02 - Fast Response - QIP V3
02 - Fast Response - QIP V3
1
FAST RESPONSE
Introduction
PURPOSE: SCOPE:
• Immediately address quality • Assembly Area
failures • Manufacturing Operations
- External / Internal
• Shipping / Receiving
• Defines the process to be
followed • All Operations
• Defines method of displaying • Other Support Functions
important information as a
visual management tool,
supporting status at a glance.
• Applies discipline in responding RESPONSIBILITY:
to issues through a systematic
approach. • Ownership
• Operations Manager
• Defines method to provide fast
response to operator • Contingency Plan for All
Situations
Benefits
Criteria of Requirement
11 – page 6-13 14 – page 9
12- page 11-19 15 – page 18
13 – page 15-19 Auditor Hints – page 19-20
Next Requirement
Problem Identification
In preparation for the Fast Response meeting, at the start of the day,
Departments shall identify their significant concerns from the past 24 hours
which include:
• External Concerns:
– Customer concerns (PRR’s, Liaison Issues, Customer Calls,
Warranty)
– Supplier concerns (Suppliers should be notified in advance when
they are to report out at the meeting).
• Internal Concerns:
– Verification Station Findings
– Layered Process Audit Systemic issues
– Line stops and Teardown issues
– Other internal Quality concerns (Dock Audits, containment activity)
– Error Proof device failures
All the significant quality issues are tracked on Fast Response Board.
PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 01601_13_00115 / 07-12-2016 / DA-DSD
6
FAST RESPONSE
Problem Identification
• Manufacturing Concerns:
– Production schedule vs. quantity produced:
• Significant deviation could affect to shipment to customer
Structure
The meeting is a manufacturing review meeting owned by Manufacturing
and supported by Quality, Engineering, Maintenance, and support staff.
Shall be held daily to review the significant quality concerns gathered by
Departments. Some organizations may choose to hold meetings on each
shift.
It is a communications meeting, not a problem solving meeting.
It should be a 10 - 20 minute stand up meeting held on the shop floor.
Each issue shall be documented on a Practical Problem Solving Report
(PPSR) or equivalent. This form is reviewed at the meeting to provide
structure for the report out and to keep the meeting to its allotted time frame.
• Suppliers are expected to use a standard problem solving form for their
report out for the initial Containment phase, Root Cause and Corrective
Action updates.
Responsibilities
The Plant Manager or designated manufacturing lead shall:
• Ensure that Fast Response process is maintained and effective.
• Designate a champion & co-champion as the facilitator.
At the Fast Response meeting, site leadership shall:
• Designate a leader (natural owner) for each concern/issue if one
has not been already assigned.
• Ensure proper support from all disciplines through attendance.
• Identify action required and owner for items statused as RED.
• Establish the next report out date for the issue if it is not closed.
Responsibilities
New issues shall be updated on the Fast Response board prior to the meeting
by the owner (lead contact in the case of supplier issues).
Owners shall be responsible for assuring all problem solving and exit criteria are
met in a timely manner through:
Owner shall report progress to the team during each of these steps:
Define The
Identify The
s3 Root Cause 5-Why (Example)
s1 Problem
Transfer Technical Root
s3 Cause to DRILL DEEP
Contain The (System RC; 3x5 Why)
s2 Problem
Implement Permanent
s4 Corrective Actions
Verify Effectiveness
s5 Of Actions
Identify The
s3
Cause
Institutionalize
s6 Throughout The Organization
Next Report Out Date Target Timing, Status, & Date Green
Y
G
Initiated but not complete
Complete
24 H 7D 14 D 34 D 35 D 40 D N/A Not Applicable
Forecasted Closed
Field Rep Ranking
Customer Closed
Lessons Learned
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
LPA not Validated on 3rd shift. - J. Biden to
2/3 CAR 08- Assy J. McGrath 2/23 N/A NA 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
Containment - Breakpoint
Error Proof/Detection
identifying opportunities for
Lessons Learned
Corrective Action
Corrective Action
(Institutionalized)
Implemented
Instructions
validation of corrective action
Validated
through Layered Process Audits
and prevention of recurrence
through error proofing and
Lessons Learned institutionalized G G G G G G G Y Y
shall also be documented. 1/11 1/18 1/24 1/24 1/25 2/13 2/15 2/20 2/20
Operator Instructions
order to properly status each
Lessons Learned
Corrective Action
Corrective Action
(Institutionalized)
Layered Process
Proof/Detection
Containment -
Standard Work
Date Opened
Implemented
PFMEA / CP
Root Cause
Breakpoint
Validated
Identified
item as Red, Yellow, or Green.
Updated
Owner
Audits
Error
The default when a problem is
first opened is Yellow until it’s
timing is exceeded, RED, or G G R R R R R R
1/21 2/22 N/A
Completed, GREEN. 1/22 1/26 2/14 2/14 2/16 3/6 3/7 3/7
In the example above, the date the problem was opened is 1/21.
• Containment was achieved within 24 hours.
• Root Cause was identified within 7 days.
• Corrective action was not implemented within 14 days so it is RED with
the expected date to be GREEN shown as 2/14.
This Red status should show details in a action/status comment column
explaining the next step.
Error Proof/Detection
OVERALL STATUS
Actual Closed Date
Lessons Learned
Corrective Action
Corrective Action
(Institutionalized)
Implemented
Breakpoint
Instructions
Validated
(RYG)
Action Plan / Countermeasure
G G R R R R R R
N/A R
1/22 1/26 2/14 2/14 2/16 3/6 3/7 3/7 PLL Program Logic for Error Prevention device to
reprogrammed by 2/14. J. Busch - M.E. 2/21
Overall Status = R, Y, or G
Worst Condition of any single Item at the left
Auditor hints
Attend on FR meeting. Observe:
- lead by manufacturing with cross -functional attendees,
- how leader controls the FR meeting (keep timing max 10-20 minutes, focus
on subject, not going to the details...),
- participants feel “comfortable”, see that is not a one time event for the audit,
- environment is suitable (everyone can hear and see the meeting),
- how issues reported out,
- Problem Solving report format is used for report out and document the
status of the issue.
Auditor hints
Prior to the audit check the last customer complaints focusing to the open ones.
Prior to the FR meeting ask if there are any significant internal issues.
Check the board if it contains above described external and internal issues.
Follow an issue from FR Tracking Board through the exit criteria confirming
actions are in place & all the relevant documents have been updated.
Check few statuses if they are rated well based on their timing, judge few N/A
items.
Escalation process is put in place with internal issues. Its defined in order to ensure that
FR21
problems are quickly communicated to people who can have an action.
Escalation
Process with Escalation process is put in place with external issues. Its defined in order to ensure that
FR2 FR22
appropriate problems are quickly communicated to people who can have an action.
timing and exit
criteria. FR23 Decision rules, responsibilities and actions (Who, What, When, Where) are clearly defined.
Criteria of Requirement
1 – page 22-28
2 – page 29-31
3 – page 32
4 – page 33-37 Global Purchasing and Supply Chain
Auditor Hints – page 38 Prev. Requirement Next Requirement
Problem
Team Leader
Responding
Needs help
Team Member Call Support
Group
Leader Support
Decision
Mgr Support
Decision
The diagram shows the span of support within the organization. The significance of the inverted
triangle is that the Team Member is at the top, supported by the entire organization underneath.
When the Team Member needs help, he calls for support, and support comes from the Team
Leader. For complicated problems, the Team Leader calls for support from the Group Leader,
and so on down the span of support.
Arlington Silao
Pontiac Mishawaka
(Example)
Manufacturing
Team Member
Team Member
Group Leader
Maintenance
Quality Team
Team Leader
Engineering
Production
Production
Production
Member
Tasks - Escalation Process
Follow Standardized Work
Actively watch out-of-standard situations
If an abnormality or defect is discovered that cannot be immediately corrected,
call for support, and continue with the rest of the cycle until support arrives
Support Team Leader (TL) with problem solving
TL hears description of problem and takes responsibility for the problem
TL begins immediate correction of the problem
TL releases the andon when he has determined a correction can be made. TL
begins problem solving with support of TM
TL calls for support to Group Leader if problem cannot be solved quickly
Support TL if he is not able to countermeasure the problem, and get the line
running as soon as possible
Call additional support as needed (i.e. maintenance, quality, engineering,…)
Work with TL to make sure root cause is identifed and countermeasures
implemented
Monitor downtime, identify problem areas and work with all available resources to
eliminate problems
• The Quality organization is responsible to issue, post and remove the quality alert.
• Andon systems should be used on shop floor to alert organization when error occur.
NOTE: The Quality Alert should only be removed after corrective action has been validated and the work instructions
have been updated if appropriate .
Andon System may Cell Phone may be Use Quality Alert document to
be used to used for communicate the issue till
Communication communication . solve the problem and update
when error is all documentation (SOS &
produced/identified JES, C.P, PFMEA).
in the station Quality Alert should be simple
and clear
Auditor hints
Standard process used across the plant for internal (at the workstation, maintenance,
logistics), customers and suppliers issues.
FR31 Actions are defined and recorded with responsibility and target closing date. Exit criteria
A defined
represent the core 6 Steps of problem solving (1. Define 2. Contain 3. Root cause 4. Correct
process for
5. Validate 6. Institutionalize).
Problem
Solving is in Tools for identifying root causes (non-detection and occurrence) are systematically applied
place. It FR32
FR3 (5 why to correct systemic issues, Fishbone Diagram etc.).
includes a
In case of reoccurence and critical issues, analysis is performed to understand why PFMEA
standard for
FR33 did not predict the failure.
documenting
A PFMEA review is required again.
the tools used
for root cause Standard form or database is used to document Lessons Learned. A process is defined to
FR34
identification. deal with the lessons learned.
Some analysis forms posted close the lines in the workshop exist (e.g. : QRQC line, 5 why
FR35
analysis with paper board report…).
Criteria of Requirement
1 – page 40-66 Auditor Hints – page 72
2- page 43-60
3 – page 56-61
4 – page 67-70 Global Purchasing and Supply Chain
4 – page 71 Prev. Requirement Next Requirement
Problem Solving
WHAT IS A PROBLEM?
• It is the GAP between the current situation and customer
satisfaction.
Standard
Discrepancy
LEVEL Actual
TIME
Problem Solving
Growing
Problem Solving
Definition:
• A structured process that
identifies, analyzes, and
eliminates the discrepancy
between the current situation and
an existing standard or
expectation, and prevents
recurrence of the root cause.
P
• Cross-functional team approach
is applied.
D
C
A
Everyone
Stability As more people
are involved,
more problems
are solved which
People creates a more
stable
environment. As
the environment
becomes more
stable, more
people can be
involved in
problem solving.
Involvement
PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 01601_13_00115 / 07-12-2016 / DA-DSD 44
FAST RESPONSE
Problem Solving
Grasp
the
Situation
Problem Solving
Grasp
the
Situation
Problem Solving
Problem Definition
Containment
Locate Point
of Cause
PoC
Problem Solving
Problem Solving
Problem Solving
Problem Solving
Problem Solving
1 Correct Process (Example)
Problem Solving
2 Correct Tool (Example)
Manufacturing
1
Correct
Process?
Can any of these cause the problem?
• Are the correct tools & fixtures being used?
(all shifts)
• Are the tools set to the specified requirements?
Manufacturing
Corrects
Correct
Tool? • Are they properly calibrated?
• Are both shifts using the same tool?
• Are the tools worn?
• Do the tools & fixtures have mutilation protection?
Manufacturing
3
Correct • Has the workstation been error proofed?
Part?
• Have the tools or error proofing been bypassed?
• Does the workstation layout allow the operator
to work effectively?
Quality Sys / Parts
• Has the Preventive Maintenance been done?
SQ / Supplier
4
Quality? (check log)
• Are tools functioning correctly?
PURCHASING DEPARTMENT 01601_13_00115 / 07-12-2016 / DA-DSD
53
FAST RESPONSE
Problem Solving
3 Correct Part (Example)
Quality Sys /
SQ / Supplier Parts
4 Quality?
Problem Solving
4 Part Quality (Example)
Supplier Data
CMM Checks
Manufacturing
2
Correct Fixture Checks
Tool?
Visual Part to Part
Visual Lot to Lot
Problem Solving
Problem Solving
• If we understand this chain, then we can find the root cause PoC
Root
Cause
Contain The
s2
Problem
1-4
Identify The
s3
Cause
If Each
YES to
NOD1-4
response
Questions
to
Proceed
D1-4to
Questions
Cause Effect
Requires
Brainstorming
a 5-Why path
Failure Mode:
Cause of Failure Mode: Point of Manufacture Tier 1 until actual root cause for each is
Why did the Manufacturing System
not prevent this
M1
Drill Deep
****************
**************** M3
**
Prevent
Prevent – Why did the
****************
**************** M4
** Manufacturing System -
Error Proofing &
****************
Standardized Work
**************** M5
**
Quality Assurance
Why did the Quality System not
M-RC
Q1
manufacturing process not
Protect GM from this
Failure Mode
Q2 prevent the defect?
****************
**************** Q3
** Protect
****************
****************
Quality System - Q4
**
Error Detection &
Q-RC
Quality Control
Why did the Planning System not
Predict this
Failure Mode
P1
P2
process not protect the customer
****************
****************
** Predict
****************
P3 (GM) from the defect?
****************
Planning System - P4
** informational content
****************
in all documentation
**************** P5
**
Quality Planning
P-RC
A
Predict – Why did the planning
What are the key findings based on
this quality issue?
****************
B
process not predict the failure?
**************** C
**
Problem Solving
Problem Description
Step 4 – IMPLEMENT CORRECTIVE ACTION (Initial problem Perception)
Cause
• Determine the steps and actions
Why?
Why?
needed to implement and timing. Cause
Why?
MARCH Root
Cause
(Example)
Countermeasure
Follow -Up
Problem Solving
Problem Definition
Step 6 - INSTITUTIONALIZE
• Identify similar products and processes which Locate Point of
potentially have or may produce the same failure Cause
mode. PoC
Cause
Why?
Send a copy of this Problem Solving Report to other
Why? Cause
Departments/Plants with the potential of experiencing
Why?
this problem. Cause
Root
• Update remaining necessary documentation: Cause
– PFMEA
– Control Plan Countermeasure
Implement Permanent
s4
Corrective Actions
Verify Effectiveness
s5
Of Actions
Institutionalize
s6
Throughout The Organization
Problem Solving
Summary:
No problem solving means no improvement.
Encourage problems and solutions.
Provide the necessary training and resources.
Have patience.
Develop problem solvers.
Managers should have the questions, not the answers.
Make decisions based on fact, not opinion (Emotion).
Use teamwork to solve problems.
Lessons Learned
A Lessons Learned system:
Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned may be identified by anyone.
Examples of activities to Identify Lessons Learned:
• APQP Process
• Layered Process Audits
• Error Proofing Verification Failures
• Problem Solving activity for Internal or external Issues
• Verification Station Findings
• Continuous Improvement Teams
• Risk Reduction-Reverse PFMEA Team Activity
• Suggestion Programs
• Company Business/Quality Operating System Management Reviews
A disciplined approach to problem prevention using Lessons Learned shall be
established. Activities within an organization to prevent future problems or
improve performance that build Lessons Learned may include.
• Drill Wide-Read Across communication and follow up
• APQP Program reviews of Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned shall be documented. Documentation may include:
• Lessons Learned Form
• APQP Checklist
• Master PFMEA
• Computer Form or Website, etc.
Auditor hints
Prior to the audit check last customer complaints focusing to the issues where
root cause found and corrective action implemented.
Verify that problem solving used efficiently, all the core "6 steps" applied,
specially that real main root cause found and action implemented against the
root cause.
If no customer complaint issued verify via an internal or sub-supplier issue.
Check a Drill Deep (5 whys), main systematic root causes found.
Ask people for examples how they are using Lessons Learned system.
Check 6th step of problem solving (Institutionalize) via examples of point FR4.
Check Drill Wide Matrix or 7&8th step of 8D of last customer complaints.
Voice of the
customer is AMADEUS system: Follow-up and escalation are in place and managed in accordance
FR41
part of the with FR24 criteria.
strategy of the
plant. FR42 Neologistic and "MLP" are knowned by the supplier.
Customer IT Use of PSA system "SPOT" --> updating of QSB+ annual self-assessment, updating of
systems are FR43 MMOG/LE.
FR4 regularly Updating of certification ISO/TS in IATF systems.
checked in
order to
provide
escalation FR44 MADIG system : Follow-up and escalation are in place and managed
processes
Criteria of Requirement
1 – pages 74
2 – page 74
3 – page 74
4 – page 74
Auditor Hints – page 74 Global Purchasing and Supply Chain
Prev. Requirement Next Requirement
FRE5 Costs of poor quality (including indirect costs: sorts,...) are followed.
Performance Metrics
(Example)
Leadership shall ensure that Fast Response
process is effective and quality status is
displayed.
Performance Metrics
(Example)
Repetitive Issue
OVERALL STATUS
Part & Part Number
Forecasted Closed
Repetitive Issue?
Corrective Action
Next Report Date
(Institutionalized)
Lessons Learned
Layered Process
Proof/Detection
Program Name
Containment -
Time to close
Standard Work
Date Opened
Implemented
PFMEA / CP
Root Cause
Breakpoint
By Owner
Customer
Identified
Validated
Updated
ITEM #
Audits
Owner
(RYG)
Error
date
Issue Description Action Plan / Countermeasure
16/04
22/04
23/04 1 - Delay in the root cause identification
Bracket 29/04 Item in CSL
1 4/15/13 Cruze GM Lack of nut Yes Carlos G G G G G G G G G 25-May 25-Jun 70 G
93345678 29/05 2 - Lead time to import a sensor from Japan - 30 days
19/06 Keep item in CSL
20/06
25/06
Performance Metrics
Andon - Report
50
45
40
35
30
Quantity
25
20
15
10
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Auditor hints
Prior to audit check number of last 12 month PRRs. If higher than 24 (do not
count line accumulation ones) or trend is significantly negative, special PRR
reduction team has to be established.
Check last customer complaints whether due dates kept. If not reasons for
delay, actions need to be addressed.
Check red items percentage, evaluate actions addressed to eliminate
roadblocks.
Evidence of periodical review of average closing time for each exit criteria and
set action plan for any deviation.
Prev. Requirement