Differences between Manufacturing Process Audit & Layered Process Audit
- Thread starter kohhe
- Start date
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
If you mean Manufacturing process audit to meet requirements of IATF 16949. As per the standard 9.2.2.3 this needs to include
"The manufacturing process audit shall include an audit of the effective implementation of
the process risk analysis (such as PFMEA), control plan, and associated documents"
Typically LPAs do not include these.
The first edition of CQI 8 include the statement that LPAs could be regarded as Manufacturing process audit but this was removed and the standard updated.
There are also a large number of Manufacturing process audit which are CQIs such as CQI 23 Injection moulding
"The manufacturing process audit shall include an audit of the effective implementation of
the process risk analysis (such as PFMEA), control plan, and associated documents"
Typically LPAs do not include these.
The first edition of CQI 8 include the statement that LPAs could be regarded as Manufacturing process audit but this was removed and the standard updated.
There are also a large number of Manufacturing process audit which are CQIs such as CQI 23 Injection moulding
There are many different plans, both GM and FCA require LPAs but they have different, not necessarily conflicting requirements.
Research the subject for example
Search results for query: "Layered Process Audit"
and find what is best for you
Research the subject for example
Search results for query: "Layered Process Audit"
and find what is best for you
As I see it Layered Process Auditing forces all levels of management to participate in structured monitoring of their organization’s processes thereby demonstrating their commitment to requirements while seeing and learning what improvements are needed.
Both are expected to be competently completed but LPA is unlike internal auditing in many ways, which may include:
1. Auditors are independent enough to be impartial and objective;
2. Audit program is driven by top management objectives;
3. Auditor plans each audit to fulfill its objective;
4. Auditor samples interactions, inputs, controls and outputs sufficient to fulfill the audit objective;
5. Auditors engage employees in seeking evidence of conformity (including effectiveness);
6. Auditors seek evidence of conformity to a system standard;
7. Auditors record findings in terms of requirements, evidence and nature of excellence/nonconformity;
8. Auditors report the audit results supporting their conclusion which answers each audit’s objective;
9. Auditors report the results to top manager within scope of each audit; and
10. Auditors also examine evidence of the effective verification of corrective actions.
In short, it’s process monitoring versus process auditing (and system auditing).
Both are expected to be competently completed but LPA is unlike internal auditing in many ways, which may include:
1. Auditors are independent enough to be impartial and objective;
2. Audit program is driven by top management objectives;
3. Auditor plans each audit to fulfill its objective;
4. Auditor samples interactions, inputs, controls and outputs sufficient to fulfill the audit objective;
5. Auditors engage employees in seeking evidence of conformity (including effectiveness);
6. Auditors seek evidence of conformity to a system standard;
7. Auditors record findings in terms of requirements, evidence and nature of excellence/nonconformity;
8. Auditors report the audit results supporting their conclusion which answers each audit’s objective;
9. Auditors report the results to top manager within scope of each audit; and
10. Auditors also examine evidence of the effective verification of corrective actions.
In short, it’s process monitoring versus process auditing (and system auditing).
