GM Supplier Quality Presentation

BIQS
2015
This presentation was developed by General Motors Corporation Global Purchasing Supply Chain.
All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or by any method,
for any purpose, without written permission of General Motors Global Purchasing Supply Chain.
GM 1
Global Supplier Quality
MISSIO N:
To b e l e a d e r s o f a n e n t e r p ri s e a p p r o ac h to ensure
our suppliers achieve launch and quality excellence.
GM 2
BIQS
Focus ONE LANGUAGE GLOBALLY
Common Principles
Common Methods
Common Processes
GM 3
BIQS 1
Nonconforming Material / Material
Identification
GM 4
Nonconforming Material / Material Identification
Are all material including the NC and suspected identified properly by tagging
or by location ?
IDENTIFY STOCK IDENTIFYING BAD
STOCK
Identify all parts that are removed
Part removed from the line/process/department Nonconforming parts MUST be
from the Tag or Mark each part or container Clearly Identified. (Examples- Tag
so parts are clearly identified. parts with red tags, permanently
line/process/ Ensure the Tag or Mark is robust marker or paint parts Red). Do not
department and must require effort to remove. use stickers as they fall off in plant
Tagging good stock is just as environments. A LOCK BOX or locked
important as tagging bad stock to area is also acceptable for Identifying
reduce mishandling. BAD parts.
IDENTIFYING
GOOD STOCK
QUARANTINE BAD
STOCK Conforming parts need to be identified
Quarantine Suspect/Nonconforming with a Green tag if its a fully finished
Non-
parts from good parts in all areas of part that is GOOD. Parts that are not
conforming the Plant or Warehouse to prevent FINISHED also must be identified
material mishandling of parts. Place parts in with a IN-PROCESS tag stating
a locked area or wrap parts with where in the process the part was
handling/
caution tape, again so they are removed (example: Removed
Containment CLEARLY IDENTIFIED. Operations 10, Ready for Operations
20).
GM 5
All Suppliers are responsible for ensuring non-conforming material does not reach the customer.
COMMUNICATE
ROBUST CONTAINMENT
If ANY GM facility is at risk of IDENTIFYING STOCK
Non- being presented with non- Identify robust
conforming conforming material, inform See Material containment process,
material all key GM contacts Identification slide and obtain appropriate
(SQE,SQA) immediately, at approvals from GM SQ
identified ALL potentially affected and Engineering.
facilities globally
Ensure compliance with the Initiate containment with the Work with key
PERMANENT
Complete FIX following material control assistance of the following GM customer
root cause process Audit (Slide 4) and checklists contacts to initiate
and Break containment worksheet.
-Point containment at
solution their facility(s) if
activities. Containment potentially
checklist
Dept. affected.
Containment W/S
CONTAIN AT YOUR
ROBUST MATERIAL FACILITY/YOUR TIER CONTAIN AT GM
CONTROL SUPPLIERS FACILITY(S) FACILITY(S)
Complete Fast Response

Conforming material NOTE: Provide
problem solving at the
Update PFMEA & daily updates to
Control Plan
facility, Read across to flow with robust key GM contacts
other facilities, and put
together lesson learnt
processes in place on current issue
RECALIBRATE status!
CLOSURE
GM 6
Containment Work Sheet should cover
all potential location Both Good and Bad material
CONT AINMENT WORKSHEET should be identified such as by
DEPARTMENT: DEPA RTMENT CONTAINMENT OWNER: DA TE:
Laboratory G. Hall 06/01/2003

PRODUCT NAME / NUMBER: 10066044
PRODUCT NONCONFORMA NCE:
Burr on flange
PRODUCT CONTAINM ENT SCOPE
IDENTIFY ALL AREAS WHERE SUSPECT PRODUCT COULD BE LOCATED
POTENTIAL AREA SUSPECT PROD. VERIFICATION

LOCATION QTY. VERIFIED FOUND? QTY? RESPONSIBILITY
Receiving 500 P.S. 500 P. Smith

Laboratory 6 K.C. 6 T. Brown
Tag
WIP Storage Areas 1000 P.S. 1000 P. Smith
Outside Processing - (Plating) 1000 C.J. 1000 C. Jones
Scrap Bins 42 K.C. 42 C. Jones
Rework Areas 0 B.T. 0 C. Jones
Shipping Dock 0 K.C. 0 C. Jones
Heat T reater 0 P.S. 0 C. Jones
At Cu stomer 0 B.T. 0 C. Jones
In T ransit 0 B.T. 0 C. Jones
Service Parts Operations 0 P.S. 0 C. Jones
TOTAL FOUND 2548 2548 C. Jones
SEGREGATE SU SPEC T PRODUCT TO (location, as feasible): 2548 pcs to Containment Area

SORT METHOD (eg. visual, gage, mating part):
SORT CRITERIA (clear pass / fail standards):
I.D. METHOD CONFORMING (eg. mark, tag, sign):
Visual for burrs
Max Burr per standard
W hite paint dot near defect area
Or & and
I.D . METHOD NONCONFORMING (eg. mark, tag, sign): Mark defect with red paint.
Location
Material identification should be easily

identified .visual tools such as colored
NC material from containment should bins ,foot print , tags ,.etc might be used .
be isolated to avoid being used . GM 7
CONTROL OF NONCONFORMING PRODUCT
GM
8
CONTROL OF NONCONFORMING PRODUCT
GM
9
What goes wrong ?
Containment Worksheet does not list all the potential locations
Containment Worksheet exists but not used
Containment without standardized work
Reintroduction not clearly identified (is at or prior to point of removal)
Hidden rework processes
Breakpoint communicated before defect really understood
Customer not notifiedbut then finds problem !!
GM 10
BIQS 2
Layered Process Audit
GM 11
Layered Process Audit (LPA)
LPA is an effective tool to assure compliance to standardized procedures at
each workstation such as SW , CNC compliance , E.P verification .
LPA process is owned by management who assure effective implementation of
LPA in all levels and use the LPA process for Continuous improvement .
LPA should have daily activity by team member /leader .
Management should participate on audit activity on go and see on shop floor
on frequent basis ( Ex: monthly base ) .
Customer specific and quality focus checks from FR issues should be
reviewed by all layers including management .
Top Management ensure effective corrective actions and counter measures.
(Example of LPA Plan )
GM 12
Process explanation
Choose the Pick the station to be audited based on the

Workstation LPA schedule
Conduct the Audit Follow LPA Check sheet

Immediately inform all Team members about the audit
results.
Record all deviations on LPA Check sheet
Give feedback & and Countermeasure sheet.
document results Assign target close date & champion
Implement suggested countermeasures
as soon as possible.
Follow-up on open items, make sure to close

by target close date.
Follow-up Elevate problem to higher level after target
Close date.
Perform Management review.
GM 13
LPA Check sheet example
HEADER: Enter the System Name
Product line or an area of the Plant
1. Molding
2. Paint/Coating
3. Assembly
4. Warehouse/Shipping
In this Example the
Section #1:
Manufacturer
COMMON Work Station Questions
would have (4) four
unique one page
Section #2: audit forms/files, to
cover all processes.
UNIQUE Quality Focused
Questions
Section #3:
COMMON Manufacturing System
Questions
GM 14
LPA Check sheet example 2 :
Customer FR Focus questions

is audited by all levels .
Management is checking LPA
results and issues closing for
all levels ( LPA is owned by
Leadership.)
Classification of questions
shows status ( audit results
are clear and N items has
action plan) .
GM 15
LPA analysis for continuous Improvement:
(Example)
DEPT._________________ LAYERED PROCESS AUDIT RESULTS
100% 47 50
90% 43 43 45 LPA results for all
levels are
80% 40
70% 35
60%
50%
27
23 24
30
25
summarized on
monthly basis for
22
20 19
40% 20
16 16
continuous
14
30% 15
20% 10
10% 5 improvement .
0% 0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
% IN COMPLIANCE: 88% 68% 95% 96% 97% 84% 95% 95% 94% 95% 95% 89%
# OF ITEMS ON ASSESSMENT: 20 15 20 30 20 10 20 25 20 20 20 20
# OF ASSESSMENTS 20 9 28 15 20 10 20 20 20 20 20 20
TOTAL # OF ITEMS ASSESSED: 400 135 560 450 400 100 400 500 400 400 400 400
# OF ITEMS IN COMPLIANCE: 353 92 533 434 386 84 380 477 376 381 378 357
NON CONFORMANCES 47 43 27 16 14 16 20 23 24 19 22 43
NON CONFORMANCES NUMBER OF ITEMS NOT IN COMPLIANCE

Safety 10 8 5 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Missed Audits 10 8 3 2 3 4 5 2 1 1 1 10
5S Related 2 7 7 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2
Product 10 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
Voice of Customer 6 4 2 2 3 4 4 4 3 2 2 10
Systemic 9 7 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Gage Calibration 5 6 3 2 2 5 6 7 2 2 2
Poke Yoke 5 7 8 10 6
GM 16
What goes wrong? Lessons learned.
Mixed with product or process audit (1/month)
Audit list is not flexible (once fixed)
Containment activity is not in LPA
Deviations corrected during audit are not documented (NC)
Daily ticking activity but no real audit
Result of 5 minutes instead of complete shift
Workstation not being checked in different shifts
Corrective actions not defined/followed (best is a hand written action plan)
Stayed on daily level, not layered
No management follow up
Only applied to manufacturing not across entire organization
GM 17
BIQS 3
PFMEA
BIQS 4
PFMEA Risk Reduction & Annual
Review
GM 18
PFMEA & Risk Reduction
General Notes:
PFMEA Should be available for all part numbers /processes .
PFMEA should Cover all processes including material handling , packing & labeling .
PFMEA should cover the rework , Bypass processes .
Each Failure mode has one Severity number .
Each failure Mode might have more than one cause .
Each cause has its RPN number .
S,O, D numbers should be taken based on PFMEA tables references .
(Example: PFMEA AIAG 4th edition tables)
Severity Tables Occurrence Tables Detection Tables

GM 19
(Example: PFMEA )
Handling Failure
modes are Failure mode
considered might have
multiple causes
Failure mode has

one S number
Visual inspection D
number is 7 or 8
Severity of scrap as per AIAG
is 7 or 8 as per references
AIAG tables
Each cause for each failure mode has its
own RPN number .
GM 20
What is Risk Reduction Process:
PURPOSE:
Reduce the risk of a initial quality failures
Error proofing past quality failures
Ensure that Failure Modes have proper controls (prevention/detection) and work properly
SCOPE:
Assembly Area
Manufacturing Operations
Shipping / Receiving
All Operations
Other Support Functions
RESPONSIBILITY (Examples):
Ownership
Engineering Manager
Operations Manager
Contingency Plan for All Situations
GM 21
What are the PFMEA processes for Risk Reduction:
PFMEA Review Process:

Cross-functional teams shall review PFMEAs periodically.
PFMEA Reactive Risk Reduction Process:

Risk Reduction through review of past quality issues.
Proactive Reverse PFMEA Process:

Reverse PFMEA is an on-station review of all failure modes included in PFMEA to
verify that all failure modes have proper controls (Prevention controls or Detection
controls) and that they are working properly.
GM 22
(Example of risk reduction.)
The use of an RPN threshold is NOT a recommended practice for
determining the need for actions, so it also will depends on Severity ranking.
For example, if the customer applied an arbitrary threshold of 100 to the following,
the supplier would be required to take action on the characteristic B with the RPN of
112.
In this example, the RPN is higher for characteristic B than characteristic A. However,
the priority should be to work on A with the higher severity of 9, although its RPN is
90 which is lower and below the threshold.
There is no specific RPN value that requries mandatory action. i.e; PFMEA is a live
document..
GM 23
Risk Limiting Method as an example for Risk Reduction
Priority Level
Based on Severity Zone (Severity vs. Occurrence) and Detection Level (Severity vs. Detection)
Priority Level 1: Highest level of risk, should review for potential risk reduction activity
Priority Level 2: Medium level of risk, next group to review for potential risk reduction activity
Priority Level 3: Lowest level of risk, risk reduction activity not necessary.
Detection
Severity Zone: comparing the severity and occurrence numbers
Detection Zone: comparing the severity and detection numbers
10 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Priority Level
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Occurrence
9 9
3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1
Detection Zone
(Sev over Det)
8 8
Detection
3 2 2 3
7 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1
6 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 3
5 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2
4 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 3
1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Severity Zone
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (Sev over Occ)
Severity Severity
24 GM
What goes wrong ?

PFMEA is a one man show.
Scoring is not according to customer guidelines.
Scoring is not consistent.
Primary detection method relies heavily on visual inspection.
Failure modes are missing, not revised at work station.
Internal/external PPM are not used for Occurrence.
Scoring driven by low RPN or set by action limit.
New scoring is not revised after recommended action implementation.
High risk item identified but not controlled by SQ tools.
Management is not involved & does not allocate resources for regular reviews.
PFMEAs not used for continuous improvement - only updated when problems occur.
25
BIQS 5
Bypass Management
GM 26
Bypass Management
Requirements
1. Risk analysis methods (e.g. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis,

etc.) are used in the development of processes and products.
2. Processes are validated relative to changes to Design, Man,

Machine, Material, Method, and Environment under full
volume production conditions.
Process Process Control STS / SOS /

Flow PFMEA Plan JES
When a process cannot be executed following its approved process, bypass

management is followed
GM 27
Bypass Management
Bypass Process
Any time the process is altered outside the approved documented control plan,
suppliers shall establish a Bypass Process Control procedure that:
Defines the minimum requirements for bypassing an existing
manufacturing process.
Defines minimum requirements for verification of the original process
when exiting the bypass.
Examples when a Bypass Process may be required:

Torque gun failures
Any back up operation outside the normal process flow
Error Proofing or gaging that are turned off ( Error proofing /detection for
Failure modes with Severity 9 & 10 not recommended to be bypassed.)
Any temporary rework to bring part back to specification
GM 28
Bypass Management
Bypass Process
The Process Bypass Control procedure should incorporate the following:
The process methods/controls defined for bypassing an existing
manufacturing process are approved by the Operations Manager
(process owner), the Engineering Manager and the Quality
Manager.
A list of processes approved for bypass are maintained through the
Document Control Process.
The PFMEA and Control Plan include the bypass process.
Standardized Work Instructions are established for the bypass
process.
A form of communication is posted at each active bypass point.
Bypass process should be covered in LPA and FR to ensure PFMEA , CP
,SW , setting process during and after bypass .
GM 29
Bypass Management
(Example)
Manufacturing Process
Backup Worksheet
This document is a record that

documents:
breakpoints of entering and
exiting the by-pass process
identifies tooling, inspection,
and audit requirements
GM 30
BIQS 6
Error Proof Verification
GM 31
Error Proofing Verification
Error Proofing
Objective: Function & use of error proofing devices are verified on a scheduled basis based on risk.
.
What is Error Proofing? How?
A method of implementing a fail-safe mechanism to detect Cross functional team using risk analysis to define where to
or/and prevent errors in a process from producing defects apply error proofing.
that severely or adversely impact customers and results in A list of all Error Proofing devices (which includes location) is
waste during manufacturing, assembly, or testing. available.
When is Error Proofing Implemented?

The method and frequency of the error proofing verification is
defined and documented in the standardized work (TIS).
When an operation, process, or test has been assessed for Error Proofing Masters parts are clearly identified.
risk and the severity for not preventing the error has been All Error Proofing Devices are checked for function (failure or
determined to be too high. simulated failure) on a scheduled basis (beginning of shift,
This is based on Severity (impact of a failure on the start of operation, or start of test).
customer), Occurrence (how often failure can occur), Records of verification are available (Data Collection Sheet).
Detection (an assessment of how well current process can A reaction plan shall be developed for each error proofing
detect failure). device and posted at the workstation in the event the error
What is Error Proofing Verification? proofing device fails.
Periodic checks to make sure the error proofing is doing The reaction plan shall be understood by the team
what it should. member and contain: the communication process,
It is a simple test to ensure it is functioning properly. containment, corrective actions, the defined temporary
checks during the malfunction of the error proofing
How is Error Proofing Verified? device, and is incorporated in the standardized work
(TIS and Data Collection Sheet.).
You must induce a fault to see if the error proofing system Why?
catches it. (Example: scan a wrong part) .
All failure modes in EP device must be verified ( Camera to We count on the error proofing system to catch the
check presence of 3 component must be verified by inducing problem.
the error for missing the 3 component We cannot afford to build or test parts, components, or
assemblies with a non-conformity.
Who does the check? The data generated from testing is critical to the
Team Member or Team Leader performs development of our products.
the check and records the result on the
Data Collection Sheet. THE BUILT-IN QUALITY MOTTO
Do not Accept, Build,
or Ship a Defect
GM 32
Benefits
Assures error proof/detection devices are working as intended.

Prevents nonconforming product from being made or transferred.
Establishes a history for each device; indicates when preventative
maintenance or repair is needed.
Instills discipline within the process.
Summary
Error proofing devices shall be verified at least once per day.

Error Proofing device locations shall be documented.
Have reaction plans to device failures ( e.g. CNC )
Verification results shall be recorded.
Leadership shall review verification results.
If Error proofing device is designed for more than failure mode , verification
should be done for all failure modes .
GM 33
(Example)
Error detection device

check presence of 5
items ( 5 failure
Sensor for
modes.) gasket 1
Sensor
for gasket Sensor for
2 lamp 1
Sensor
for Sensor for
gasket 3
lamp 2
Defected sample missing all items. Test pass if 5 sensors give negative results.
GM 34
What goes wrong ?

Not all the error proofing devices are verified
Verification documented as completed but not actually performed
Result of verification driven by Master status (Bad Master = NOK result)
Frequency of verification is not reviewed
Reaction plan is not defined / followed in case of verification failure
Verification failures not escalated so no action taken
Containment not implemented when error proofing disabled
If error proofing device malfunctions, all parts should be rejected
Error proofing disabled - too many parts rejected or considered false fails
GM 35
BIQS 7
Gage Calibration / Measurement
System Analysis
GM 36
Gage Calibration / Measurement System Analysis
Gage Definitions :
GageAny device used to obtain measurement, or assess the conformance of a
part or characteristic relative to specifications.
AdjustmentA set of operations to bring a gage into a state of performance
suitable for its use.
CalibrationA set of operations that compares and evaluates under specified
conditions, the relationship between a gage and a traceable standard
CertificationA set of operations to document the results of a calibration,
indicating conformance or non-conformance to specifications.
Master a device used to check and/or adjust a gage to a specified value.
MasteringA set of operations to verify that the gage results agree with the master.
GM 37
Gage Calibration / Measurement System Analysis
R & R Study Example
The angle variation of each operator measurement must be placed into the R&R table to
have the appropriate evaluation. The specification for the study is 1 degree minimum,
and 5 degrees maximum.
3 inspectors, 10 samples , 3 trials R&R Study Results
GM 38
BIQS 8
Fast Response & Team Problem Solving
GM 39
Fast Response:
The disciplined execution of quality and production milestones that must be

targeted for completion within a 24 hour, 5 production day and 20 production day
period to prevent reoccurrence of a problem.
To ensure that quality issues are immediately addressed through a disciplined

execution of quality and production milestones. Establishes focused criteria to drive
the Fast Response to resolve issues and provide feedback in a meeting structure.
Engages and supports team problem solving.
Provides the status of a problem through visual tracking.

(Example)
GM 40
FR Tracking Board Example:
Points to Review:
Ownership
Exit Criteria
Overall Status
Next Report Out Date ABC Company - Quality Fast Response Tracking Board
EXIT CRITERIA
STATUS KEY
1) Required but not initiated
R 2) Target Date Missed
Y Initiated but not complete
Target Timing, Status, & Date Green G Complete
24 H 7D 14 D 34 D 35 D 40 D N/A Not Applicable
Actual Closed Date

Operator Instructions
Forecasted Closed
Field Rep Ranking
Open > 40 Days=R

Next Report Date
Lessons Learned
Customer Closed
Corrective Action
Corrective Action
(Institutionalized)
Layered Process
Program/Product
STATUS (RYG)
Proof/Detection
Who Answered
Containment -
Standard Work
Date Opened
Implemented
PFMEA / CP
Root Cause
Concern # /
Who Called
OVERALL
Breakpoint
By Owner
Customer
Validated
Identified
Updated
ITEM #
Owner
Audits
Name
Error
Date
date
Issue Description Action Plan / Countermeasure
G G G G G G G Y Y
1/10 PRR Hood Brkt Material Contaminated F. LaFeve 2/21 Need operator approval and training completion Y
1/11 1/18 1/24 1/24 1/25 2/13 2/15 2/20 2/20
1 Amore Mason 312869 24241198 for Work Instructions across shifts 2/19 25-Jan
Internal Radio Spt.
G G G G G G G
1/15 CAR 08- Brkt Burrs B. Adams CLOSED NA NA G
1/15 2/16 2/10 2/20 2/10 2/17 2/20
2 Sykes Jones 626 15891477 2/24 21-Feb 18-Feb
Hinge
G G G R G R R R
1/21 PRR Assy Parts mislocated on assembly McIntosh 2/22 N/A PLL Program Logic for Error Prevention device R
1/22 1/26 2/1 2/17 2/21 2/17 2/21 2/24
3 Kurtz Arnold 313123 21119878 to reprogrammed by 2/21. J. Busch - M.E. 3/2
FORD Seat Brkt
G G G G Y Y Y Y Y
1/22 NCR MNOP- Mixed Parts J. McGrath 2/22 Need to confirm LPA results and Process Y
1/22 1/24 1/27 1/27 2/21 2/20 2/20 2/20 2/21
4 Ferrer Stelzer 4219 13456-AF Documents updated. LL System input. 3/3 2-Feb
Internal Hinge
Paint dots found on loose & mis- G G G G R G G
2/3 CAR 08- Assy J. McGrath 2/23 N/A NA LPA not Validated on 3rd shift. - J. Biden to R
built parts 2/4 2/7 2/8 2/8 2/23 2/28 2/8
5 Dowdall Mehall 632 21119878 confirm Cor. Act. By 2/22 3/15
Need Corp. Office approval on P.O. to obtain
G G Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
2/14 PRR ICS Supt. Loose 7mm bolt on front cover B. Adams 2/21 vendor intallation of Torque Monitor Upgrade. Y
2/15 2/7 2/21 2/21 3/14 3/12 3/13 3/14 3/14
6 Singh Patel 313517 99923889 Bob D. to obtain authorization. 3/26
Both Customer issues and Major internal issues

addressed in the FR meeting
GM 41
Team Problem Solving Safety People
PROBLEM SOLVING FORM
Quality Responsiveness Cost Environmental
Author: Date: Problem Tracking # Lot#/CSN/Julian Date:
found
1. Problem Description
Have a defined process for Problem Solving which

(High level vague statement)
2. Problem Definition (Detailed specific statement) Freq: 100% Sporadic One Time
includes the core 6 Steps and a standard

for documenting tools used for root cause
3 Point of Cause (Where problem is occurring)
User Location: Other: (s pe cify)
Dept: Area: Shift: 1 2 3
( circ le )
identification and elimination.

Immediate Containment Activity: Short-Term Fix Person Resp. Target Date Status Breakpoint
Empower everyone in the organization to 4. Root Cause Investigation:

1 Std. work followed & employee trained?
(At the point of cause - may use diagnostic checksheets if available)
Yes No N/A 3 Correct parts used? Yes No N/A
participate in Problem Solving and Lessons

2 Correct tools/equipment used? Yes No N/A 4 Are the parts in specification? Yes No N/A
Direct Cause
Why
Team Input (ie. Team Member, Team Leader)
Learned.
Why
Why
Why
Establish and institutionalize a system to

Why
Real Root
Cause
document Lessons Learned.

5. Countermeasures/Long-Term Problem Correction: (Fundamental Process, Engineering, Tooling Changes)
Activity : Person Resp. Target Date Status Breakpoint
Establish a disciplined approach to problem

prevention using Lessons Learned.
Follow-Up Verification (Did we effectively resolve the problem?)
Countermeasure tracking -
Verification Process (How did you verify the countermeasure worked?)
working days defect free
Has a Quality Alert been posted? Yes No N/A 1 2 3 4 5
Have PFMEAs been completed/updated ? (Failure mode comprehended) Yes No N/A 6 7 8 9 10
Review the Lessons Learned process to assure

Old RPN#_____________ New RPN#____________ 11 12 13 14 15
S______ O_______ D________ S______ O_______ D________ 16 17 18 19 20
Was the Control Plan adequate? Yes No N/A *Color green for no repeat or red if defect reoccurs
Was the Control Plan followed? Yes No N/A
Has Error Proofing been reviewed and verification completed? Yes No N/A
implementation.
Have the job instructions, SOS/JES/PQS been updated ? (Including "finesse" instructions) Yes No N/A
Has JIT Training been completed? Yes No N/A
Have the Layered Audits been updated? Yes No N/A
Have the check sheets or other forms been updated? Yes No N/A
The results/changes were communicated to all Team Members on all shifts Yes No N/A
YES Issue closed

Issue resolved satisfactorily?
NO Issue escalated to:
Lessons Learned: Press Body Paint Assembly
Could the communication of this problem and its solution possibly prevent other departments from Yes
incurring the same problem? If YES - check relevant boxes and send a copy of this form to those Machining Casting Supplier ME/PFA
departments. No
Participants: Author (Signature & date required for closure) Group / Shift Leader (Info only) Area Manager / Leadership (Info only)
Shift 1
Shift 2
Shift 3
Comments:
Problem Solving Form Example :
GM 42
What goes wrong ?
Fast Response Meeting was started but stopped, because:

It became a problem solving meeting (too long)
No daily issues reported (-> weekly -> wind up)
Issues remained open too long because of no regular feedback
Practical Problem Solving Form or equivalent is not used
No clear definition of what is a significant issue
Problem solving in office not at Point of Cause
Missing whys (Drill Deep) to find main root cause
Read across (Drill Wide) is not completed
Lessons Learned database available, but not in use
GM 43
BIQS 10
Quality Focused Checks
GM 44
Conducting Quality Focused Checks

Find all Quality Checks in JES/TIS.
Is Team Member following all steps in the JES/TIS?
Does Team Member understand / complete all Quality Check(s)?
Does Team Member understand standard(s)? (i.e. push/click/tug)?
Findings noted on Quality Focused Audit worksheet:
= Meets Standard
= Deviation Found
N/A = Not Applicable
= Issue Corrected
GM 45
LPA is used when to follow Quality focus checks for customer and
significant internal issues , also used to follow KPC , Delta etc.
Example 1 : Review LPA sheet example slide no 13
Example 2 :
GM 46
BIQS 11
Standardized Work
GM 47
Standardized Work
STANDARDIZED WORK PROVIDES A FOUNDATION FOR:

Ensuring operators are consistently performing tasks and
procedures the same across all shifts and personnel.
An efficient production sequence.
Identifying value added tasks.
Reduced variation within a process.
Waste reduction, line balancing and quality built in station
Continuous improvement and problem solving
A lean organization
Auditing operator conformance to work instructions
(Layered Process Audit).
GM 48
Standardized Work
Definition:
A user friendly document that provides detailed information on a specific element of
work to ensure the successful execution of that element.
Purpose:
To provide detailed training information for new team members.
To bridge the gap between engineering information and shop floor knowledge.
To provide a written history of that element.
To provide a baseline for auditing, problem solving, continuous improvement,
rebalancing of work and documentation transfer.
GM 49
Standardized Work
Symbols for Delta
(Examples) Operations
SOS JES
Value added Vs Non value Team members sign after training

added timing & Station lay out identified
to support lean improvement.
GM 50
Standardized Work
What goes wrong ?
Standard Operation Sheet is created for customer auditor and not for
training of new operator
supporting Layered Audit
analyzing jobs for improvement opportunity
problem solving
Hints are missing to describe how to perform a step
Reasons are not defined
Less visualization more description
Gage R&R was not done for attribute gages or not repeated
Try to perform operation based on current JES.
GM 51
BIQS 12
Process Change Control
BIQS 14
Change Control Production Trial Run
GM 52
Change process
All suppliers shall have a procedure for Plant Process Changes:
Changes should be documented utilizing a plant process change form
(reference Powertrain PPCR example).
All process change ( Internal or external ) forms shall be controlled through
a Document Control Process.
The procedure shall cover both Planned and Emergency changes
(Typically temporary modification to process/standard work due to
unplanned situations, such as downtime, stockout, authorized
customer rework, schedule fluctuations, etc.).
The purpose of the Plant Process Change Request (PPCR) is to:

Maintain a record of all changes that may impact the final product.
Track system changes that may have a negative impact on the
process, but not necessarily on the final product quality.
Ensures all key stakeholders are made aware of change requirements
and have input to control out of standard conditions.
GM 53
(EXAMPLE)
Plant Process Change Request Form
Rev. Date: 10/5/07 PLANT PROCESS CHANGE REQUEST PPCR NO.
(ALL SHADED AREAS MUST BE COMPLETED) CONTACT: EXT. 5-5391
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION EMERGENCY PPCR? YES NO

IF "YES", GIVE COPY TO QUALITY
PART NAME(S) IMPACTED Manufacturing Process Bypassed? Rev. Date: 10/5/07 PLANT PROCESS CHANGE REQUEST PPCR NO.
IF "YES", COMPLETE Manufacturing Process SECTION 3: DETERMINE WHICH FUNCTIONAL GROUPS NEED TO RESPOND TO THIS CHANGE
Backup Worksheet (in S:\ECO\FORMS) CHECK ANY ITEMS THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE / IMPACTED: RESPONSE DUE DATE:
SAFETY: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:

YES NO
GUARDING OTHER WORK-FIT INSTRUCTIONS
MODEL YEAR AND APPLICATION MANUFACTURING: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
PART #(S) IMPACTED MAINTENANCE MANUFACTURING INSTRUCTIONS PRODUCTION MONITORING
MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
DATE INITIATED MFG. DEPT(S) IMPACTED OPERATION PROCESS ROUTING PROCESS PARAMETERS GAGE (DRAWING, PLAN)
/ STATION # TOOLING AND DRAWINGS PFMEA CMM (DRAWING, FIXTURES)
PROCESS CONTROL PLAN MACHINE DRAWINGS (MECH/ELECT) FLOAT SHEETS
(IF EMERGENCY, TIME ALSO PLANNED CHANGE DATE ERROR PROOFING GAGE CHECK SHEET PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
TOOLING ENGINEERING: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
REQUIRED)
CUTTING TOOLS & DRAWINGS CNC PART PROGRAM TOOL ROUTING
OPPORTUNITY / PROBLEM STATEMENT: INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
WORKPLACE LAYOUT ENGINE SEQUENCING SYSTEM JOB INSTRUCTIONS (SWC/SOS/STS/JES)
TAKT TIME / LABOR CONTENT CYCLE TIME (PART TO PART) STANDARDIZED WORK VIDEO
DUNNAGE (INTERNAL & EXTERNAL) ERGONOMICS GAGE/TOOL CHG/COMP. FREQ.
MATERIAL HANDLING JOB DESIGN (METHOD CHANGE) VISUAL CONTROLS
ANDON SIGNALING SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE/EMERGENCY REACTION PLAN: PLANT ENGINEERING: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
ELECTRICAL/CONTROLS SOFTWARE WASHER PARAMETERS/CHEMICALS
RELOCATION/REARRANGEMENTS INSTALLATION/REMOVAL COOLANTS/FILTRATION
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING: FOR QUESTIONS ON ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, CONTACT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER.
WHAT IS THE AIM OF THIS CHANGE? WHY SHOULD WE WORK ON THIS NOW? CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
IS THERE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT? YES NO
TRAINING: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:

WORK REFERENCE STATION SYSTEM LEVEL JOB AIDS CHECKLISTS
INTEGRATED TASK PROCEDURES TASK/STATION LEVEL JOB AIDS OTHER
OEM / SUPPLIER TRAINING MODULES
EXPLAIN THE METHOD BY WHICH PROPER OPERATION WILL BE VERIFIED: PRODUCTION CONTROL & LOGISTICS: CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
BREAK-POINT REQUIRED MATERIAL PULL SYSTEM SUPPLIER DUNNAGE
DELIVERY ROUTES ADDRESS SYSTEM SUPPLIER PACKAGING
MATERIAL PARTS LIST
IS&S:
CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
INITIATOR NAME INITIATING DEPARTMENT
IS THERE AN IMPACT ON IS&S? YES NO
CHANGE LEADER NAME
QUALITY / RELIABILITY:
(if different than initiator) AREA MGR. SIGN. (EMER. ONLY)
GAGES (EQUIPMENT, PROGRAMS) CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
SECTION 2: DETERMINE IF CHANGE REQUIRES PDT/CIT-LEVEL OR PPAP REVIEW AND APPROVAL CMM'S (EQUIPMENT, PROGRAMS) CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
CHECK ANY OF THE FOLLOWING THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE:
STATISTICAL VERIFICATION CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
CM, P A NEW PART OR PRODUCT (i.e. A SPECIFIC PART, MATERIAL OR COLOR NOT PREVIOUSLY SUPPLIED TO THE SPECIFIC CUSTOMER). QUALITY SYSTEM CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
CM, P PRODUCT MODIFIED BY AN ENGINEERING CHANGE TO DESIGN RECORDS, SPECIFICATIONS OR MATERIALS. PPAP (PRELIMINARY REVIEW): CONTACT: SIGNATURE:
CUSTOMER'S EASE OF ASSEMBLY CUSTOMER'S AUDITS/TESTS CUSTOMER'S PROCESS OR TOOLING
CM, P USE OF ANOTHER OPTIONAL CONSTRUCTION OR MATERIAL THAN WAS USED IN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PART.
ERROR PROOFING AUDIT DUNNAGE/PACKAGING CONTROL PLAN (INSP. METH./FREQ.)
CM, P PRODUCTION FOLLOWING ANY CHANGE IN PROCESS OR METHOD OF MANUFACTURE WHERE, IN THE JUDGEMENT OF TECHNICAL IMPORTANT: 1. THIS SECTION REQUIRES SIGN-OFF IF ANY OF THE ABOVE ITEMS OR IF ANY OF THE "P" ITEMS FROM SECTION 2 APPLY.
2. AFTER CONTACTING THE SQA, FORWARD THIS FORM AND A PPAP WARRANT TO THE SQA, AS APPLICABLE.
EXPERTS, THE POTENTIAL EXISTS TO IMPACT PRODUCT INTEGRITY (e.g. MATERIAL PROPERTIES, SURFACE FINISH ... ETC.). 3. THE SQA IS TO SIGN THIS SECTION AS APPROVAL OF ALL REVIEWED PRE-IMPLEMENTATION PLANS FOR FULFILLING PPAP REQTS.
ADVISE PRODUCTION OF IMPENDING CHANGE? YES CONTACT:
P PRODUCTION FOLLOWING ANY CHANGE IN PROCESS OR METHOD OF MANUFACTURE. SECTION 3 REVIEW FOR APPROVAL THIS AREA IS FOR USE BY CHANGE LEADER'S SUPERVISOR ONLY
P CORRECTION OF A DISCREPANCY ON A PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED PART. APPROVED BY: PRINT NAME SIGN DATE
(LEADER'S GENERAL SUPERVISOR OR SUPERINTENDENT)
P PRODUCTION FROM TOOLING AND EQUIPMENT TRANSFERRED TO A DIFFERENT PLANT LOCATION OR FROM AN ADDITIONAL PLANT LOCATION. SECTION 4: OTHER INSTRUCTIONS / COMMENTS
P PRODUCTION FOLLOWING REFURBISHMENT OR REARRANGEMENT OF EXISTING TOOLING OR EQUIPMENT.
P CHANGE IN SOURCE FOR SUBCONTRACTED PARTS, MATERIALS, DUNNAGE OR SERVICES (e.g. HEAT-TREATING, PLATING, PAINTING, ETC.)
P PRODUCT RE-RELEASED AFTER TOOLING HAS BEEN INACTIVE FOR VOLUME PRODUCTION FOR TWELVE MONTHS OR MORE.
P FOLLOWING A CUSTOMER REQUEST TO SUSPEND SHIPMENT DUE TO A SUPPLIER QUALITY CONCERN. SECTION 5A: TO IMPLEMENT PPAP WARRANT APPROVED (IF APPLIC.)
THIS AREA IS FOR USE BY CHANGE LEADER'S SUPERVISOR ONLY
P PRODUCTION FROM NEW OR MODIFIED TOOLS (EXCEPT PERISHABLE TOOLS), DIES, MOLDS, PATTERNS ... ETC., APPROVED BY: PRINT NAME SIGN DATE
(LEADER'S GENERAL SUPERVISOR OR SUPERINTENDENT)
INCLUDING ADDITIONAL OR REPLACEMENT TOOLING.
THIS AREA IS FOR CUSTOMER (MANUFACTURING) USE ONLY
NO ITEMS APPLICABLE CHANGE ALREADY PDT/CIT APPROVED APPROVED BY: PRINT NAME SIGN DATE
(MANUFACTURING GENERAL SUPERVISOR OR SUPERINTENDENT)
IF YOU CHECKED ANY "CM" ITEM(S): 1) DO NOT CONTINUE TO SECTION 3 UNTIL FURTHER NOTIFIED BY YOUR PDT/CIT LEADER.
POST-IMPLEMENTATION SIGNATURE BY CHANGE LEADER
2) FORWARD THIS SHEET TO THE MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING CLERK. ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION DATE BREAKPOINT (IF APPLIC.)
(USE ENG. # OR DATE)
IF YOU CHECKED ONLY "P" ITEM(S): CONTINUE TO SECTION 3. COMPLETE PPAP SECTION (MANDATORY).
SECTION 5B: FINAL APPROVAL
IF YOU CHECKED NO ITEMS: CONTINUE TO SECTION 3. COMPLETE PPAP SECTION AS APPLICABLE. THIS AREA IS FOR USE BY CHANGE LEADER'S SUPERVISOR ONLY
APPROVED BY: PRINT NAME SIGN DATE
CORRESPONDING GMPT CMP TRACKING NUMBER (LEADER'S GENERAL SUPERVISOR OR SUPERINTENDENT)
THIS AREA IS FOR CUSTOMER (MANUFACTURING) USE ONLY
APPROVED BY: PRINT NAME SIGN DATE
(MANUFACTURING GENERAL SUPERVISOR OR SUPERINTENDENT)
GM 54
Production Trial Run (PTR) process
Suppliers shall establish and utilize a defined PTR process that provides the
following elements to ensure successful PTR execution:
Standardized Communication and Documentation
Build Readiness Reviews utilizing a cross functional Team
Quality Reviews before and after the change
Key elements of an Effective PTR Process:

A PTR is a limited , controlled and contained production tryout
used to evaluate a change prior to full production
implementation.
The PTR confirms the manufacturability of a change within the
normal production environment.
The PTR is not a substitute or extension of the product
validation process.
A written procedure and flow chart shall define the PTR process
and requirements.
GM 55
A Communication Form shall be used to document each step

of the process and to record all approvals and results .
Suggested Sections of the Production Trial Run Communication Form:

Change Leader PTR Request and Information
PTR Core Team PTR Decision and Approval to Run PTR
Customer Contacts
Customer / Internal PTR Requirement Decision
PTR Readiness Approval
Internal PTR Valve Review and Approval
Customer Evaluation of PTR
GM 56
(EXAMPLE: Production Trial Run)
GM 57
BIQS 13
Verification Station (Final
Inspection/CARE/ GP12)
GM 58
Final Inspection /CARE/ GP12
General :
Final inspection /GP12 should be performed before shipping .

Inspection could be 100% or sampling according to risk and part history .
Check list should be clear , updated according to customer feedback and FR
issues .
Point , touch , listen , count methods should be mentioned in the standardized
work .
Feedback to the production line with the finding should be standardized and
supported with alarm limits .
GM 59
(Example: VS)
Shop Floor Management
Defects Leaving VS Station - Feedback
Defects Entering VS Dock Audit/Containment/Field Rep-Liaison Issues
Inspection of product (Attribute/Variable) Formal Customer Complaints - Reports
Prioritizing of defects Team Performance Data, FTQ & SCRAP Trend
Alarm Escalation Procedure Charts (over time), Direct Run, Safety.
Immediate Responses Record of Calls for
help and escalation.
Leadership meeting every shift
Meeting Assignments
Pareto Analysis, Defects over time
Attendees Sign-in Sheet
Problem Solving
Driving fixes into station - BIQ
Team select new problems based on
pareto analysis, assignable cause.
Team reports out weekly on status
Tracking R, Y, G Reviewed for
roadblocks, problem escalation.
GM 60
Quality Feedback/ Feed Forward: (Example)
Issues that escaped

Feedback Defects found at Issues that escaped to to the customer and
details are internal audit or the Customer and are are found by the
communicated containment check caught by the Supplier customer
points including GP12 contact
from all
downstream Any issues
customers escaped to
including the
between Customer
departments
at the
manufac-
turing site.
GM 61
BIQS 15
Andon System Implementation
GM 62
IN-PROCESS CONTROL & VERIFICATION

Satisfy Your Customer. . .
Accept
Do not Build a Defect!
Ship
Solve Problems Through Teamwork!
GM 63
Andon System :
Andon System Could be by alarms , lighting or equivalent .
Andon System help the team member to raise the flag when
abnormality occurs .
LPA might be used to check the effectiveness of Andon System
.
(EXAMPLEs of Andon System)
GM 64
BIQS 16
Alarm and Escalation
GM 65
Alarm & Escalation
Definition :
When a defect is detected, feedback to the appropriate

team or individual will be given by using a
communication system.
The alarm is raised by using audio/visual signals (e.g.

Andon).
The alarm process directs the support functions

to:
Go and See the problem
Apply containment to prevent further flow
of defects
Initiate problem solving
GM 66
Alarm & Escalation
(Examples)
Limits posted in the station
Specified caution and alarm Scrap board has good 5S and visual
limits linked with cost of 1 unit . management for caution & alarm
limits .
GM 67
Alarm & Escalation
Implement the Alarm Escalation Process for Communication

The item detected at the VS is communicated to production for containment ( ANDON
System). Repetitive items escalate to different organizational levels where they respond to
provide additional problem solving support.
ALARM PROCESS FORM
Example
Occurrence will vary

based on process
capability
Response time will be plant

specific, recommended
plants work towards a 10
minute target.
Plant
Management Responder
Re
Superintendent /
sp
on
Shift Manager
on
a ti
se
Supervisor
c al
(Group Leader)
Es
Team Leader
Team Member
GM 68
BIQS 17
Visual Controls
BIQS 18
Visual Standards Communicated and
Understood
GM 69
Visual Control & Visual Standards
General:
Visual Standards such as Boundary samples , Quality alerts , master parts should
be communicated to all team .
Visual Standard documents should be controlled .
Visual standards should be updated based on FR and customer feedback .
(Examples) (Product Quality Standard)
Good and Bad Photos
Revision date for

document control
GM 70
Visual Control & Visual Standards
(Examples)
Boundary Samples showing good
and Bad borders posted in shop floor .
GM 71
BIQS 19
Process Control Plan
BIQS 20
Process Control Plan Implemented
GM 72
PCP & PCP Implemented
FLOW DIAGRAM
PCP relation with PFMEA & WI
1
3
PFMEAs
4
6 POTENTIAL FMEA Number

FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS
(PROCESS FMEA) Page of
Item Process Responsibility Prepar ed By
Model Year(s)/Vehicle(s) Key Date FMEA Date (Orig.)
Core Team
7 Process Function Potential Failure

S C
Potential Effect(s) E L Potential Cause(s)/
O
C
D R.
E P. Recommended Responsibility
Action Results
Actions S O D R.
Requirements
9 1Mode
0 of Failure V A Mechanism(s) of C Current Pr ocess Control T N. Action(s) & Target Taken E C O P.
S Failure U E Completion Date V C T N.
S R C
PICTURE OF PROCESS
SHOWS FLOW OF PROCESS
FOUNDATION FOR PFMEA,
CONTROL PLANS, TOOL
LAYOUTS, WORK STATION
LAYOUTS, ET.
LISTS EACH OPERATION
CURRENT CONTROLS
ENHANCED CONTROLS FROM RECOMMENDED
ACTIONS
PER OPERATION:
KPCs, KCCs
INSPECTION FREQUENCY
GAGE & CHECKING DEVICES
REACTION PLANS FOR NON-
CONFORMING PRODUCT
PER OPERATION:
INSPECTION FREQUENCY
GAGE & CHECKING DEVICES
REACTION PLANS OF NON-
CONFORMING PRODUCT
GM 73
Example:
(A: PFMEA)
failure mode about temperature
Detection method
using variable
gauge
See Next Page.
GM 74
Example:
(B: PCP)
Temperature control using gauge
Frequency of control
Check sheet used to
register the records
GM 75
BIQ 21
Process Capability
Review
GM 76
Process capability Review
CONTROL, CAPABILITY
AND PERFORMANCE
X
X X X
X XX
X X X X
X
X
X
X X X X X X
Voice of the Customer (VOC) and

Voice of the Process (VOP)
It is often necessary to compare the process variation with the engineering or

specification tolerance to judge the suitability of the process. Process capability analysis
addresses this issue.
GM 77
Four Important Assumptions

for Capability Measures
The process is statistically stable
Individual measurements approximate

a normal distribution
Specifications are based upon

customer requirements
The sample represents the population
GM 78
Example:
GAEf-A23 Rev A
FFCpk Validation
INSPECTION ALLOWABLE ALLOWABLE
TARGET UPPER LOWER NUMBER OF
PROCESS NAME: AC backup Bowling Green LEVEL LIMIT LIMIT TRIALS
500 520 480 30
TRIAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
ACTUAL 499 501 500 500 500 501 501 500 501 499 500 500 500 501 500 501 500 500 500 500 501 501 499 500 500
(X-Xbar)^2 1.5211 0.5878 0.0544 0.0544 0.0544 0.5878 0.5878 0.0544 0.5878 1.5211 0.0544 0.0544 0.0544 0.5878 0.0544 0.5878 0.0544 0.0544 0.0544 0.0544 0.5878 0.5878 1.5211 0.0544 0.0544
TRIAL 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
ACTUAL 500 500 501 501 500
(X-Xbar)^2 0.0544 0.0544 0.5878 0.5878 0.0544 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TRIAL 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75
ACTUAL
(X-Xbar)^2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TRIAL 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100
ACTUAL
(X-Xbar)^2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FLUID FILL CAPABILITY HISTOGRAPH

35
30
25
NUMBER OF OCCURENCES
20
15
Series1
10
0
480 484 488 492 496 500 504 508 512 516 520
-5 GM 79
LEVEL
BIQ 22
Rework Repair
Confirmation
GM 80
Rework & Repair Confirmation
Re-Introduction
All control plan inspections and tests shall be performed.
A work instruction required to perform rework
Customer approval may be required
Product removed from the approved process flow should be reintroduced into the
process stream at or prior to the point of removal.
Reintroduced product needs to be identified.
Best practice would suggest that you do not run product more than twice.
NOTE: When it is not possible to reintroduce at or prior to removal: an approved

(Quality Manager) documented rework and inspection procedure shall be
used to assure conformance to all specification and test requirements.
GM
81
81
Rework & Repair Confirmation
Example:
Rework Approved as per

Part with NC label waiting Rework Performed
PCP , Green Label
for rework according to rework
attached and part moved
WI in the rework table
to approved green table.
GM
82
82
BIQ 23
Feedback Feed
Forward
GM 83
Feedback - Feed forward
Required Information must be defined for all levels of the Organization
Content Format
Variance to standard Common
Containment Visual
Breakpoint
Timing Countermeasure
Immediate
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
GM 84
Customer/Supplier Communications
Supplier
Feedforward changes in product & process
Feedforward problems that will affect customer
Implement immediate containment - follow up
with problem solving & communicate results
Deliver products that meet standard
Supplier Customer
Customer
Communicate current standard requirements
Provide immediate feedback on any problems
Feedback results of supplier problem solving
GM 85
Example:
Quality Alerts should be posted and communicated in the production and inspection
areas .
Quality Alert Quality Alert
Inspection Station Work Cell
GM 86
Example:
Quality performance and VOC is communicated to shop floor
Verification Station FTQ feedback Escalation results feedback
GM 87
BIQ 24
Training
GM 88
Training
Training & Development Planning
Leaders should utilize annual training plans to develop their employees (including
entire staff of manufacturing and support function areas).
Special consideration should be given for New Hires, personnel assigned to a new
role or position and temporary employees.
Training should exist for employees and be based on a needs assessment (i.e.
organizational goals, individual training needs etc.).
Use training tools such as:
Scheduling and Tracking
Flexibility Charts (to validate training and assess training needs)
Training Evaluations etc.
Training plans should include areas such as:
Health, Safety & Environment
BIQS
Technical Training
Leadership Development
Launch Specific Training (if applicable) etc.
GM 89
Training
Individual Job Training Example:
GM 90
Training
Flexibility Chart
Example:
GM 91
BIQ 25
Contamination
Control
GM 92
CONTAMINATION CONTROL
Sources of Contamination
Original material/fluid from the tiered supplier

Transfer from supplier container to GM pipe lines
Material/Fluid handling at the station
Dirt/oil or foreign material on parts/fluids/sealers or
dunnage
Incorrect PPE. e.g. cotton gloves instead of lint free
System cleaning not completed correctly sediment still in
the system such as metal in the vehicle from body shop,
or final wash effectiveness insufficient Powertrain.
Incorrect abrasive material, backing or particle size as well
as forbidden materials being used (Silicon, lubricating oil).
GM 93
Example: Fluid in Original Packaging
Supplier/ Plant needs to
develop Standardized
work (checking methods) Customer needs , correct
to Confirm shipped Material which is clean & free
material. from debris/damage.
What do
they
Examples of items checked need?
-Material-Number
-Lot-Number
-expiration date
-seal not damaged
Container, hoses and connections
Brake fluid samples are taken for
water, oil, solids.
- Freezing point/correct mixing ratio
cooling fluid and washer fluid
- Are all pipes and air/con
assemblies protected against dirt
& moisture?
GM 94
Component Contamination
Daily Sediment checks

results should be Customer needs ,
documented control Material which is free from
PT only sediment debris/damage
limits identified on the
station
What do
Protectors in they
place not need?
missing, only
removed at
point of fit
GM 95
Original packing and handling
Customer needs, parts

Packaging styles should be which are not damage or
reviewed & bought off by a deformed during
cross-functional team. transportation & meet
original design intent
No
Unprotected
Paint to metal
or part to part
contact?
GM 96
BIQ 26
Maintenance
GM 97
Maintenance
Strategy and Organization
Scope adressed
Process Equipment
Handling devices / conveyors
Facilities
.
Handling devices
Buildings
Tank
PROCESS
Fork-lift truck
GM
Fluides 98
Maintenance
Maintenance: types
Corrective Maintenance:
Maintenance performed after a breakdown detection
Purpose: Ensure the re-start of the equipment as soon as possible (even with
degraded solutions)
Preventive Maintenance:
Maintenance performed according to predefined frequencies or on the basis
of predefined criteria (nb of cycles)
Purpose: Reduce the probability of breakdowns or the wear of the equipment.
Example: Aircraft Maintenance
Predictive Maintenance - Condition Based Maintenance (specific type of
preventive maintenance):
Maintenance based on the measurement of key parameters on the equipment
Example: Vibration Analysis on rotating machines, Fluids analysis,
thermography on electrical equipment. Corrective Maintenance
Risk of
breakdown Condition Based Maintenance
Preventive Maintenance
GM 99
Maintenance
Total Productive Maintenance (TPM): Key Principles
The entire organization (from

management to maintenance, to
Total engineering, to production
operators)
Team work!
Improved capability of equipment
Productive Elimination of waste and reduction
of cost
Achieving equipment availability
and quality targets
Predictive, Preventive, Corrective,

Maintenance and Reactive maintenance
Optimize the life of equipment
GM 100
Maintenance
Spare Parts Management
Identification of the critical spare parts
Criteria to define critical spare parts shall be defined according to
procedure by organization
List update shall be conducted periodically based on maintenance results
Spare parts storage

Storage conditions: suitable conditions shall be defined (procedure) in
order to avoid damage
Stock management: min condition shall be managed
Inspections & verification: periodically the physical inspections of spare
parts shall be defined and perfomed
GM 101
Maintenance
Maintenance performance measurements
q MTBF Mean Time Before Failure
MTBF gives information on the reliabiliy
Operation Time
of the equipment MTBF =
Nb of breakdowns
Time
q MTTR
MTTR gives information on the maintenability
of the equipement (maintenance friendly) Mean Time To Repair/Recovery
Reparation Time
MTTR =
Nb of breakdowns
q High equipment effectiveness means

High MTBF Low MTTR
GM 102
BIQ 27
FIFO/Material
Handling Process
GM 103
FIFO/Material Handling Process
FIFO present in all operations
Minimize inventory and allows traceability of material.
FIFO present in ALL OPERATIONS (Including repacking, kitting, buffers, WIP, and any
staging areas).
Visual aids support all operations and standardized work.
FIFO rotation FIFO should occur on a daily basis unless otherwise noted by the plant
(in these cases FIFO may occur on a weekly basis).
Ensure that FIFO is part of layered audit process.
FIFO processes are documented and are part of standardized work.
FIFO Material In All Storage Locations
Material In FIFO Order Oldest Material to Operator First
Full Full
CMA Full Full
Empty
Empty
Supplier
Overflow
GM 104
Sources of Handling Damage
Original packaging from the supplier

SPS packaging or other types of re-bin activity
Parts handling at the station
Insufficient care taking parts from the rack
Transporting un-protected components in the
product
Vehicle protection or lack of protection
Tooling/Fixture protection or lack of protection
Incorrect or no PPE. i.e. cotton gloves instead of lint free
Vehicle parking or storage both inside & outside the
plant
GM 105
Original packing and handling
Customer needs, parts

Packaging styles should be which are not damage or
reviewed & bought off by a deformed during
cross-functional team. transportation & meet
original design intent
No
Unprotected
Paint to metal
or part to part
contact?
GM 106
BIQ 28
Shipping Approved
Packaging
GM 107
Shipping Approved Packaging
Racks and Bins Status

Racks , containers protect parts from being damaged .
On floor storage with easy access without handling

equipment
GM 108
What is mislabeling ?
PARTS AND LABEL DO NOT MATCH

Wrong part number Wrong destination Wrong sequence
Wrong hand Wrong engineering Incorrect quantity

Level
Wrong color Mixed containers
Unreadable bar code on pallet
Mixed parts
Missing label Wrong part
Partial container identification
Foreign parts
GM 109
Labeling & Shipping failure modes

PFMEA
POTENTIAL FMEA Number________________________________
FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS Page ___________________of___________________
(PROCESS FMEA)
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

Item_________________________________ Proc ess Responsibility ________________ Prepared by_________________________________________
Model Year(s)/Vehic le(s)________________ Key Date___________________________ FMEA Date (Orig)_____________Rev____________________
Part Number___________________________ Core Team________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
C Po tential O D
Action Re sults
Process Pote ntial Po tential S Curre nt e R Resp onsibility S O D R
Part Description_________________________
l Cau se(s )/ c Recom m end ed Actio ns
t
Function / Failure Effe ct(s) of e a c Proce ss P & Target e c e P
s
Mech anis m (s) u
e Actio n(s) Take n
Requir em e nt Mo de Failure v Contr ols c N Com p letion Date v c t N
s of Failur e r t
Operation
1
Description KPC KCC 2
1 3
2
3
PROCESS CONTROL PLAN

Prototype Pre-launch Production
Part Number__________Part Description__________
Labeling should be included in flow Part/
Process Operation Machine
Number Description Device Characteristics Methods Reaction Plan
diagram, PFMEA and control plan
Parts are considered as 100%
defective if labeling is incorrect 1
The labeling step must be 2

considered as critical as a KPC 3
GM 110
Total Quality is the key to our survival
The design is right.
The raw materials meet spec.
The manufacturing process is capable.
The part quality is excellent.
Why cant they get the

right label on the box?
GM 111
BIQ 29
Supplier
Management
GM 112
Supplier Management
Suppliers need to use quality data for sourcing decisions , select new suppliers .
For current tiered suppliers , Tier one should use systematic problem solving tools
when issues occurred , also Tiered suppliers issues should be communicated in
FR meetings .
Tier one should send structure feedback to tiered supplier performance regularly .
Tier one should establish system and process audit to assure compliance for key
and critical suppliers .
Quality Data used for sourcing decisions
Example: Supplier base bid list
GM 113
Supplier Management
Effective problem solving process
For any delivery of parts with deviation, tier 1 validates the formal deviation
request of the tier X complaint (refer to Control of Nonconforming Product
CNC6).
Tired suppliers shall demonstrate a systematic and disciplined approach to
problem solving.
Example:
GM 114
Supplier Management
Tired suppliers monthly performance tracking
Example:
6 panel
It is recommended that suppliers use at least the first 13

BIQS elements to implement and audit at key tiered
suppliers
GM 115

GM Supplier Quality Presentation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

GM Supplier Quality Presentation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BIQS

Focus ONE LANGUAGE GLOBALLY

Complete Fast Response

Laboratory G. Hall 06/01/2003

POTENTIAL AREA SUSPECT PROD. VERIFICATION

Receiving 500 P.S. 500 P. Smith

TOTAL FOUND 2548 2548 C. Jones

SEGREGATE SU SPEC T PRODUCT TO (location, as feasible): 2548 pcs to Containment Area

Material identification should be easily

What goes wrong ?

Containment Worksheet does not list all the potential locations

Containment Worksheet exists but not used

Containment without standardized work

Reintroduction not clearly identified (is at or prior to point of removal)

Hidden rework processes

Breakpoint communicated before defect really understood

Customer not notifiedbut then finds problem !!

(Example of LPA Plan )

Choose the Pick the station to be audited based on the

Conduct the Audit Follow LPA Check sheet

Follow-up on open items, make sure to close

Customer FR Focus questions

NON CONFORMANCES NUMBER OF ITEMS NOT IN COMPLIANCE

Severity Tables Occurrence Tables Detection Tables

Failure mode has

What is Risk Reduction Process:

What are the PFMEA processes for Risk Reduction:

PFMEA Review Process:

PFMEA Reactive Risk Reduction Process:

Proactive Reverse PFMEA Process:

What goes wrong ?

Scoring is not according to customer guidelines.

Scoring is not consistent.

Primary detection method relies heavily on visual inspection.

Failure modes are missing, not revised at work station.

Internal/external PPM are not used for Occurrence.

Scoring driven by low RPN or set by action limit.

New scoring is not revised after recommended action implementation.

High risk item identified but not controlled by SQ tools.

1. Risk analysis methods (e.g. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis,

2. Processes are validated relative to changes to Design, Man,

Process Process Control STS / SOS /

When a process cannot be executed following its approved process, bypass

Examples when a Bypass Process may be required:

This document is a record that

When is Error Proofing Implemented?

Assures error proof/detection devices are working as intended.

Error proofing devices shall be verified at least once per day.

Error detection device

What goes wrong ?

Verification documented as completed but not actually performed

Result of verification driven by Master status (Bad Master = NOK result)

Frequency of verification is not reviewed

Reaction plan is not defined / followed in case of verification failure

Verification failures not escalated so no action taken

Containment not implemented when error proofing disabled

If error proofing device malfunctions, all parts should be rejected

3 inspectors, 10 samples , 3 trials R&R Study Results

The disciplined execution of quality and production milestones that must be

To ensure that quality issues are immediately addressed through a disciplined

Provides the status of a problem through visual tracking.

Actual Closed Date

Open > 40 Days=R