Definition Process Performance interpretation - Management Review Input 5.6.2 (c)

R

rickmcq

5.6.2 (c) says "process performance and product conformity". Would somebody give me their interpretation of "process performance"?

Thanks
Rick
 

AndyN

Moved On
Hi Rick:

As you may know, in automotive-land "first time through" or FTT, aka first pass yield or FPY is a commonly used term. So you can use a similar performance metric on your core manufacturing process(es), for example. It's a measure of the ability of the product to pass QC etc first time, without reject (even if subsequently used)
 

insect warfare

QA=Question Authority
Trusted Information Resource
Another useful metric to track process performance is "rolled throughput yield" or RTY. It goes beyond "first pass yield" or FPY. Attached is a short presentation that I put together a while back from my research on the subject (the file is 2007 version - our company's proxy is prohibiting me from uploading a PDF or earlier version from my current location).

Maybe someone here can convert and post it in PDF.

:2cents:

Brian :rolleyes:
 

Attachments

  • Rolled Throughput Yield (training).pptx
    86.1 KB · Views: 334
R

rickmcq

Hi Rick:

As you may know, in automotive-land "first time through" or FTT, aka first pass yield or FPY is a commonly used term. So you can use a similar performance metric on your core manufacturing process(es), for example. It's a measure of the ability of the product to pass QC etc first time, without reject (even if subsequently used)

Ok, so it's another one of those "unless you've been doing this for at least 15 years, you wouldn't know what they were talking about by reading it" things. :)

That's something we already do. We were recently burned on missing a couple of review inputs on our 14001 side. They wanted to make sure they were covered on TS.

Thanks
Rick
 

somashekar

Leader
Admin
5.6.2 (c) says "process performance and product conformity". Would somebody give me their interpretation of "process performance"?

Thanks
Rick
An internal audit outcome is measure of process performance. Meeting quality objectives is a measure of process performance. Effectiveness of CAPA process is a measure of process performance ...
In fact, all the review inputs in your management review that are not product performance are process performance.
 

AndyN

Moved On
An internal audit outcome is measure of process performance. Meeting quality objectives is a measure of process performance. Effectiveness of CAPA process is a measure of process performance ...
In fact, all the review inputs in your management review that are not product performance are process performance.

Somashekar - I'm not sure I can agree with you on this one. My understanding is not that IA is a measurement, but an independent verification that the process performance was attained by following the process and its controls. The organization may be getting good performance from its processes - indicated by FTT - but it takes the IA to confirm that the process and its controls were being followed.
 

somashekar

Leader
Admin
Somashekar - I'm not sure I can agree with you on this one. My understanding is not that IA is a measurement, but an independent verification that the process performance was attained by following the process and its controls. The organization may be getting good performance from its processes - indicated by FTT - but it takes the IA to confirm that the process and its controls were being followed.
The suitable methods for monitoring and, where applicable, measurement of the quality management system processes must help to demonstrate the ability of the processes to achieve planned results.
The purpose of internal audits at planned intervals is to determine whether the quality management system conforms to such planned arrangements to the requirements of the International Standard and to the quality management system requirements established by the organization.
So it can be deduced that internal audits are a suitable method for monitoring QMS processes in its ability to achieve planned results.
Planned arrangements must be giving planned results. Internal audits can show the extent (how much) they are giving such results and in the process pick areas that needs an action to correct arrangements.
(The results of audits though are said in the 5.6.2 a))
 
Last edited:

AndyN

Moved On
Monitoring, I can agree, but not "measurement", which was the premise of your comment earlier. People are often confused over monitoring vs measurement. We might measure the actual fuel in our car's tank, to give us an mpg/kpl figure, but we only monitor the gauge as we drive...
 

insect warfare

QA=Question Authority
Trusted Information Resource
Monitoring, I can agree, but not "measurement", which was the premise of your comment earlier. People are often confused over monitoring vs measurement. We might measure the actual fuel in our car's tank, to give us an mpg/kpl figure, but we only monitor the gauge as we drive...

Yes, I too have fallen into that trap before. We must be selective when we throw around words like "monitoring" and "measurement" to ensure they are interpreted in the correct context.

Brian :rolleyes:
 

somashekar

Leader
Admin
Yes, I too have fallen into that trap before. We must be selective when we throw around words like "monitoring" and "measurement" to ensure they are interpreted in the correct context.

Brian :rolleyes:
The periodic monitoring of a process gives the measure of that process performance. That is what exactly periodic internal audits outcome gives.
Measure also means appraise, assess, evaluate, valuate. By measure I am coming to this and not to a measurement that has an unit attached to it.
 
Top Bottom