Operational planning and product and service provision when things happen so fast

#1
The company I work for, my self included, has recently moved it's ISO 9001:2015 certified (dry friction manufacturing) portion of the business into the same building as it's (laser/press brake) non-certified metal fab business. The expectation is to include the non-certified metal fab portion of the business into the scope and get it certified as well.

One of the reasons I/we were able to get the dry friction portion of the business certified at the previous location is because our customers (John Deere, Honda, Husqavarna, etc) required detailed and collective operational planning of their products from beginning to end. Product and service provision was an absolutely breeze to apply as well. Prototypes, testing, measurement data and approvals were required prior to mass production.

Where I've moved, things happen awfully fast with new parts and customers do not even supply drawings, PPAP or test requirements, etc. In some cases, new parts are processed, and then are shipped out the door before the end of the day without any verification/inspection.

The metal fab process starts with a customer sending an email saying "we need this cut", and will have a DXF attached to the email. At that point a quote is completed and the part is made almost immediately even though we have lead time requirements. There is a review of the part and at that point someone determines it can be made. The problem here is that things happen so fast that there is no evidence showing the product was made correctly.

Due to things happening so fast, how do we address with an auditor the issue of not having evidence of conformity with the majority of the metal fab products?
Previously we could do this since customers required collective operational planning and also product and service provisions.

Kind regards

Brandon
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator
#2
Brandon,

Nothing in ISO 9001 slows product realization. By investing in prevention a factory may not need so much product verification.

Sounds like your metal fab business is much more of a “job shop” than the mass production dry friction business. Both sets of customers have different sets of requirements.

Two different systems, each with their own purpose, but both may conform to the requirements of ISO 9001.

So, study the new (host) system to understand how it works instead of assuming that it does not conform to the standard. It will have a different culture (especially with respect to its thinking about risk) and may need a few new processes or controls but do not be too quick to judge against what you are used to. Listen, observe and learn.

You do not mention top management’s reason for having the two different businesses share the workspace. Are they expecting one to learn from the other? Are they planning to merge/share managers, operators, equipment, processes? You need to spend some time with top management to really understand their reasoning.

Even though they may not share their production processes they may share the processes that support production such as recruiting, training, purchasing, investing in improvement and auditing. So, be careful not to foist the support processes on the job shop without learning its requirements.

Your job is about to become a lot more interesting.

Listen well and your advice on any necessary changes stand a much better chance of being welcomed.

John
 
#3
John, thanks for your reply, the metal fab is definitely "job shop". The reason for having the two different businesses share the workspace is to have all portions of the business certified, and also have quality and production support resources available to help with this task since they previously did not have the resources.
 
#5
In all honesty, the business move reason was very low key. We were told the move was gonna happen, and it happened. In the process I was told to get the metal fab side included in the certification and that's it. My thought on a reason for the move is an absolute assumption, and that assumption is that the metal fab portion lacks resources to aid in continuous improvement that can help grow the business.
If the question of "why the move" comes up during an audit, the owner should address that with the auditor.
It's unfortunate that non-of the metal fab customers require specific planning for their products. Since I've been here, we have had new products where I was sure I'd get part submission warrants indicating what would need to be done to get customer approval. I have never received this type of information from metal fab customers.
 

Tagin

Trusted Information Resource
#6
The problem here is that things happen so fast that there is no evidence showing the product was made correctly.

Due to things happening so fast, how do we address with an auditor the issue of not having evidence of conformity with the majority of the metal fab products?
But how often are customers complaining or returning metal fab product for being nonconforming? I'm assuming its low. Are the folks doing the fab verifying with gauges against some drawing or spec? Or is their machine preprogrammed by someone else to assure the product conforms? I'm thinking that something very "inline" must be going on in the process to verify the product before it goes out the door, or there is a high certitude based on some other factors in the process.
 

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator
#7
Better to stop thinking about passing an audit.

But you’ll probably find that being driven by your internal requirements is just as good, if not better, than being driven by customer submittals.

I have no doubt you’ll see there is more than one way to deliver quality services and products.
 
#8
But how often are customers complaining or returning metal fab product for being nonconforming? I'm assuming its low. Are the folks doing the fab verifying with gauges against some drawing or spec? Or is their machine preprogrammed by someone else to assure the product conforms? I'm thinking that something very "inline" must be going on in the process to verify the product before it goes out the door, or there is a high certitude based on some other factors in the process.
I am aware of a few customer complaints but not many. The complaints I've been made aware of were ones not made to print. This has actually caused loss of business.
Folks doing fab are able to verify products 45% of the time with gages against a drawing 45% of the time currently. The case currently is that at the new location, product will be ordered and is then made without documented inspection/evidence showing that parts were made correctly. I'm just not used to things happening so fast. I'm wondering what the auditor would say if products are made without verifying if they are good or not. My belief is that this method posses a huge risk.
 

Tagin

Trusted Information Resource
#9
I am aware of a few customer complaints but not many. The complaints I've been made aware of were ones not made to print. This has actually caused loss of business.
Folks doing fab are able to verify products 45% of the time with gages against a drawing 45% of the time currently. The case currently is that at the new location, product will be ordered and is then made without documented inspection/evidence showing that parts were made correctly. I'm just not used to things happening so fast. I'm wondering what the auditor would say if products are made without verifying if they are good or not. My belief is that this method posses a huge risk.
Why are they unable to verify the other 55% of produced product?

I suppose you might be able to argue that you have a "45% sampling rate". After all, it's not uncommon to only verify some percentage of samples of a produced lot and base actions on the sample results (as long as that 45% are reasonably representative of the breadth of product and processes involved).

Another factor is competence (8.5.1e): are the workers doing the fab well-trained and experienced long-time employees, or are these high-turnover positions? A high degree of competence reduces risk and so reduces the reliance on verification. But if it is high-turnover and new applicants are not required to have extensive prior experience, then it seems you must rely on verification.
 

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator
#10
"Cease reliance on mass inspection to achieve quality. Eliminate the need for inspection on a mass basis by building quality into the product in the first place."

- W. Edwards Deming
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Richard Regalado Top 10 operational risks of 2019 for business continuity planning Business Continuity & Resiliency Planning (BCRP) 6
C AS9100D, Clause 8.1 - Operational Planning and Control AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 12
M Integrated Phased Processes - AS9100D cl. 8.1 Operational Planning - Clarification AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 8
M Key characteristics in the Quality Planning Operational Procedure Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3
M Operational (free) simulation games for manufacturing and quality Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 5
I ISO 22000:2018 - Operational Prerequisite Program Examples Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 2
D Determining of sample size for 'Operational Qualification' AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 3
C AS9100 Rev D 8.1.1 & APQP - Operational risk management process AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 0
Z Operational Qualification for Injection Molding Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 6
L OpEx (Operational Excellence) Documents in QMS? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 0
O Air Flow - Which is the operational difference between LAF (vertical and horizontal) and RLAF? Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
M Informational UK – Brexit operational readiness guidance for the health and care system in England Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 3
T Operational setup of how FIFO / Process Map on Lithium Batteries is done Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
J Installation Qualification (IQ) and Operational Qualification (OQ) for Laser Marking 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
Q Management control Procedures & Operational Control Procedures ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 1
R AS9100D Cl. 8.4.2 - Identify Raw Material as a Significant Operational Risk AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
L Heated Sealed Packages - Sample Size for OQ (Operational Qualification) and PQ Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 11
A Quality Department - Operational Framework Service Industry Specific Topics 2
A Operational Procedure for an IT Service Industry Quality Department Service Industry Specific Topics 1
A IT Managed Services Company Quality Department - Operational Document ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
G How have you addressed Cl 4.4.6 Operational Control ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 4
E Operational Qualification of a Drug Box Coding Device in Production Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 1
J OQ (Operational Qualification) for Liquid-Water Isotope Analyser Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 2
B Usage of Parts from OQ (Operational Qualification) Mold Validation ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
B OQ (Operational Qualification) of a Freeze Dryer Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 2
I Quality and Operational Excellence Training Institutes in Europe Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 1
W ISO 14644 Cleanroom Validation - "Operational" Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
M Quality Manual - ISO 17025 required Mandatory and Operational Procedures ISO 17025 related Discussions 7
S Barcode Scanner IOPQ (Installation/Operational/Performance Qualification) Requirement Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 9
J OHSAS 18001 Clause 4.4.6 Operational Control Example Procedure Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 9
M Determining Sample Size needed for Operational Qualification (OQ) Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 24
G Evaluation of Training for Operational Staff Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 8
K Operational Prerequisite Programmes (oPRP) Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 2
S What does "Operational Review" mean as tool - Effectiveness of Internal Control Risk Management Review Meetings and related Processes 3
L OQ (Operational Qualification) for Electropolish - Orthopedic Cutting Tools Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
W Packaging / Heat Sealer Validation - IOQ (Installation/Operational Qualification) Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 13
A ISO 14001:2004 Clause 4.4.6 - Operational control (in English) ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 2
D Good operational definition for Schedule Variance Software Quality Assurance 2
A Sample Documented Procedures that satisfy 4.4.6 Operational Control wanted ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 2
Q Operational Qualification of a CNC machine ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
D Laser Weld Operational Qualification ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
S Operational Qualification for injection molding process Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 2
D Procedures in Communication, Operational Control, etc. - ISO 14001 Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 12
C CNC Machine Operational Qualification Recoverability Testing Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 1
V Identification of Operational Prerequisite Programs (oPRP) for ready to eat products Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 4
P Operational QMS (Dubai) vs. compliant QMS (UK) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
W IQ, OQ, PQ (installation, operational & performance qualification) compared to PPAP ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
H Basic questions about Installation, Operational & Performance Qualification - PCBA Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 11
S Operational Excellence Assessment of multiple sites - Seeking examples Excel .xls Spreadsheet Templates and Tools 6
T DFT - Demand Flow Technology - Operational Sheets (WI) Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4

Similar threads

Top Bottom