Hi All,

My GM flew in from the big smoke the other day and to my astonishment asked me to include him in investigations for major non conformities. I asked him what he thought a 'major' was and he asked me to investigate and come up with a system. Our current safety system has the GM on the investigations if an employee has a 'Lost Time Injury' and the Operations Manager (next most senior) if there is a work place injury but no lost time. The Department Manager investigates near misses and proactive safety reports etc.
I thought I would use this as a basis for the NC (CAR) investigations but use monetary values and impact on the process or system.
I have attached a draft matrix for managers to use to establish cost, severity and urgency. What do you think? Has anyone got a similar system?

Thanks in advance

Greg B

Another solid idea from the Queenslander, and I like the idea about the matrix. I wonder if it may do some good to add more lines for the managers comments, and if I were to use it I'd probably want some info on how to judge the High, Moderrate or Low aspects? Is that what the asterisks are for?

Anther angle would be to use a similar electronic form...

Please let us know what you end up with.

/Claes

Claes,

As always thanks for the support and comments. I was actually going to include this in our CAR form. The managers would have ample room on the CAR to make further comment (especially when we get an electronic form...very soon).

One of the reasons I posted this was to get some feedback on the High, Moderate and Low aspects. What if I use the system they use in Safety with High and Low Risk measured by a matrix. I could then change the 'Severity' to 'Risk'. Anyone know how it works ????? I still need to know how to measure 'Urgency' and I suppose there would be many variables depending on the system, process. I would also need to qualify the urgency or priority. Help please :frust: :confused:

Greg B

One of the reasons I posted this was to get some feedback on the High, Moderate and Low aspects. What if I use the system they use in Safety with High and Low Risk measured by a matrix. I could then change the 'Severity' to 'Risk'. Anyone know how it works ????? I still need to know how to measure 'Urgency' and I suppose there would be many variables depending on the system, process. I would also need to qualify the urgency or priority. Help please :frust: :confused:

Greg B

Couldn't you nick something from one of the many good FMEA forms around?

/Claes

Greg,

In a bit of a hurry so this'll be short. Don't completely understand your matrix, but one quick thought. Sometimes a $ value to measure urgency isn't a good measure, IMO. Maybe the screw-up was only on a $300 customer order, but perhaps the parts were qualification samples that had a $20,000 order hanging on approval of the $300 order. One possible solution is to let a Sales Manager or Operations Manager bump-up something to a high level of urgency even if the dollar amount is low based on their consideration of issues less quantifiable than money yet still important. Maybe you thought of this and I just did not understand the matrix. :bigwave:

What an excellent idea.

Got a question for you. Is this part of your NC form, or a seperate form to be completed? Just curious, as I detest extra forms.

Can I borrow to incorporate into my system?

CarolX

Couldn't you nick something from one of the many good FMEA forms around?

/Claes

Claes,

I haven't had anything to do with FMEA so I will need to have a look thru the threads. Thanks

Greg B

Greg,

In a bit of a hurry so this'll be short. Don't completely understand your matrix, but one quick thought. Sometimes a $ value to measure urgency isn't a good measure, IMO. Maybe the screw-up was only on a $300 customer order, but perhaps the parts were qualification samples that had a $20,000 order hanging on approval of the $300 order. One possible solution is to let a Sales Manager or Operations Manager bump-up something to a high level of urgency even if the dollar amount is low based on their consideration of issues less quantifiable than money yet still important. Maybe you thought of this and I just did not understand the matrix. :bigwave:
Mike,
I thoroughly agree with the dollar thing and I would not like to see that as the sole contributor to the Importance or Impact of the NC. We would have to have criteria for this as with the other parts of the matrix. What? I don't yet know.
This was all bought about by the fact that the GM wants a 'level' where he will be bought in on the investigation. I havent yet worked out that level but it will have to do with the Dollars, Effect on the customer, business, process, product etc.

Greg B

What an excellent idea.

Got a question for you. Is this part of your NC form, or a seperate form to be completed? Just curious, as I detest extra forms.

Can I borrow to incorporate into my system?

CarolX

Carol,

This is not yet part of the NC form but will be as soon as I can finalise what I want it to do. You certainly can borrow it and if you have any input into it please let me know. See previous post to Mike. :bigwave:

Greg B

How about something like a risk matrix, but with frequency vs consequence.

I modded your form, and just put a few ideas and numbers, but it is the concept I was thinking of.

How about something like a risk matrix, but with frequency vs consequence.

I modded your form, and just put a few ideas and numbers, but it is the concept I was thinking of.

James,

That is exactly the type of input I was looking for. I talked to the GM a few hours ago and he stated that he wanted it aligned to the Australian Standard for Risk. This looks VERy similar to the system we use for Safety.

Greg B

Exactly

Looks much like and FMEA to be.

Severity ranking
Occurence Ranking
Detection Ranking

Multiply them all together and get a Risk Priority Number (RPN).

Look up the failure mode you identify to those on the FMEA, and then say who needs to be involved based on the RPN !

ta da

James,

That is exactly the type of input I was looking for. I talked to the GM a few hours ago and he stated that he wanted it aligned to the Australian Standard for Risk. This looks VERy similar to the system we use for Safety.

Greg B

Yeah, pretty much what I took it from.

I hope it get's changed enough not to be chased by their lawyers:biglaugh:.

Be sure to post what you finally come up with.

Martin, I had FMEA in the back of my mind as well because I'm trying to use that in a strategy analysis problem I'm working on for my MBA.

Greg B,

Just came across this thread, via back door review of attachments by author. Would you be able to share what you finally ended up with?

Thanks,
Doug

James,

That is exactly the type of input I was looking for. I talked to the GM a few hours ago and he stated that he wanted it aligned to the Australian Standard for Risk. This looks VERy similar to the system we use for Safety.

Greg B

What is the system you use for safety?

Douglas and Randy,

Here is the latest chart for Quality thus far. It has still not seen the light of day but it is getting close. We still need to work out some issues such as IS IT GOING TO WORK?? :lmao:

The safety matrix is from our files but I have little to do with it other than trying to borrow some ideas.

:thanx: That's cool

:topic: How about a copy of the safety report?

One great thing about you guys in Australia, the Canadian's & Brit's is that you all have made great inroads in safety management, whereas we American's just hit and miss at it.

:thanx: That's cool

:topic: How about a copy of the safety report?

One great thing about you guys in Australia, the Canadian's & Brit's is that you all have made great inroads in safety management, whereas we American's just hit and miss at it.


O.K Randy,
Here are some of our Safety Forms. The first is our Investigation Form. It is long winded but gets the job done. The second is our Job Safety Analysis (JSA) Form. Everyone uses this and we have compiled a detailed JSA history on every task within our company. It is a massive undertaking but in the end very worthwhile. The third is the Safety report Flow chart and Matrix (unfortunately I do not have access to an electronic copy of our Safety Form as it is a document that is printed in book form outside of the company. I could probably get someone to scan a copy (I'll try).

We have reduced our Lost Time Injuries (LTI) from about 18 per year to 1 or 2 (in two years). This is coupled with a Behaviour Based Safety System, Safety Steering Committee, Safety Representatives, a lot of Training and Refresher Training, Senior Management support(up to the Board) etc etc. I am very jealous of the safety system. If we treated our Products like our people we would have no NCs.

Thanks...anything I can give you? An Arkansas "woo-pig-sooey? A waltz with Matilda? One of my copies of "The Man from Snowy River"? You name it buddy!

Thanks...anything I can give you? An Arkansas "woo-pig-sooey? A waltz with Matilda? One of my copies of "The Man from Snowy River"? You name it buddy!
Randy,

Your presence on the 'Cove' is reward enough!! :lmao: :applause:

Since a certain Sheriff left there has been a distinct lack of 'Aggro' and you always call a spade a shovel.

Randy,

Your presence on the 'Cove' is reward enough!! :lmao: :applause:

Since a certain Sheriff left there has been a distinct lack of 'Aggro' and you always call a spade a shovel.If you really don't want it, Greg, could I have the Arkansas "woo-pig-sooey"?
It will probably go great with my Missouri "Show Me" button and my extensive collection of round "tuit" devices (everyone used to tell me I could get something from them as soon as they got a round tuit, so now I have them to hand out whenever I hear that excuse.):lmao:

Hi All,

My GM flew in from the big smoke the other day and to my astonishment asked me to include him in investigations for major non conformities. I asked him what he thought a 'major' was and he asked me to investigate and come up with a system. Our current safety system has the GM on the investigations if an employee has a 'Lost Time Injury' and the Operations Manager (next most senior) if there is a work place injury but no lost time. The Department Manager investigates near misses and proactive safety reports etc.
I thought I would use this as a basis for the NC (CAR) investigations but use monetary values and impact on the process or system.
I have attached a draft matrix for managers to use to establish cost, severity and urgency. What do you think? Has anyone got a similar system?

Thanks in advance

Greg B

Has anyone got any more input into this? I never got around to completing it. Please read the background in the first few posts and replies. Essentially we want to come up with a grading system for our Non conformances/CARs etc whereby we assign responsibility at different levels of the company to oversee their management. We need to do this by evaluating the real cost, potential cost etc and then set a scale for action such as <100K = GM input or >1K department supervisor level. Any ideas?

Link to first post and Attachment (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=55306&postcount=1)

Has anyone got any more input into this? I never got around to completing it. Please read the background in the first few posts and replies. Essentially we want to come up with a grading system for our Non conformances/CARs etc whereby we assign responsibility at different levels of the company to oversee their management. We need to do this by evaluating the real cost, potential cost etc and then set a scale for action such as <100K = GM input or >1K department supervisor level. Any ideas?

Link to first post and Attachment (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showpost.php?p=55306&postcount=1)Wow! A blast from the past without Marc attached!

Let me suggest that a major nonconformance (for purposes of involving different management levels) is anything that results in a nonconforming product reaching a customer, simply because the ramifications can quickly become "unknowable" similar to the idea of screwing up a prototype order. (I would not include "screwed up" paperwork in this category.)

Next higher level is creation of product which cannot be repaired or reworked, resulting in unsellable product which has to be scrapped. (i.e. these are discovered/detected in-house.)

Next higher level are items usually only discovered in audit (such as current work instructions and plans/specs NOT available at work station) which "could" result in loss, but haven't.

My thinking really only addresses the "urgency" of curing the nonconformance, to prevent escalation of the situation.

I hasten to add that nothing changes in the methodology of investigating and curing root cause, only more folks involved in the "active" distribution list rather than the end of month or end of quarter omnibus Quality "incident" report.

If this gets you off the hook with the bosses - a case of Fosters would be sufficient, PLUS your picture to post on my deck to offer toasts to as I drink the brew.

Wes, as much as I'd like to shout you and Aussie beer or two I ma actually after something a little different. We want to set a standard to evaluate the risk both dollars and damage to the company for the involvement of Management from Supervisor level thru to General Manager i.e 1: a small change in specification findings, in process, may be a Nil dollar value - No loss sustained but huge potential loss - this may be addressed by the senior area supervisor (Investigated, action plan implemented and controlled or fixed) 2: A customer perceives that there is a size or colour variation in a product may be handled by the Production or marketing manager as there is no loss in dollars but huge potential to lose if the customer takes offence 3: Customer refuses product to be unloaded = Millions $$ - instant GM involvement.
All of our NCRs/CARs are acted upon instantly. A report must be raised and distributed to all concerned parties. An action team is established and investigation undertaken...we need to develop a risk matrix along with potential dollar value loss. Similar to a safety risk matrix. It may happen again and if it does it will be catastrophic or It will happen again but it will be minimal. We need to review the risk of all CARs instantly (I understand that post investigation we will have a better understanding of costs, severity and future potential but we need a better handle on it straight up). We are GOING to finally start placing a cost against NCs. Something I have been striving for over the years. We do it for safety but never for Quality. This possibly does not make much sense..Sorry