I work in the automotive industry at a tiered supplier. I have recently reviewed all of my plants PFMEAs, with other team members, and reformatted the top-level effects. Previously the top-level effect was only the customer effect OR end-user effect. Now, I have in-plant effects and customer effects and end-user effects where they apply. This is led to a number of line items receiving higher severity scores for in-plant effects than before and higher than the customer effects.
Ex: If I build a bad part and catch it in plant, it is scrap which is a (7) according to the handbook. If I ship this part to the customer they will make me sort, but I won't shut down their plant since we are not just-in-time, which is a (5) according to the handbook.
This is generally confusing to most people. They believe the customer severity/ risk should always be higher than in-plant. I explain that the new rating helps drive attention to the parts of the process that need improvement BEFORE they become customer issues and that the severity ratings are independent of each other and should not be compared. This works sometimes. For the most part, I'm being asked to lower the severity for in-plant effects to reduce the number of High action priorities and the amount of red showing on the PFMEA. I do not believe this is the correct approach.
I've also had quite a hard time teaching everyone that RPN is no longer to be used and Action Priority is the main thing to consider. Before I got here a few years ago, AP wasn't on any PFMEAs. RPN still dominates conversation, particularly scores above 100.
My questions:
1. Am I correct in thinking that the three severity categories in the AIAG/VDA FMEA handbook are independent of each other? That it is ok if the in-plant severity is higher than the customers and vice-versa?
2. Am I correct is saying that we should only consider AP/ RPL ratings and that RPN only provides information within the context of AP/ RPL ratings?
I feel like all the work I did is about to be undone and we'll, once again, not be able to use the PFMEA to drive improvements in our process just to make things look better at a glance to upper management.
Ex: If I build a bad part and catch it in plant, it is scrap which is a (7) according to the handbook. If I ship this part to the customer they will make me sort, but I won't shut down their plant since we are not just-in-time, which is a (5) according to the handbook.
This is generally confusing to most people. They believe the customer severity/ risk should always be higher than in-plant. I explain that the new rating helps drive attention to the parts of the process that need improvement BEFORE they become customer issues and that the severity ratings are independent of each other and should not be compared. This works sometimes. For the most part, I'm being asked to lower the severity for in-plant effects to reduce the number of High action priorities and the amount of red showing on the PFMEA. I do not believe this is the correct approach.
I've also had quite a hard time teaching everyone that RPN is no longer to be used and Action Priority is the main thing to consider. Before I got here a few years ago, AP wasn't on any PFMEAs. RPN still dominates conversation, particularly scores above 100.
My questions:
1. Am I correct in thinking that the three severity categories in the AIAG/VDA FMEA handbook are independent of each other? That it is ok if the in-plant severity is higher than the customers and vice-versa?
2. Am I correct is saying that we should only consider AP/ RPL ratings and that RPN only provides information within the context of AP/ RPL ratings?
I feel like all the work I did is about to be undone and we'll, once again, not be able to use the PFMEA to drive improvements in our process just to make things look better at a glance to upper management.
