Tactics to work with Design Engineering on CAR

P

ProblemChild

#1
I feel that the design engineering team often got offensive whenever a CAR was issued to them to correct a design-related problem as part of the 8D.

Do you agree that psychologically it will make the situation better if we just simply change the term from "CORRECTIVE" action to something like " improvement plan" or " Design enhancement" whenever we deal with our internal issue in an OEM environment?

Is it just me to feel that many technical professionals are very sensitive to the term " Corrective action"?
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

yodon

Staff member
Super Moderator
#2
Interesting question.

I've never worked with design folks who were offended when a change request was made to correct a design issue and you could point to the specifics of why the design failed to meet the requirements. Is it possible the management team is using CARs for punitive measures? If that's the case, you may well have deeper issues.

Are your design folks in on the review or are the CARs just being "thrown over the wall"? This may be another source of the ill feelings. If this is the case, you may be missing an opportunity to improve. What was the earliest in the process that the issue should have been caught? Why were the existing controls (e.g., reviews) not effective in catching the issue? Engaging with the design team on such questions may get better buy-in as well.

Changing the terminology of a correction (a nonconformity has been identified and needs to be corrected) to something else would not be advisable. You need clear delineation between true issues (nonconformities) and enhancements. Examining issues gives you opportunity to improve processes: where could the issue have been caught earlier and why didn't we catch it earlier? (Note: if you are having a lot of true "design enhancements" that may be another indicator that the very early-on processes such as user needs or usability aren't being properly addressed - so even "enhancements" can be a source for process improvement and you don't want this confused with nonconformities).

Interestingly (to me, at least), I read an article once that a manager went the other direction: instead of calling a software issue a "bug" he called is "spoilage." The intent was to get the mindset around providing the best product possible. I don't recall if it was effective but I thought it kind of resonated.
 

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator
#3
I feel that the design engineering team often got offensive whenever a CAR was issued to them to correct a design-related problem as part of the 8D.

Do you agree that psychologically it will make the situation better if we just simply change the term from "CORRECTIVE" action to something like " improvement plan" or " Design enhancement" whenever we deal with our internal issue in an OEM environment?

Is it just me to feel that many technical professionals are very sensitive to the term " Corrective action"?
rudolph,

This may be the first time they are being held to account for meeting the requirements.

No need to argue over terms or to battle with them.

Instead you need to listen to them earn their trust.

Just find out what they are trying to achieve and help them to see how the system (of which they are part) stops them from fulfilling their objectives.

Then you can empathise with them as you help them to identify and remove the impediments to meeting their objectives.

Sometimes the quality guy is seen as the problem but in reality you’re on the same side and they want their design output to meet requirements too.

This “tactic” as you put it has to come from your genuine concern for their success. I would drop the maliputive tactic mindset.

John
 

psp1234

Involved In Discussions
#4
John - you are spot on!
People will realize that this is the same reaction under a different name...
Best thing it to understand why design issues are not right in the first time and help design-eng resolve issues that hold them back (more/other training, more resources, better plan, better clarity of spec etc.)

sue
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
P Tactics to get cooperation from Contract Manufactuers Manufacturing and Related Processes 6
N Scouting Potential Suppliers - Strategy and Tactics Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 7
H Getting Things Started ? QM, Tactics, Strategy, Acceptance vs. Gridlock, Enthusiasm Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 3
ScottK Political Smear Tactics - how do they affect you? Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 4
C Stress / Challenge Conditions for Design Verification Testing to Reduce Sample Size 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 11
J Significant change related to design and intended use EU Medical Device Regulations 2
S Traceability of requirements to design and risk Design and Development of Products and Processes 3
U NOC - What is considered a "design change" EU Medical Device Regulations 5
Q PPT used as Design Review ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
D Design Verification Sample Size vs Repeats Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 9
A Design and development procedure for API Spec Q2 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 6
D Design controls - Inputs, outputs, V&V, DHF, DMR ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
LostLouie Manufacturer divorced from Design process, is he justified in design process deficiencies? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 9
R DFA & DFM - Examples for Design for assembly and design for manufacturability Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 2
D Using Laboratory Notebooks in R&D and Design and Development ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
D ISO 13485 - 7.3.6 Design and development verification - Do most folks create a separate SOP? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
K Joint approval between OEM and Manufacturer on Design Documents ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
M API 4F/7K/8C Design Package Validation Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
A Design History File - Not ready to share the design drawings or Bill of Material US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
W Need for current design or process control FMEA and Control Plans 2
A What is the difference between Design Process, Process Design and Design Control? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
D Test summary report example for design validation wanted - ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
B Why the Greek god Hephaestus should have done a design FMEA (DFMEA) on his giant robot APQP and PPAP 1
S Documenting Design Verification Test Results (ISO 9001) Design and Development of Products and Processes 1
DuncanGibbons Understanding the applicability of Design of Experiments to the IQ OQ PQ qualification approach Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 4
S Requirement to Conduct New Shelf-life Testing? (re-do testing for design change) EU Medical Device Regulations 3
A Sample Agreement available for Outsourcing Medical Device Design activity? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
DuncanGibbons How is the arrangement between Design and Production organisation envisaged? EASA and JAA Aviation Standards and Requirements 4
L Design & Development of a SERVICE Service Industry Specific Topics 13
C Documentation for items used for Design Verification 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 4
P Design verification driven by new equipment. How is this different than process validation? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
A AS9102B - 3.6 Design Characteristics and form 3 AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
P Design FMEA - Detection Rating criteria ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
U Medical Device Design finalization testing ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S MDR Delay - MDD design Change? (before new MDR DOA) EU Medical Device Regulations 8
J Iterative design and production for custom made products ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
T Design Input detail & specificity ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
J Design file for pre-existing products - Inputs and Outputs ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
D Design Transfer Template capturing Customer Specific Requirements Other Medical Device Related Standards 3
T Design Control Procedures later in the Development Process ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
M Looking for a Presentation on Design for Excellence (DfX) Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
K Old medical devices -> 7.3.7. Design and development validation ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
R Design and Manufacture Guidelines for Surface Mount Technology Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 9
optomist1 Design Exclusion, but now we might have an outsourced Product Design ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
Q Relabeler for patent expired product - design control responsibilities? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
B Supplier of design and manufacture process ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
I Does anybody use Detection in medical device Design FMEA? ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 18
A Design process goal for ISO 9001 Manufacturing and Related Processes 23
Z Definitive definition of design? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
A UDI and Design Controls - Labeling change via the Design Control process 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1

Similar threads

Top Bottom