KPIs: Two for every core process?

[schaeen]

Our CB said that they are required, therefore we are required, to report a time-based and a quality-based KPI for each core process. I assumed she was referring to some IAQG standard for CB audits that I don't have access to; but my AI assistant, who knows all the standards, says no such requirement exists. She did not write an NCR but she wouldn't end the audit until we had invented two such KPIs per process. She said the requirement started sometime our 2024 audit (and should have already been in place for 2025).

Assuming she knows what she's talking about (and for the sake of argument, Randy, let's actually assume she does), what specifically was she referring to? The AI speculated that she was referring to internal CB auditor guidance materials. If that is the case, do we really need to comply?

(We think this requirement is bull***t because our carefully crafted manufacturing KPI is a complex formula that combines time and quality measures. She actually said we must separate them - they cannot be combined. To satisfy her, we invented a time-based statistic that management finds meaningless and pretend that the complex formula only measures quality.)

 

[Bev D]

While we wait for our audit experts to chime in, this smells like to me. Did your auditor cite ‘chapter and verse’ of the standard where this alleged requirement exists? If they did, what does it say?

Auditors cannot simply make up requirements unless they are your Customer and there is a foundation in the CSRs…

 

[Tidge]

I asked an AI to generate a response and it just said "Wait for @Randy " and it showed me a bunch of helicopter photos.

 

[Bev D]

OK best funny this week!

 

[Randy]

"Wait for @Randy " and it showed me a bunch of helicopter photos.

One of my favorite, I hope it was included.

OTD being a mandated one by the AS9101 document.

Demonstrating the unreality of that specific "Shall" and lack of an oxygen breathing entity creating it.... OTD is a 100% pipedream that can be destroyed in literally milliseconds. OTS? Yep better chance of success....OTD? The Sun will rise in the West easier.

 

[ChrisM]

The aerospace standards have this weird "PEAR" requirement - Process Effectiveness Assessment Report - that the auditor/assessor has to calculate at every audit that they conduct. I'd never come across anything like this in over 40 years in "quality" before I started working in aerospace. What the letters stand for is also open top debate - the words I used above are what our "Body" uses but I have seen other interpretations.
PEAR is not mentioned in the aerospace QMS/BMS Standards (e.g. AS9100); the auditors are supposed to calculate it as part of the audit.
There is a requirement to continually improve the QMS - read section 4.4 of the Standard where it mentions performance indicators for processes, usually interpreted as KPIs. One KPI per process is sufficient, not two. As an example, if you have a process for generating quotations in response to enquiries, the time taken to respond to each enquiry could be a KPI. Don't over-think it though, a response may be "we need more information in order to give you a price", not the number of days that it takes to to come up with a price in response to an enquiry. Where I currently work, our target for this is 17 working hours and many customers indicate that this is too long, so we are looking at reducing it.

 

[qualitytoad]

We recently underwent our AS9100 audit and had to deal with this PEAR requirement. The auditor showed me the CBs audit form which had mandatory fields which requested twelve months of data per KPI. They told me that the PEARs and documenting the KPI data was a requirement from OASIS, which I didn't fully believe. This is because I sat through two years of AS9100 audits at a previous company and PEARs were not discussed at all. It seems to be dependant upon the certification body. We were told to aim for at 2 KPIs per process but I got the impression this was more of a safety net just in case the technical reviewers reject the PEAR you have chosen or highlighted that there's a non-conformance within the data/corresponding actions.

I had the impression from the auditor that they thought the PEAR KPI requirement was rigid and unnecessary. It became more of a tick box exercise and the KPIs we selected for some processes felt completely redundant. We just did it to appease the auditor and pass the audit. There's some obvious ones for processes such as Purchasing, Production, etc but Design KPIs specifically didn't feel worthwhile.

The key thing for the auditors (from what I've seen) is that if at any point you do not meet your target in the past twelve months, you need to prove corresponding actions were carried out.

Also you can adjust the target to whatever you like. Global KPIs (unrealistically high OTD, lots of revenue) do not need to be your internal site KPIs for the audit.

 

[Miner]

Apparently your previous organization has been taken for a ride.

 

[Bev D]

The IAQG recognized conformity assessment bodies such as AB’s and CB’s have to conform the certification process to a plethora of standards, including the triad of AS9104-1/2/3.

And this means?

 

[Randy]

Kinda curious, how did PEAR's contribute to the success of the 787-MAX?