROCESS
Readiness
KPI Monitoring
DESIGN
VALIDATION
PM PML PQL PB PDL
STRATEGIC
OBJECTIVES
TECHNICAL &
FUNCTIONAL
OBJECTIVES
PROGRAM
PROGRESS
3. Governance
SUPPLIER
Readiness
176
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Who is on the Program Steering Committee
(PSC)?
Sales
Purchasing
Product Engineering
Program Management
Human Resources
Manufacturing
Quality Regional Director of Quality
Regional Director of Human Resources
PG or Regional Director of Programs
Appropriate Customer Division Manager
Regional Director of Product Engineering
Regional Director of Manufacturing
Regional Director of Purchasing
Regional VP (Chairman)
Finance Regional Controller
177
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Mind-set change: Company wide expectations
Gate Review repetitions are not acceptable
1st pass of all / majority of Mandatory Deliverables
2nd run to close any open issues raised in 1st run
Escalation is not only for information exchange, it is really for
problem resolution
Increase information transparency do not kill the
messenger
Focus on preventive problem solving and set the example
for timely management involvement
178
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
PMS Mandatory Program Deliverables
Sales
Prototypes paid
Sales
Prototypes paid
Human
Resources
Human
Resources
5 Series
PRODUCTION
5 Series
PRODUCTION
Design FMEA *
Product
Engineering
Prototypes approved
Design FMEA *
Product
Engineering
Prototypes approved
Program
Management
Master schedule *
Control of
process &
design
change *
Program
Management
Master schedule *
Control of
process &
design
change *
Manufac-
turing
Process definition
EMPT Run @ Rate
Manufac-
turing
Process definition
EMPT Run @ Rate
END OF
PRODUCTION
CUSTOMER
INQUIRY
PROGRAM
AWARD
CUSTOMER
TOOL RELEASE
CUSTOMER
PRODUCTION
PART APPROVAL
START OF
PRODUCTION
END OF
PRODUCTION
CUSTOMER
INQUIRY
PROGRAM
AWARD
CUSTOMER
TOOL RELEASE
CUSTOMER
PRODUCTION
PART APPROVAL
START OF
PRODUCTION
GR 1 GR 2B GR 3
GR 4
CAR Approval
Program
Quote Review
GR 2A Go/No Go
Program
Target Review
GR 1 GR 2B GR 3
GR 4
CAR Approval
Program
Quote Review
GR 2A Go/No Go
Program
Target Review
Quality
Quality
V1.0
* mandatory deliverables linked to Quality Validation Review minimum necessity items
1. Process 1. Process 1. Process 1. Process
179
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Version 2 - 14 Dec 2009
Program Internal Contract (program objectives) - GR#1
Description
The Program Internal Contract articulates the performance boundaries of a program (objectives) committed to by the
PSC Chairman as agreed by the Program Steering Committee (PSC), the Program Core Team (PCT), and associated
Functional Managers at the Gate Review.
The Program Internal Contract is prepared in the acquisition phase between the Program Quote Review and the
Program Team Kick-off. The Program Internal Contract is first approved at the Gate Review #1 by the PSC. The PSC
reviews the Program Internal Contract at subsequent Gate Reviews. It is possible that the threshold level of some
contract parameters are changed during subsequent Gate Reviews.
Input
Program Quote Review minutes
Customer requirements
Initial Product and Process Concept
Preliminary Manufacturing Footprint
Initial Equipment Concept
Initial Supply Chain Concept
Required output
Completed Program Internal Contract with full commitment of Program Team, Functional Managers and the Product
Steering Committee
Documents to be used
Program Internal Contract
Responsibility
Validator: Program Steering Committee
Actor: Acqusition Manager up to Program Kick-off, Program Manager after Program Kick-off
180
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Prepared between the Program Quote Review & Program
Team Kick-off
Highlights the major program risks
First approved at the Gate Review #1 by the PSC
Functions have committed to their associated key
program challenges
The PSC reviews the Program Internal Contract at
subsequent Gate Reviews
The right level of staffing is reserved in order to
close the gaps
181
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Articulate the performance boundaries of a program as mutually agreed by the
Program Steering Committee (PSC) and the Program Core Team.
Prepared between the Program Quote Review and the
Program Team Kick-off.
First approved at the Gate Review #1 by the PSC.
The PSC reviews the Program Internal Contract at subsequent
Gate Reviews.
Committed product deliverables are defined.
Hard to measure customer expected performance targets are
identified.
Target and the actual values are compared and the magnitude
of the gaps are estimated.
The right level of staffing is reserved in order to close the
gaps.
Major program challenges are highlighted early.
Main program stakes are transferred into the Program Single
List of Issues
Complementary gap closure projects are launched.
The program scope is adjusted.
Functions have committed to their associated key program
challenges.
indicator
Units Target Actual Seuil Alerte
Product
performance Safety/Regulation
Safety Customer
specification (
incl.NCAP) Tests status R/Y/G G Y
Regulation Tests status R/Y/G G Y
Interface with vehicule % parts in carry over % 10% 7% TBD
Innovative functions/new applications Number of new functions number 1 1
Innovation 1 - BA3 Milestone status M1-M4 M4 Status M4 < M3
Weight % = actual/customer target % 66kg 70kg TBD
Perceived quality Electrical Noise dB dB <40 36
Functional Noise Zero V3 Quotation RSA Subjective 0 >0
Aspect Number of DMT points number 0V1 et (V2+V3)<0.03 @ SOP TBD
effort Newtons number 100% to specification 1 Non conformance
Reliability & endurance Status of endurance test R/Y/G G Y
Design for manufacturing R/G 100% operation GO au Gate 2 R
AGREPT Number of points < 5 number 0-5 5+1
Cost
Product cost (Provisional Product Cost
with current definition and current
manufacturing performance) Previsional cost / target cost 381.49 387.22
IRR % IRR % 15 6.8 5%
OI OI 6 2.6 0
Upfront Upfront en ME 13.3 15 20%
Quality PPM at 0km PPM 40 150 10%
3 Months Warranty Claims K/= Cases per 1000 2.15
B: 1,3
C: 6,9 10%
Resources Staffing CT & ET Zero Open Position * 1
Turnover on Core Team and key
functions (Program Manager, Core
Team Members, Architect) % 0 0 1
Delivery Definition Freeze for DV juin-06 NA
Tool Launch avr-07 NA
PPAP juil-08 Na
Manufacturing
Footprint Number and names of plants Number and name Number and name
6, ACL (JIT), St. Jao Madere
(Foam), St. Jao Madere
(Metal), St. Jao Madere
(Insitu), STEA (Trim Covers),
Poland (Slides)
84, Coife (3
Suppliers) Any change
Production Volumes Unit forecast 1,000,000 NA 5%
Program
Specific
Targets/Challene
ges LCC % LCC Supplier Pannel % 30% 20% 5%
New Plant
Plant built, equiped, staffed
and approved 0
New Customer 0
New Concept 0
New Development Venture 0
Weight 66kg 70kg
LCC 30% 20%
182
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Good answer for
Functional milestones & Gate Reviews
How do you perform your Functional Milestones and your Gate Reviews ?
Clear list of attendees (plan/real)
including expert and mandatory if
needed
Clear check list with conclusion
(Ok/NOk)
( clear criteria to conclude Ok)
Action plan with Responsible
& deadline in single file
Calendar for next ( six months
at least) Functional Milestones
& Gate Review
Time to pass Gate is
monitored and achieving
target line
Engineering / Manufacturing /
Purchasing Functional
Milestones
ENGINEER
MANUF
PURCHASING
E84
Product type Complete Seat
1st row
Katharina Jahn
07/10/2008
Review
location
Stadthagen Jacek Kusiak
PQL Outputs
WP planned
closure date
Quality Key Deliverables Critical Status Comments / Actions Detailed description of PQL output
Product performance - PIST Level PIST level for KPCs has achieved the customer target
Final Key Characteristics List Key Characteristics List reviewed and updated based on the prototype
tests, measurement results
2E15 Internal Quality Objectives Updated Development Convergence Plan 22/09/08
implemented C G
Prototype control plan implemented and signed off
Product audit tracking is ongoing
reference to Convergenceplan E84_Fehlerbersicht_KJ_20080809
Action plan defined to correct non conformance based on PIST values,
DV test results and any other non conformities (complaints..etc.).
Pre-Production Control Plan
Flow Chart/Machines, Tools used in the process / KPC, KCC /
Frequency of control / Inspection methods, gauges, tools../ Record
format and duration / Reaction rules in case of non conformity (Rework?)
/ Approval by Plant and Program Manager
Pre-Production Inspection Instructions References for measurement / Characteristics to be measured with
tolerance and classification
QSE plan with implementation dates in line with
FPT, MPT & EMPT requirements and schedule -
QSE Training & coaching plan -
- - Program risk assessment ongoing G Shareplace is updated and in use / also 3PR and LOP / SLI / PRC
Regular Programrisk assessment - Prototype (SLI /or customer specific
list, 3PR, PRC, PQL Sharepoint, Risks identified and under control or
escalated when necessary)
- - Quality Validation Review 23/09/08
implemented G 23.09.2008 09:30 - 11:00 result A-
QVR conclusion positive (status A or A-) or QVR scheduled (if QFMis
performed earlier than QVR )
Conclusion: PASS :___YES____ FAIL: ______
Re-Review Necessary ? YES:_______ NO:___X_____
Signature Name Date
Program Quality Manager Kusiaz Jacek 7-oct.-08
Comments:
2E14
2E25 Pre-Production Control Plan
implemented
Gauges requirements
2E+28
07/07/08
07/07/08
25.06.08
Proto #2 Quality Performance
Analyzed
Established
QSE deployment plan defined
Work Packages
QUALITY FUNCTIONAL MILESTONE QUALITY FUNCTIONAL MILESTONE QUALITY FUNCTIONAL MILESTONE QUALITY FUNCTIONAL MILESTONE
Phase 2B Phase 2B Phase 2B Phase 2B
Program
Review Date
PQL & contributors
Reviewed by
C
Pre-Production Controlplan is defined and signed off
Inspection instructions are defined (based on E90) Update
--> next update of inspection instruction will be during PVL-phase in 02/2009,
training material is available in plant now
QSE plan for 2. semester 2008 is defined together with the plant QSE Coordinator
(Bernd Schmeisser / Michael Wende) date for R@R implemented; planned dates:
FPT (20.02.2009), MPT (22.05.2009), EMPT (24.09.2009) will be implemented in
the next update of semester 1-2/2009
New Training and choaching for E84 is not necessary, because of carry over E90
(statement UAP Manager Y. Kermarrec) Budget 2009 :2 new Trainers and 1 new
employee (50%) planned
G
Y
G
PIST level actual
94,96% (h-point in BMW production adjustment)
78,92% (h-point in LH- addjustment)
target 60% for phase 2b
--> to add root cause action pilot and deadline in the PIST database
Actions are defined and agreed with the customer
- H-point - discussion with Karmann and BMW because LH - adjustment is
necessary, planned for cw 48; BMW and Karmann know this problem(because of
carry over parts the h-point E84 could not reach LH-adjustment, but BMW-
production and ECE adjustments are fulfilled)
Key Characteristics are updated (last update 25.09.2008 Rev. 05)
69 characteristics (class 1 = 12; class 2 = 27; check criteria = 30) --> PIST&PIPC -
12 characteristics --> class 1 = 0, class 2 = 4, check criteria = 8
Ok
Critical item
183
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Messages
Focus on the PMS Mandatory Deliverables
The Program Steering Committee is a cross
functional business management team
The PSC guarantees the full engagement of the
line organization to meet program objectives
Gate Reviews are about decision
Change organization mind-set to assure first
pass yield of Gate Reviews
184
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Asia Shangha May 12
th
8h-18h00
USA A.Hills-Frazer Jun 17
th
8h-18h00
France Meru Jun 30
th
8h-18h00
Germany Augsburg Jul 8
th
8h-18h00
SAO Curitiba Sep 30
th
8h-18h00
India Pune Oct 14
th
8h-18h00
2011 Group sessions in Regions
Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion Conclusion
Ken SATO Ken SATO Ken SATO Ken SATO
186
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Sales
Prototypes paid
Sales
Prototypes paid
Human
Resources
Human
Resources
5 Series
PRODUCTION
5 Series
PRODUCTION
Design FMEA *
Product
Engineering
Prototypes approved
Design FMEA *
Product
Engineering
Prototypes approved
Program
Management
Master schedule *
Control of
process &
design
change *
Program
Management
Master schedule *
Control of
process &
design
change *
Manufac-
turing
Process definition
EMPT Run @ Rate
Manufac-
turing
Process definition
EMPT Run @ Rate
END OF
PRODUCTION
CUSTOMER
INQUIRY
PROGRAM
AWARD
CUSTOMER
TOOL RELEASE
CUSTOMER
PRODUCTION
PART APPROVAL
START OF
PRODUCTION
END OF
PRODUCTION
CUSTOMER
INQUIRY
PROGRAM
AWARD
CUSTOMER
TOOL RELEASE
CUSTOMER
PRODUCTION
PART APPROVAL
START OF
PRODUCTION
GR 1 GR 2B GR 3
GR 4
CAR Approval
Program
Quote Review
GR 2A Go/No Go
Program
Target Review
GR 1 GR 2B GR 3
GR 4
CAR Approval
Program
Quote Review
GR 2A Go/No Go
Program
Target Review
Quality
Quality
V1.0
187
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Key Characteristics
Strict Control
Plans
Validated
Engineering
Changes
and Gate Reviews
FMEA
Program
QRCI
Capitalization &
Transversalization
188
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
The basic rule:
We are all allowed to make a mistake
once
But:
This is true for:
Individuals
Teams
FAURECIA
we are not allowed to repeat twice
the same mistake
189
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
The 7 Quality Basics in Development
are not tools for
Quality and PMS people
Who is responsible for Development Quality?
Who has to implement the 7 Quality basics in
Development?
Who is in charge?
They are our basic
Development tools
190
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
NAME :_____________________________Session:_____________________________________
1 2 3 4
Introduction
Capitalization &
Transversalisation
Key Characteristics
FMEA
Program QRQC
Changes
& Gate Reviews
How to accelerate
Conclusion
Value added of
the module Comments
Evaluation Form
to fill in
191
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
o
f

F
a
u
r
e
c
i
a

-
D
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

p
r
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d

7 Quality Basics in Development

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7 Quality Basics in Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7 Quality Basics in Development

You might also like