Consolidating results of LPA (Layered Process Audit) for Management Review

V

vinny

#11
I would suggest reporting both number of non-conformances (audit findings) and well as repeat issues. Break it out by layer. It’s no good if the 1st layer group leader finds none, 2nd layer supervisor finds 10, and 3rd layer quality finds 50. Should be the other way around.

The core items should be the same all the time but you can get great benefits from having a dynamic one. Add and remove as needed. New check based on Customer return, failed calibration or higher scrap seen on a particular machine, checks specific to a particular process/line that is different than others, verification period for a new control or machine repair. As the verification period passes…the checks can drop off or go to reduced control.
I agree with JaxQC, your findings for Management review have to relate back to NCs identified. We break them down in pareto fashion by cause and then assign systemic CA as required. I like the addition of breaking down the NCs by layer found and think I'll revise our system to add that piece as well. Thanks JaxQC!
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
P

Path of Totality

#12
I am currently defining an LPA process for my site. I have overcome many of the challenges so far with the information and experiences shared in this forum, however the one topic I am still unsure about is the consolidation of results for management review.:confused:

CW
I'm getting ready to do the same and my plan is that instead of the operators / supervisors / Managers using check marks or words (i.e. pass, complient etc.) I will be using numerical "answers". If something is complete and being followed it will get a 1, if something is complete but not being followed 100% it might get a 2. Something totally broken would get a 3. A gage with no sticker or out of date automatically gets a 3. The numbers then would be tabulated into a pareto so it can be reviewed at upper level Management meetings or posted for the plant floor. I still have details to work out but this is my plan so far.
 

Stijloor

Staff member
Super Moderator
#13
I'm getting ready to do the same and my plan is that instead of the operators / supervisors / Managers using check marks or words (i.e. pass, complient etc.) I will be using numerical "answers". If something is complete and being followed it will get a 1, if something is complete but not being followed 100% it might get a 2. Something totally broken would get a 3. A gage with no sticker or out of date automatically gets a 3. The numbers then would be tabulated into a pareto so it can be reviewed at upper level Management meetings or posted for the plant floor. I still have details to work out but this is my plan so far.
Be careful that this approach does not deteriorate in an opinion poll. Any "grading" must be based on clear requirements and clear audit evidence. In addition, a missing calibration sticker would be a different "3", than a batch of unidentified material. A "3" ranking may not be indicative of the severity of the issue.

Stijloor.
 
P

Path of Totality

#14
Be careful that this approach does not deteriorate in an opinion poll. Any "grading" must be based on clear requirements and clear audit evidence. In addition, a missing calibration sticker would be a different "3", than a batch of unidentified material. A "3" ranking may not be indicative of the severity of the issue.

Stijloor.
Agree. I just need to make sure this is not so cumbersome that a) it won't get done properly and b) looses focus to the goal.

We run high dollar / low volume product (military and medical) so the operators already have a fare amount of paperwork and seeing as I am in the process of adding more........:notme:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Marc Consolidating Inter-Plant Documentation Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 0
lanley liao How to understand this words that the planning of internal audit shall take into consideration the results of previous audits? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 10
Nihls When the MSA results show no operator influence Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
Q IATF audit - Root Cause Analysis results IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
P Ppk results shown as asterisk after the transformation of Non-normal data Using Minitab Software 4
S Documenting Design Verification Test Results (ISO 9001) Design and Development of Products and Processes 1
A MSA results differences - Supplier results vs. My results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
J Audit Finding For Not Retaining Test Results ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
F ISO 17025:2017 Clause 7.7 Ensuring the validity of results - Threshold ISO 17025 related Discussions 9
P AS9102 Form 3 Dimension Results Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
H Graphical analysis of results - Confidence level bands nomenclature Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
G What information to put on measurement Dimensional Results APQP and PPAP 7
A Calibration Certificate Results General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 3
F Measurement Audit and ILC for ISO 17025 Clause 7.7.2 - Comparison with results of other laboratories ISO 17025 related Discussions 0
KCalaba21 ISO 9001:2015 6.2.2 E - "e) how the results will be evaluated." ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
S AS9100D PEAR - Examples for organization's method for determining process results? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
shimonv Referring to previously submitted biocompatibility results in a new 510(k) submission Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
J ISO 17025 - Please share a sample procedure for monitoring the validity of results ISO 17025 related Discussions 1
A Acceptance p-value for linearity and bias analysis in minitab results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 0
Marc European universities dismal at reporting results of clinical trials - 2019 Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
T Final process capability results - What I am supposed to present? Cp and CpK? APQP and PPAP 11
V Recording CMM dimensional results on CFG-1003 APQP and PPAP 3
Prashant G AS9100 Requirement - Verification of characteristics results with drawing requirements AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 13
A Supplier Audit Results - when do you prepare? General Auditing Discussions 10
U ISO 17025:2017 Clause 7.7 Ensuring the Validity of Calibration Results ISO 17025 related Discussions 6
M FDA News FDA Safety communication – Interim Results of Duodenoscope Reprocessing Studies Conducted in Real-World Settings Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
A Definition Intended Results - What does "Intended Results" mean? Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 4
G ANOVA GR&R: Minitab vs AIAG MSA results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 7
G ISO 9001:2015 - Management Review 9.3.2 c) 5) - Monitoring and Measurement Results ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
R Tensile Test Strain Rate - Impact on the Test Results Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
K Taguchi Experiments for Factorial Design Analysis - Reliability of Minitab Results Using Minitab Software 1
B How to interpret Grindometer Gage R&R Results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 1
J What results need to be defined in IATF 16949 Clause 8.3.4 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
C Leveraging previous results in IQOQs - Environmentally Controlled Room 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
W MR Inputs (9.3.2) - "Monitoring and Measurement Results" vs. "Process Performance" Management Review Meetings and related Processes 8
S Is it mandatory to provide the results of the validation report in handwriting? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
Ajit Basrur CDRH Customer Satisfaction Results at 87% US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
T Results from conducting a Capability Studies Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 4
V CMQ/OE exam results - March 7 2015 Professional Certifications and Degrees 10
W Results of the ASQ CSSBB Exam March 07 2015 Professional Certifications and Degrees 62
T OES Global Results Drift Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 1
Ron Rompen Quick question on results of Student-t test Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 7
G Interpreting Type 1 MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) Results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 4
L Release of Audit Results Report to 3rd Party ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
M ANOVA for S/N ratio gives different results Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 5
V Analysing Results after DOE Using Minitab Software 1
B Tolerance Calculator Based on R&R Results Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
C How to handle Action Results in a new FMEA Review once we have a new RPN? FMEA and Control Plans 1
V Analysis of DOE Results and Model Finalization Using Minitab Software 4
B MSA (Measurement System Analysis) - Results and Actions Taken Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 12

Similar threads

Top Bottom