Interesting Discussion IATF 16949:2016 Clause 9.2.2.3 and Layered Process Audits

[Judegu]

This just in: The plant where LPAs were "launched" do that...

Maybe in most cases, how to motivate the lowest level employees(operators and inspectors) to do their jobs to 100% percent is what we need to do.

 

[AMIT BALLAL]

Maybe in most cases, how to motivate the lowest level employees(operators and inspectors) to do their jobs to 100% percent is what we need to do.

Not a good idea to tell operators to the LPA, why tell people to audit their own work? The main purpose of LPA is to make sure people are following what they are supposed to be Eg. Work Instructions, Control Plan (By involving multiple levels of management to escalate pending points, so that necessary actions can be taken).

If one layer of management is not doing audit, it will be visible during audit by next level of management and this will help to ensure LPAs are done.

 

[ElenR]

We do LPA because it is required by our automotive customer. 1st layer are our Front Line leaders, Technicians, 2nd layer are Supervisors, Engineers, Finance, HR, Planners, Purchasers and the 3rd layer are the Functional Managers. This is being done every day/shift for the 1st layer, 2nd layer are two processes per week and 3rd Layer one process per week.


For non-automotive products, we do the manufacturing process audit once a month per audit schedule but covers the whole assembly process.

 

[Marc]

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.

I assume this is audited by a review of the Process FMEA, the Control Plan and the Process Flow Diagram. Correct? What is the criteria to determine affectiveness? What questions might an auditor ask to determine "efffectiveness"? What measureables, if any, are expected?

 

[Judegu]

Not a good idea to tell operators to the LPA, why tell people to audit their own work? The main purpose of LPA is to make sure people are following what they are supposed to be Eg. Work Instructions, Control Plan (By involving multiple levels of management to escalate pending points, so that necessary actions can be taken).

If one layer of management is not doing audit, it will be visible during audit by next level of management and this will help to ensure LPAs are done.

Yes, it is a totally bad idea to do so. However I found a old version of CQI-8, it said that the first layer should be done by the operators themselves. That is when I became quite confused.
Plus the self audit in my company is kind of traditional I suppose. And the check sheet of this self audit serves as a reminder for the operator what needs to be done where we assumes that they are willing to do it and we trust they will do it.

 

[AMIT BALLAL]

Yes, it is a totally bad idea to do so. However I found a old version of CQI-8, it said that the first layer should be done by the operators themselves. That is when I became quite confused.

If you want to include operators, start with next levels first. Once a culture is established, you can include operators as well. But the inclusion of operators is a difficult thing to do and will take time.
Remember, it is just a guidance standard. Do what makes sense to your organization.

 

[Howard Atkins]

I assume this is audited by a review of the Process FMEA, the Control Plan and the Process Flow Diagram. Correct? What is the criteria to determine affectiveness? What questions might an auditor ask to determine "efffectiveness"? What measureables, if any, are expected?

Marc,

ISO 9000 defines effectiveness as
3.7.11
effectiveness
extent to which planned activities are realized and planned results are achieved.
So in this case if you are working as to the documents

 

[heiss]

Many thanks for your update on the new version of CQI-8. What about my second question? How do you gaurantee the effectiveness of Layer 1 audit where operators audits themself. How do you manage to make the result authentic? In my company, we also have similar self check process, sadly sometimes the operators just fill the check sheets without actually checking the items.

One way of checking LPA effectiveness is to track who is finding the non-conformances. If most of your nonconformances are found by Tier 2 (Management) or at Tier 3 (Executive) auditors. Then your Tier 1 audits are not effective.

 

[ElenR]

Many thanks for your update on the new version of CQI-8. What about my second question? How do you gaurantee the effectiveness of Layer 1 audit where operators audits themself. How do you manage to make the result authentic? In my company, we also have similar self check process, sadly sometimes the operators just fill the check sheets without actually checking the items.

In our organization, we do not allow the operator do the LPA on their own process, we design our 1st Layer to be done by our Group Leaders that is not handling the product assembly being audited. The objective of LPA is to correct or address immediately any nonconformity seen on the spot. We also presented the result of LPA to top management during Management Review.