LPA's (Layered Process Audits) - Evaluation of Effectiveness

[HIDBIGO]

In all the presentations for LPA checklists and in reviewing completed/implemented checklists I have found no information/evidence regarding evaluation for "effectiveness". If an LPA is intended to fulfil the TS requirements for a "Manufacturing Process Audit", (clause 8.2.2.2) which TS requires "to determine its effectiveness", and if effectiveness is defined roughly as performance to objectives (process measures), then there appears to be a gap to requirements. Or am I missing something?

[AndyN]

Bingo! and welcome to the Cove!

I'm not sure if you've had a chance to perform a search on the topic here, but you might well find similar discussions. I, for one, have questioned the validity of the LPA approach as a substitute for any kind of regular quality audit, but since it's flavor of the month (and, I suspect they're done better than some internal audits) they get a lot of support. The LPA's don't actually look at the effectiveness, as you say, but (strangely) they are attributed with causing vast improvements in FPY.

Let's see if others give you their perspective........

[Kales Veggie]

I am a big fan and proponent of LPA and have observed companies improve their overall performance (customer satisfaction, scrap level, etc).

Currently I am assisting of one of clients implementing an LPA system in our of their plants. They have struggled for years with standard process/control plan audits.

On effectiveness: LPAs results must be rolled up (weekly, monthly) and reported to all parties involved. Action plans must be developed to reduce non-conformances found. The goal is to drive down N/Cs. I think if you know how to measure effectiveness of control plan audits, you know how to measure effectiveness of LPAs.

LPAs are short (max. 30 minutes, max. 10 questions or so), frequently executed by multiple levels of management, corrective actions are taken immediately when N/C are found. The goal is to reduce risk to your company. Risks include customer dissatisfaction, high scrap, high rework and so on.

[Helmut Jilling]

Originally Posted by HIDBIGO

In all the presentations for LPA checklists and in reviewing completed/implemented checklists I have found no information/evidence regarding evaluation for "effectiveness". If an LPA is intended to fulfil the TS requirements for a "Manufacturing Process Audit", (clause 8.2.2.2) which TS requires "to determine its effectiveness", and if effectiveness is defined roughly as performance to objectives (process measures), then there appears to be a gap to requirements. Or am I missing something?

I would not recommend that your LPA should take the place of Mfg. Process Audits. The LPA's are fairly brief, and performed by personnel who often are not trained as auditors. They are intended as an overview.

Mfg. Process Audits give you the opportunity to do an indepth control plan audit, if you wish, which would provide a much better review. LPA's are good for catching low-hanging fruit, which is why the OEMs like them so much.

[Kales Veggie]

Good point.

If the OEMs like LPA very much and LPA catch low hanging fruit, suppliers should like LPAs as well.

Finding defects/problems before the OEMs do is what we all want. Think about all the resources (expedites, customer dissatisfaction, sorting cost, corrective action cost, travel cost, SQE/STA visits to your facility, etc) to could go wasted.

[Helmut Jilling]

Originally Posted by Kales Veggie

Good point.

If the OEMs like LPA very much and LPA catch low hanging fruit, suppliers should like LPAs as well.

Finding defects/problems before the OEMs do is what we all want. Think about all the resources (expedites, customer dissatisfaction, sorting cost, corrective action cost, travel cost, SQE/STA visits to your facility, etc) to could go wasted.

Yes, it is useful for any organization with low hanging fruit. It is similar to the concept of "Management by Walking Around" made popular a few years back.

But many of my clients are at < 5 ppm and 100% delivery. Unfortunately, they have virtually no low hanging fruit anymore. For them, this becomes a limited-value exercise.

[AndyN]

After the intial rounds of LPA, I've had feedback that the returns diminish pretty rapidly. The comment made to me was that "it's tough going and asking the same questions of the same people when you know how they're going to react and you know you're not going to find anything".

[HIDBIGO]

Originally Posted by AndyN

Bingo! and welcome to the Cove!

I'm not sure if you've had a chance to perform a search on the topic here, but you might well find similar discussions. I, for one, have questioned the validity of the LPA approach as a substitute for any kind of regular quality audit, but since it's flavor of the month (and, I suspect they're done better than some internal audits) they get a lot of support. The LPA's don't actually look at the effectiveness, as you say, but (strangely) they are attributed with causing vast improvements in FPY.

Let's see if others give you their perspective........

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the feedback. However, it still doesn't answer the effectiveness part as required by ISO/TS. So, is this a situation where the organization must a.) do a better job of check list creation and b.) do a better job of record keeping, which clearly demonstrates that manufacturing process objectives are part of the LPA?