Implementing Operator Product Self-Inspection

Dears,
we currently check the quality of our products by controls performed by Quality Inspectors (1st off-part and checks for every shift, as described in our Control Plans).
I have got now the goal from the Top Management to eliminate or reduce Quality Inspectors,moving the controls to operators (self-inspection).
Do you have:
- any exemples of similar solutions (how organized, roles, responsibilities)
- how to deal with SPC checks (I think operators are just able to perform attribute checks)
- how to manage 1st off-checks for productions started when the Quality Supervisors are absent (i.e. night shift)
- exemples of documentation used for operator self-inspection (for examples registration forms, visual aids, reaction plans, etc)
- procedures describing the self-inspection management
- presentations concerning the benefit of self-inspection instead of traditional quality control by quality department
-anything more that can support me on this issue.
My company is delivering components for the automotive industry, principally injection moulded and blow moulded plastic parts and small assemblies.

Thanks a lot in advance for any help.
Regards,
Domenico

Hello to All!!!
I am facing the same situation as Domenico. What I am doing is studying the costs involved, because my intention is to show that the earlier a non conformity is found, cheaper it is to solve it.
But, I am only studying and I see that there is also a cultural and change to be made, otherwise production people won´t feel responsable for evaluating what they have produced.

Regards!!!

Not exactly what you are looking for, but, in Aerospace, a Recommended Practice document, ARP9162, has been issued. Check here.

ARP9162 - Aerospace Operator Self-Verification Programs - SAE Standard

A quick summary:

An SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) Standard
Document Number: ARP9162
Date Published: May 2005

Title: Aerospace Operator Self-Verification Programs

Issuing Committee: G-14 Americas Aerospace Quality Group (AAQG)

Scope: The focus of Operator Self-Verification is on traditional manufacturing operations, and applications can be made wherever traditional inspection is employed. The practices recommended in this document are intended to identify the basic elements and provide a guideline for structuring Operator Self-Verification programs within the aerospace industry; applicable to producers of commercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines and composite components. Operator Self-Verification programs are applied to improve the overall efficiency and product quality of processes considered mature, as judged by the implementing organization. Operator Self-Verification programs are not stand-alone processes, but augment existing quality management systems. The identified program elements are for voluntary implementation by the organization, and are not intended for contractual flow-down unless otherwise stipulated through contractual agreement.

alekra said:

Hello to All!!!
I am facing the same situation as Domenico. What I am doing is studying the costs involved, because my intention is to show that the earlier a non conformity is found, cheaper it is to solve it.
But, I am only studying and I see that there is also a cultural and change to be made, otherwise production people won´t feel responsable for evaluating what they have produced.

Regards!!!

Click to expand...

I total agree....quality is produced not checked.

This is where the role of quality assurance comes in and as such the quality department becomes a service provider overseeing the Quality Management System.
All quality control functions have to be delegated to the production units. Therefore a training programme has to be made and the necessary training given by competent personnel to ensure that quality control of the process and product are able to be performed by the production units.
A simple structure is as follows.
The production supervisor is responsible for the process's first and last off samples and any non conformities have to be corrected before production release.
After production release ( in process) it is the operators responsibility to inspect to a product control plan/ work instructions the products produced. Records are kept of the measurements (variables and attributes) take every number of hours or units produced, on a works order form with all product parameters. Samples related to this effect are left for the production supervisor to quality control, thereby verification and validation of these samples is performed. Any non conformities have to be reported and segregated through out the whole process. Once the run is completed a last off sample is produced and compared to the first off sample any discrepancies shall be scrutinized and corrected as necessary and the tool/work process preserved for the next run.
Records are kept of,
First off....to include sample and any statements if necessary.
In process quality control results
Last off...to include sample and any statements if necessary

sal881vw said:

The production supervisor is responsible for the process's first and last off samples and any non conformities have to be corrected before production release.

Click to expand...

Interesting statement. Somewhat a conflict of interests in general terms....Please don't get me wrong, I guess I'm just old school.

Cordon said:

Interesting statement. Somewhat a conflict of interests in general terms....Please don't get me wrong, I guess I'm just old school.

Click to expand...

Think of it this way: Why is production the only department in most companies where it's considered necessary to have inspectors? Why do we assume that production people will try to hide their nonconforming work, but accounting clerks won't?

One word: fear. Inspectors are necessary because production people are afraid of being hit over the head for their mistakes, or for nonconforming output they have no control over (think about the Red Bead demonstration). You can't eliminate the need for inspectors until you eliminate fear.

Just look at Deming's 14 points, all of the answers are there, very self explainatory................I see no conflict of interest, after all quality is everybody's business. It is the life line to any business.
Fear can be overcome by empowerment through training and ownership.

Jim Wynne said:

Think of it this way: Why is production the only department in most companies where it's considered necessary to have inspectors? Why do we assume that production people will try to hide their nonconforming work, but accounting clerks won't?

One word: fear. Inspectors are necessary because production people are afraid of being hit over the head for their mistakes, or for nonconforming output they have no control over (think about the Red Bead demonstration). You can't eliminate the need for inspectors until you eliminate fear.

Click to expand...

I just meant that it seems weird that the production supervisor is checking first off parts and not a person from quality...unless the supervisor is wearing the hat of quality also. I love the accounting example by the way!

On a side note; who checks our work?

Jim Wynne said:

One word: fear. Inspectors are necessary because production people are afraid of being hit over the head for their mistakes, or for nonconforming output they have no control over (think about the Red Bead demonstration). You can't eliminate the need for inspectors until you eliminate fear.

Click to expand...

And how can you be certain that inspectors are not recording false results?:mg: