Layered Audit - Some questions to the Practitioners

[Peters]

In your opinion...
1. (on 1st layer) What situation is better:
a) when supervisor is auditing his own process or
b) when supervisor is auditing other processes
2. (on 2nd layer) What situation is better:
a) when production managers and engineers are auditing production area or
b) when production managers, engineers, buyers, purchasing managers, sales managers, service managers are auditing production area
3. What should be the effect of LPA –
a) only temporary, containment actions (to correct nonconformity)
b) always corrective actions (focused on root cause)
c) always both
On every layer the same approach?
3. (on 1st layer) Who implement corrective actions in situation: supervisor found nonconformity in his own process? Supervisor found NC and the same supervisor implement CA?
4. Who and when review his corrective actions?
5. Who collects LPA reports from 1st layer? Only supervisors? Do they should prepare summary reports from their audits? For whom? In what form?

[AndyN]

Originally Posted by Peters

In your opinion...
1. (on 1st layer) What situation is better:
a) when supervisor is auditing his own process or
b) when supervisor is auditing other processes
2. (on 2nd layer) What situation is better:
a) when production managers and engineers are auditing production area or
b) when production managers, engineers, buyers, purchasing managers, sales managers, service managers are auditing production area
3. What should be the effect of LPA –
a) only temporary, containment actions (to correct nonconformity)
b) always corrective actions (focused on root cause)
c) always both
On every layer the same approach?
3. (on 1st layer) Who implement corrective actions in situation: supervisor found nonconformity in his own process? Supervisor found NC and the same supervisor implement CA?
4. Who and when review his corrective actions?
5. Who collects LPA reports from 1st layer? Only supervisors? Do they should prepare summary reports from their audits? For whom? In what form?

Answers: 1-a, 2-a, 3-a-every layer, 3 (first layer) - supervisor on own process, 4 -next layer, next LPA, 5-someone designated in production should coolect all sheets, analyse and report, for Production management.

The LPA report format has been posted here as a sample in an LPA thread, just do a search and you'll find it.

[Peters]

I have a problem - how to organize LPA corrective actions (on 1st layer).
For example... Team leader conducted LPA on his own line (1st layer LPA). He found 3 NC. He reported NC. Who should implement corrective actions? The same team leader? Who should verify corrective actions effectiveness? The same team leader?

[Kales Veggie]

Peters, I agree with AndyN answers.

1-a
2-b (involve all staff members in the LPA).
3-a (institute 8D process when necessary, e.g. repeat N/C)
4- next layer or designated person (for example Quality Manager, someone that understands corrective action process) when corrective action is complete. Verify also at next audit.
5- designated LPA person

The person that finds non conformity must address containment.

It is critical that the LPA process is championed by top management of the plant (plant manager and staff). Production has to be the leading the LPA process.

Keep the time to do an LPA down to 15-20 min. Limit the number of questions. Ask questions that can be answered with Yes or No. Questions should should include also why the question is on the LPA sheet.

Administration (reporting, audit scheduling, maintaining the sheets) can take a lot of time. There is software you can purchase that will reduce the administrative overhead of the LPA process. Check out http://www.lpadmin.com

Reports should be accessible to many people in your plant.

2nd question:
The corrective action should be verified by an 3rd person (not the teamleader).

[bgwiehle]

Originally Posted by Peters

In your opinion...
1. (on 1st layer) What situation is better:
a) when supervisor is auditing his own process or
b) when supervisor is auditing other processes

Unlike the other responders: do both. Once our supervisors got comfortable with LPAs, we started occasionally assigning an LPA outside their area in order to get the fresh set of eyes and independence from responsibility for the particular employee running the process.

Originally Posted by Peters

3. What should be the effect of LPA –
a) only temporary, containment actions (to correct nonconformity)
b) always corrective actions (focused on root cause)
c) always both

Our approach is "both". Of course both options may not always apply. In addition, we find LPAs have a role in increasing awareness of the requirements for the process, whether it's inspection frequencies or required data on the paperwork, etc., for supervisor, employees and management.

Originally Posted by Peters

3. (on 1st layer) Who implement corrective actions in situation: supervisor found nonconformity in his own process? Supervisor found NC and the same supervisor implement CA?

In our system, the auditor (regardless of layer), can assign corrective action to an individual; that individual is chosen based on the non-confomance found and which function is most likely to address the apparent root cause. Sometimes that's the production supervisor, sometimes it's Engineering, etc. Non-conforming reports are reviewed by the LPA administrator and corrective actions followed up. Summary reports are prepared for management.

As for the other questions: its better to involve as many functions in LPAs as possible. In some cases, your customer's requirements may specify participants and frequencies for doing and reporting audits.

B.G. Wiehle

[Peters]

Another question:
Which situation is better in LPA - when audit time is known for the audited person or not? (on 1st, 2nd and 3rd layer)
I'll be thankful for the answer...

[grismosw7]

Originally Posted by Kales Veggie

Administration (reporting, audit scheduling, maintaining the sheets) can take a lot of time. There is software you can purchase that will reduce the administrative overhead of the LPA process.

I clicked the link, and it is taking me to a financial investing website. I'm very interested in this software, do you have another link?

[bgwiehle]

Originally Posted by Peters

Which situation is better in LPA - when audit time is known for the audited person or not? (on 1st, 2nd and 3rd layer)...

Which do you mean? time (date & shift) of audit or how long the audit takes?

The date of the audit should be recorded, because the audit is a snapshot in time (what was found at that moment). Depending on the circumstances and customer, you might want more precision (shift, time). We record scheduled date & shift and the date and shift the audit actually took place. The process is identified in the schedule.

How long the audit takes will be a function of the number and scope of questions, auditor experience, etc. We have designed our checklists so that audits take about 15 min, but that's an average. We don't track actual time taken.

B.G. Wiehle