Module 9. Robust 8D. Robust 8D. Module 9

Transcription

1 Module 9 1

2 The Purpose of this module is to clearly define Ford Customer Service Division (FCSD) expectations as it relates to completion of 8Ds in response to service quality rejects 2

3 Understand the components of an 8D and FCSD s expectations in terms of 8D content Examples provided Know the importance of containment at each link in the supply chain 3

4 8D is: A Problem-solving methodology for product and process correction and improvement Simple and effective problem solving technique Structured into eight disciplines(d1-d8) Emphasizes team synergy 4

5 5

6 The focus of D1 is to establish the team necessary to solve the problem and implement corrective actions and to begin the team building process When determining team membership: Limit membership to between four and 10 members Choose members with the right skills, knowledge, resources, authority, etc., to solve the problem at hand Choose the right mix of qualifications Change team membership as needed 6

7 A description of the problem provided by Ford. This field can t be modified. The description will provide the following: Statement of the problem found Information for the packaging label Picture of the nonconforming part and if available the correct part If applicable packager information 7

8 When you develop an ICA, you: Protect the customer from the effects of the problem Contain the problem from a cost, quality and timing perspective 8

9 Containment process consists of D1-D3 Enter into QIM within 2 business days of receiving a quality reject D1 Establish the Team Name, Title, and Phone Number, for each team member D2 Problem Description Description created by FCSD and is view only for a Supplier D3 Interim Containment Define, Stock in Facility, Stock In Transit, Stock at Packager, Similar Parts and Other 9

10 Facility In Transit Packager Similar Parts What is the fallout rate of parts inside the manufacturing plant? What is being done immediately to ensure no defective parts leave the plant? Are parts in transit to a Ford facility? Are parts in transit to a Packager facility? Are Like parts affected? Are parts at a Packager? If so, are we certain that they meet spec.? If uncertain, advise disposition of parts at packager Have RH or LH parts been identified with the defect? Are parts of a different color affected? Are parts a level up or down affected? 10

11 Report if any of the rejected part or any like parts are in your facility. Contained 375 door trim panels in house, no problems found. Found and fixed 30 pieces of RH rocker arms identified as LH in warehouse. No headliners to contain, all pats made to order. 500 wheel covers contained, no gloss problems found. 100 crankshafts in finished goods, 50 have corrosion and 50 are rust free. 11

12 Report if any of the rejected part or any like parts are on their way toward FCSD depots or Packagers in a truck. 20 pieces XL3Z-1130-AA, 12 pieces XL#Z-1131-AA, X pieces of similar parts Y & Z are in transit. Conveyance # : LMNOP Contacted packager, all like product in transit contained. No Product in transit. Shipped 1000 pieces of the rejected part on (3/1/15.) 12

13 Report if any of the rejected part or any like parts are at a packager or at FCSD. Informed Packager the parts they have in house are nonconforming. Worked with the Packager to exchange parts for parts to specification This part nor similar parts currently at the Packager. 13

14 Report if Similar Parts are involved with this concern. o Ask yourself and report: What like parts did we ship with the rejected parts? o Parts across different car lines Escape, Focus, Mustang, etc. o Various colors shipped o Model years shipped o RH vs. LH parts o Different engineering levels 14

15 Focus on the process, not the people What has changed? Multiple Root Causes Most likely causes Weight multiple root causes (i.e. 80% or 20% at fault) Utilize Quality Tools 5 Whys Review Process Flow Diagram for Escape Points Is / Is Not Fishbone Diagram 15

16 Used to identify the fault. Cross functional team asks Why 5 times in effort to determine root cause. Built into the QIM system. Example Fault: Wrong part was shipped 1. Why? Parts were labeled incorrectly 2. Why? New service part number launched at supplier 3. Why? Engineering part number changed and it was assumed the Service part number should change 4. Why? Failure to properly manage the change 5. Why? Lack of understanding of Ford Service parts and failed to ship according to their release 16

17 Used to understand how the problem escaped to the customer and identify the escape point: Review the process flow focusing on the location in the process where the root cause occurred. Determine if a control system exists to detect the problem. Are service unique requirements included? 17

18 Is / Is Not Used to develop the correct Problem Statement Ask: What s wrong with what? Ask Next: Do we know why this is happening? 18

19 A graphical representation used to organize and display the interrelationships of various possible root causes of a problem. Possible causes of a potential defect or failure are organized in categories and subcategories in a horizontal tree-structure, with the failure as the root node. 19

20 Current change over process (or lack of change over process) allows mixed product to be shipped to customers Once the part became service only production was moved to a line with no poke-yoke Change implemented internally, but Ford was not notified via proper channels (SREA, WERS Alert) Change was approved via SREA by Ford, but no new notice was issued and no new print was approved 20

21 D5 focuses on decision making and verification. By focusing on these two steps, you can: Make the best decisions based on benefits and risks Verify that the chosen solution will work Any PCA you choose should: Fix the problem at the root cause level Generate no additional problems Be verified to work 21

22 Revised current change over process to include first piece and last piece inspection at each change over Developed a process to ensure that the control plan and PFMEA are followed when an OE part becomes service only to ensure appropriate error proofing is in place Revised Manage the Change process to include validation of revised Ford Notice and print, as well as PPAP approval at level 3 to ensure customer approval pf the change 22

23 D6 is when you implement the PCA to eliminate the root cause of the problem. Validation makes sure the PCA works as intended after implementation. Develop an implementation plan for the PCA Once PCA has been validated to work, remove the Interim Containment Action (ICA) Monitor long-term results 23

24 Since first and Last piece inspection implemented for all changeovers, 2 months ago, no discrepancies have been found Reviewed 3 specific part numbers that moved from OE to service only line. All 3 parts have documented Manage the Change review and original error proofing is still in place Include inspection date(s), part number(s), quantity inspected, and inspection results Verified that new notice number, print, and Fordapproved PSW have been received for the last 3 design changes 24

25 Behind every problem that creates the need to do a G8D, there is at least one system, practice, procedure, or policy that allowed the problem to occur and escape. Document changes to Procedures Policies Work instructions PFMEA, Process Flow Diagram Control Plan Ensure that service specific processes are added to these documents Train employees in the new procedures, etc. Determine whether this PCA should be applied systemically Other manufacturing lines Other Manufacturing plants Document technical lessons learned 25

26 Sincerely recognize both team and individual contributions Celebrate Team Commitment Problem resolution Process improvement Be Creative Be Timely 26

27 D1-Establish Team Reference Desk Procedures QIM-DP-11-Input Supplier 3D Comments QIM-DP-13-Input Supplier 8D Comments *Training Material for QIM can be found on the FCSD Supplier Quality Portal 27

28 D2-Problem Description (Automatically populated) Attachments tab- All supporting Documents including the picture of the nonconforming part and if available the correct part 28

29 D3 - Supplier Containment Note: For K type rejects written by a Packager use the Stock at Packager field below for the 3D Containment and Disposition responses. 29

30 30

31 D4-Root Cause 31

32 D5-Choose & Verify Perm. Corrective Actions 32

33 D6-Implement & Validate Perm. Corrective Actions 33

34 D7-Action(s) to Prevent Reoccurrence 34

35 D8-Congratulate Your Team Note:8Ds closure requirement is 60 days which includes the STA s review. 35