Starting a Corrective Action Board (MRB - Material Review Board)?

[Brian Myers]

All,

I have been handed a most ticklish challenge.

As background, I am a Mechanical Engineer with experience as an Automotive Quality Engineer and Production/Manufacturing Engineer and most recently as a Program Manager for Audio Equipment. I have been through 3 ISO/QS Initial Audits and worked for companies on both sides of the certification fence (currently the company I work for is not - and probably never will be ). I am also just 15 days away from sitting for my CQE!!

Anyway, until two days ago I was a Supplier Quality Analyst for this company (long story, involves a "dog house" and some bad blood between myself and the COO ) I have finally been "promoted" to Engineering status again and have been asked to help set my own "long term" goals (since only 2 other people in this entire organization actually understand what I do ! )

As part of these goals I have been asked to consider starting what they called a "Corrective Action Board". Has anyone heard this term? I am familiar with Material Review Boards (MRB), but we really aren't organized or operate in a way that would need an MRB. The Corrective Action Board seems like the right idea in principle, but i just can't put my head around the actual logistics of such a group.

What would be a reasonable charter?
What sort of people should sit on this board?
How do I get "traction" for action based on the MRB recommendations?

Any help would be much appreciated!


Brian Myers

 

[M Caruso]

At a company I once worked for, we had a Corrective Action Board in respect to one specific manufacturing line. Representatives from each department (Engineering, Quality and Manufacturing) that worked with that line, were appointed to the board. Each meeting we reviewed the internal yields , process issues and any customer issues of the line and brainstormed ways to improve based on the current problems and past experience. Meeting minutes and action items were distributed to all members of the team as well as thier bosses and the powers that be who implemented the board. The board worked very well and our internal yields improved and customer satisfaction improved also. You could almost call the CAB a six sigma team.

 

[Brian Myers]

Thanks Caruso.

What you describe is exactly what I am used to, problem is I don't live/work in that world any more. I am a Corporate Quality Guy. I don't actually have direct access to the Manufacturing Floor or that sort of group in this position. I have done a few similar setups to what you describe - and they have always worked marvelously .

Now, how do I roll that idea up the Dung Pile and use the same premise to improve Design and Quality Assurance activities? I am , but nothing I am finding cross-references well to the "corporate" approach to life.

Brian

 

[M Caruso]

The questions I would have at this point:

1) What is in trouble that needs correction?
2) Where would you get data or information needed for the board?

It is easy enough for management to say "Do this.", but what exactly do they see that is the problem or problems needed to be fixed.

 

[Wes Bucey]

Thanks Caruso.

What you describe is exactly what I am used to, problem is I don't live/work in that world any more. I am a Corporate Quality Guy. I don't actually have direct access to the Manufacturing Floor or that sort of group in this position. I have done a few similar setups to what you describe - and they have always worked marvelously .

Now, how do I roll that idea up the Dung Pile and use the same premise to improve Design and Quality Assurance activities? I am , but nothing I am finding cross-references well to the "corporate" approach to life.

Brian

Regardless of whether you have direct access to the manufacturing floor, somebody has to be on site to do the root cause investigation that is at the heart of EVERY CA/PA initiative.

If you are isolated from the operation by physical or psychological distance, you still have to find a way to connect to the site where the activity you are attempting to correct takes place.

Consider this in the same manner as a customer trying to oversee a Corrective Action Request from a thousand miles away. You are simply the internal customer who is a "thousand miles" away from the scene.

I have an idea this clue alone may give you some ideas on how to make that connection. I'm sure many of our Covers can add to your list.

 

[Jim Howe]

corrective action boards

During the early 1980's I partcipated in the CAC (corrective action committees) which answered to the CAB (corrective action board) at Goodyear Aerospace.
The CAC's were program specific (Captor, MK-48, P-II, etc) these committees examine all non-conformances, warranty issues and customer complaints. We operated independently of the MRB (material review board). Our findings and actions were forwarded to the CAB (mostly executives) who diffused the information to the other CAC's under the assumption that a problem with one program may also be affecting another program wheather they knew it or not.
For example, I recall the P-II program discovering hydrogen embrittlement in their Cad plated 1/4-20 cap screws. These cap screws were used on several different programs and the corrective action for one also served the other.
I know it sounds confusing but, according to the CAB, it paid dividends.

 

[Brian Myers]

Thanks to all of you!

Here is the "rest of the story"...

I have direct links into each factory through thier QC/QA and Produciton Engineering Functions. I also have a roaming set of inspectors that conduct shipment audits. Based on the Shipment Audit results and Warranty Data, I initiate Corrective Action Requests at each facility as needed. To date this has been a "disconnected" activity as I am the only person in contact with most of these people and issues.

I think what my management wants is to institute a cross-functional group to review the CA and PA as well as look into design and product issues as they become highlighted by inspection, audit, and warranty. While in theory this makes great sense, I am struggling with how to organize and charter such a group, who would be most reasonable to "invite", and how to get the group heard when the time comes (bad news, when it is correct, often falls on deaf ears around here!).

I guess I am really looking for the best practice to organize a Design/Product Corrective Action Board. I like the Goodyear Aero example, but in my case there is no group higher and no real "copy list" defined at this point. I don't want to start a group that has no meaning, and activity that will get no results.

Thanks,
Brian

 

[Jim Howe]

corrective action board

Thanks to all of you!

Here is the "rest of the story"...

I have direct links into each factory through thier QC/QA and Produciton Engineering Functions. I also have a roaming set of inspectors that conduct shipment audits. Based on the Shipment Audit results and Warranty Data, I initiate Corrective Action Requests at each facility as needed. To date this has been a "disconnected" activity as I am the only person in contact with most of these people and issues.

I think what my management wants is to institute a cross-functional group to review the CA and PA as well as look into design and product issues as they become highlighted by inspection, audit, and warranty. While in theory this makes great sense, I am struggling with how to organize and charter such a group, who would be most reasonable to "invite", and how to get the group heard when the time comes (bad news, when it is correct, often falls on deaf ears around here!).

I guess I am really looking for the best practice to organize a Design/Product Corrective Action Board. I like the Goodyear Aero example, but in my case there is no group higher and no real "copy list" defined at this point. I don't want to start a group that has no meaning, and activity that will get no results.

Thanks,
Brian

Why not propose to mangament to implement the CAC's in each factory with them reporting back to a CAB of which you will chair and allow them to select a few executives to help you review and redistribute the info (cross functional of course). In my opinion if you sell the boss on it it will be an advantage to the company just like it was at Goodyear Aerospace.

 

[Brian Myers]

Seeking Corrective Action Board Charter (Rules of Engagement)

Ok, so now I have an idea of what I want/need to accomplish. Here are the basics..

1) The CAB is to be comprised of a Cross-Functional Team to include Engineering, QA (me - Chair), Purchasing, Supply Management, Logistics, Customer Service

2) Internal Focus - To improve internal (READ : Corporate) processes and to begin capturing and reporting on COPQ (I don't like the term COQ, makes execs look for ways to cut those vital Quality Costs).

3) External Focus - Supplier Corrective Action Review, MRB (of sorts), improve Supplier Relations and Supplier Control.

4) The Team Members will be responsible for taking the recommended actions of the CAB back to their respective departments for action and will be responsible to report back to the CAB on progress/obstacles.

Agenda is being left completely up to me to set and I get to select my "draftees".

I am now stumbling over writing a good, solid, logical, and practical CHARTER for the group.

I don't want to walk into this without a good plan, and without that plan written and approved by Senior Management. There will be some resistance from the draftees and a serious reluctance to "look inward" for corrective action. (That is just our Corporate Culture - I have run afoul of it before attempting to write standardized product launch procedures. )

Anyone got any ideas? Old CAB / MRB Charters or Rules of Engagement you are willing to share?

Thanks,
Brian

 

[Jim Wynne]

I am now stumbling over writing a good, solid, logical, and practical CHARTER for the group.

Thanks,
Brian

Put the team together and make your first order of business drafting a charter. You should have a framework ready at the outset, but if the group is involved in defining the function they'll be more likely to buy in.