Transcript Supply Chain Process Capability & Product Realization Process Strategy Streams IAQG General Assembly

Supply Chain Process Capability
& Product Realization Process
Strategy Streams
IAQG General Assembly
San Diego, April 7, 2006
Barbara O’Dell
The Boeing Company
IAQG Stream Leader
Supply Chain Process Capability
Bernard Lauras
Airbus
European Sector leader
Product Realisation Process
Sub Tier Control as a Source of Risk
To Regulators and Customers
Poor Control of Sub Tiers is viewed as a Risk
Methods used by Suppliers to Control
Sub-Tiers are not well understood
Reduced level of
interaction with Sub
Tiers compared to
with suppliers
(Lack of Visibility)
Source of NonConforming Product
Supplier doesn’t
know how to control
their (sub-tier)
suppliers
Few industry standards and Best
Practices published on how to
perform excellent supplier control .
No common vocabulary or scoring
Sub Tier system
insufficient to detect
& prevent nonconformance
(Lack of
Transparency)
SCMH provides a framework for
organizing and integrating our work
Stand alone requirements
(9102, 9131, 9103, etc)
9100
Requirements
Supply
Chain
Mgmnt
Handbook
Industry best practices on
how to meet requirements
Supplier Mgmnt Life Cycle
Supplier
Selection
Pre Production
Validation
Ongoing
Approval
Change
Mgmnt
Supply Chain Process Capability
Name changed from Sub Tier Process Control
Often, the value stream includes companies operating at many
levels, and one standard should be consistently applied
Ideal Stream
Typical Stream
OEM
OEM
First Tier
First Tier
OEM
Sub Tier
Sub Tier
First Tier
Sub Tier
SCMH chapters have been renumbered
and include Product Realization Activities
1.0 Supplier Selection
& Capability Assessment
4.0 Process
Control
7.0 Work Transfer
Management
2.0 Requirements
and Flowdown
5.0 Product
Verification
& Acceptance
8.0 Supply Chain
Mgmnt and
Performance
Measures
In work by Product Realization Stream
In work by Supply Chain Process Capability Stream
3.0 New Product
Introduction
6.0 Controlling
Non-Conf Product
9.0 On going Approval
And Maintenance
10.0 Program
Management
For every “chapter” in the Handbook
We’ll follow this roadmap
Phase 1: Collect aerospace and other industry best
practices, standardize the knowledge & agree on
core requirements
Phase 2: Create best practice material first, then
mature into a guideline or to an industry standard
document (910X standard). Maturity assessment
may be developed here. Implementation Process
should be defined here (pilot phase as required).
Phase 3: Standardized training provided
by industry accepted trainers
Phase 4: Implementation Process. Depending on guideline
vs 910X decision, the document may be deployed company
by company, or by standardized audit checklist, or by
industry certification as part of the ICOP/9104 system.
Implementation must include maturity assessment.
Supply Chain Process Capability have
been tasked Chapters 1 and 2
1.0 Supplier Selection
& Capability Assessment
4.0 Process
Control
7.0 Work Transfer
Management
2.0 Requirements
and Flowdown
5.0 Product
Verification
& Acceptance
8.0 Supply Chain
Mgmnt and
Performance
Measures
In work by Product Realization Stream
In work by Supply Chain Process Capability Stream
3.0 New Product
Introduction
6.0 Controlling
Non-Conf Product
9.0 On going Approval
And Maintenance
10.0 Program
Management
Sales Volume & Option Forecasting
Project Management
On going Approval
& Maintenance
Supply Chain Mgt and
Performance Measures
Work Transfer Management
Controlling Non-Conf
product
Product Verification
and Acceptance
Process Control
New Product Introduction
Requirement & Flow down
Supply Chain Processes
IAQG SCMH Chapters
Supplier Selection
& Capability assessment
Chapter 1 - Supplier Selection
and Capability Assessment
O
Contract requirement flow down
Manage the Supply Chain
Planned change management
Supplier Development
Performance Monitoring and Decision support
O
New product introduction //LCM
O
SC design & major Components sourcing
O
O
Suppliers sourcing selection & qualification
O
O
O
O
O
O
Sales & Operation Planning
O
Master Scheduling & sequencing
O
Plant, material, skills & capacity planning & Scheduling
Manufacturing
O
O
O
O
O
Post Delivery
Post Delivery
Support
Support
and services
Order Management (internal & external)
O
O
Inventory planning & optimization
Logistic Management
Non Conformity Management
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Chapter 1 - Supplier Maturity Assessment
per Supply Chain Process
Four levels of maturity (Maturity model CMMI like)
1.
Undefined : No Process, Method, Tools/ No Process,
Method, Tools/ and Appropriate Behaviours
• Processes
2.
3.
Defined
Applied
• Tools & Data
4.
Optimising: Implemented and optimised, continuous
improvement
Four domains assessed:
• People & Organisation
• Performances Metrics
Non Conformity
Management
People & Organization
Process
1
Undefined
No clear Accountability
2
Defined
Expert firefighters
No Problem solving
skills
Reactive needs
Customer Stimulus
3
Applied
4
Optimizing
Clear accountability
Multifunctional team
Cross functions
Highly Skilled
Highly skilled
Ad hoc firefighting
actions
Root cause process in
place
Process playbooks
Mature process for root
cause & preventive
actions
Limited preventive actions
Tools & Data
Manual : Fax e-mail
Spreadsheet
Expectation
Supplier
performance
Performance
Metrics
Multiple Data base
No measurement of
Performance
Measuring performance
Integrated database, clear
workflows, internal
collaboration
Internal & external
collaboration.
Performance drives action
plans
3+ regular review of
metrics effectiveness
Real time intelligent
workflows
Chapter 1 - Decision making process
New product Introduction
Life Cycle Management
1
Undefined
People
& Organization
Contract
Requirement
1
Flow down
Undefined
Sales Volume
& Option
People
& Organization 1
Forecasting
Undefined
2
Defined
2
Defined
2
Defined
3
Applied
3
Applied
3
Applied
4
Optimizing
Process
People & Organization
Process
Supplier
Assessment
Results
Tools & Data
Process
4
Optimizing
4
Optimizing
Standard Questionnaire
and Assessment results
independent from the
size of company and
product/project
criticality…
Tools & Data
Performance
Metrics
Tools & Data
Performance
Metrics
Performance
Metrics
Each Company to apply
weighting to each
process as appropriate
to their Product,
Customer, Risks, etc…
Decision to select or not
based on risk analysis like
9134 “Supply Chain Risk
Management guideline”
(Special action plan if not
capable but need to select)
Chapter 1 : Supplier Selection &
Capability Assessment
• Deliverables by Seville
– Agree on the definition of the 15 Supply Chain Mgmnt processes
– Agree on the maturity matrix concept and finalize its content
– Conduct pilot assessments, using the maturity matrix and model, in
all sectors
– Finalise decision matrix and questionnaire
• Actions to be completed later
– Validate questionnaire and Maturity Model during on the pilot phase
– Publish questionnaire and Maturity Model decision matrices
– Issue training package
– Identify Requirements,Guideline and Best Practices
Chapter 2: Requirements & Flowdown
Brainstorm of Causes
Affinitize Causes
Suppliers Produce Non-conforming Product because they do not understand the requirements or they do not receive the requirements. . . . . . . . . WHY?
People do not have
necessary training or
knowledge to flow
everything that is required
Supplier submits errors in
the drawing/specs, but we
don't correct it promptly
Special process houses don't have access to our specs!
Except where they are also first tier suppliers, or where we
have given them a KUTD distribution of hard copies.
9100 oversight by some CRBs is
sometimes insufficient to detect the
lack of compliance to Contract review
and requirements flowdown sections of
9100 Does confidentiality agreements
prevent the CRB from being able to do
this well?
Contract review process is not robust
enough, not 2 way communication
with customers that gets things really
discussed and defined. We've trained
them not to "bother us".
Customer gives the wrong
revision level of a drawing or
spec to a supplier or doesn't
ensure the supplier is aware of
changes to drawings or specs
Customers are not
reviewing all the orders
(especially on repeats)
except where they have
non-conformances
Purchase Order review
by the customer to
ensure the correct
notes are applied to the
contract is not robust
The inspection was done to the
plan, not to the requirements!
Non-conformance . drawing calls
out a flag note for 1/2 " arrow, and
planner made a plan for a smaller
arrow.
Hardware is produced and
shipped before the PO (and
all the requirements) are
available in a complete
documented project
Verbal instructions
which conflict with
requirements are
given to save time
in our process.
Problems with the KUTD system
Process spec changes occur,
but we don't get every supplier
input and confirmation of their
ability to meet the change
People who own the task of PO
requirement review, how do they
know how to do it, how do they
know if they have done, no
feedback and what tools are they
using to do it well?
Complex and
complicated specs
that refer us to other
specs and tables
and graphs
Most of these positions have
high turnover and so planning is
data entry, and/or so is contract
review not really anything more
than data entry.
Mfg planning errors don't
result in a plan that will
meet requirements even
when it is fully followed
Process changes occur in the middle of the product
realization process. How do we communicate this in real
time through the whole value chain? What if the subsub-tier hardware has already been built? Only a
problem if the spec change, inspected to current revision
vs the revision under which it was purchased.
All the necessary
requirements aren't
flowed.
C&S
7.2.2 Suppliers
accept work they
cannot meet
requirements
7.2.2 People who
own the task of PO
review, how do they
know how to do it?
Contract review
process is not robust
enough, not 2 way
communication
Do a better job of
discussing
requirements on
some major
projects
Suppliers Produce Non-conforming
Product because they do not understand
the requirements or do not receive the
requirements. WHY?
Process spec changes
without supplier input and
confirmation of their ability
to meet the change
Ambiguous terms and
acronyms, ….leads to
assumptions
Complex and
complicated
specs
Customers are not
reviewing all the orders
(especially on repeats)
People do not have the
training or knowledge to
flow all that is required
7.2.2 9100 oversight by
some CRBs is sometimes
insufficient to detect the
lack of compliance
7.2.2 Supplier
misunderstands
requirements
7.2.2 Supplier agreed to meet
requirements they couldn't meet
7.4.2a,e &f Access to
specs by subtiers. . The
first tier is responsible to
identify and send the
required data.
7.4.2a Specification
Pull system is a
problem .. suppliers
overloaded
We aren't connecting
the quality customer
with the quality supplier
Suppliers don't want
to question
customers and risk
losing the work.
High turnover ...
planning & contract
review nothing more
than data entry.
7.4.2j Sub tiers are getting the suppliers
interpretation of what the customer's
requirements are, not the accurate flowdown.
Purchase Order review by the
customer to ensure the correct
notes are applied to the contract is
not robust
Poor communication with sub-tier
suppliers ... not getting specs
Requirements change, with no required a
change incorporation request or date.
Supplier wasn't even notified of the change.
Sub tier certs aren't
flowed to the ultimate
customer.
The inspection was done to
the plan, not to the
requirements and plan was
wrong
Problems with the KUTD system
We aren't connecting
the quality customer
with the quality supplier
and ops with ops, only
the pa to pa.
Suppliers are accepting work
when they cannot meet
requirements and we fail to
detect this prior to contract
award and production start…preproduction validation
We have trained our suppliers to respond to schedule at
the expense of quality and completeness. When we
deliver our requirements late, it puts them in a crunch!
When we are in a hurry, we tend to make more mistakes
2.0 Requirements and Flowdown
Team Leader: Barb O’Dell
Team Leader: Barb O’Dell
Team Members: Gordon Rosner, Arne Logan, George Udris, Jarie Hermie, Wes
Wilkey
Team Leader: Gayle Roland
Team Member: Jay Park, Michelle Pierce, Dave Trucksis
Customer gives the wrong revision level of
a drawing or spec to a supplier or doesn't
ensure the supplier is aware of changes to
drawings or specs
Mfg planning errors don't result
in a plan that will meet
requirements even when it is
fully followed
Reqts Def
7.2.1 Requirements Definition
Special process houses
don't have access to our
specs!
Process spec changes
without supplier input and
confirmation of their ability
to meet the change
All the necessary
requirements aren't
flowed.
Complex and
complicated
specs
Ambiguous terms and
acronyms, ….leads to
assumptions
Contr. Rev Change Mgt
7.2.2 Contract Review
Customers are not
reviewing all the orders
(especially on repeats)
People do not have the
training or knowledge to
flow all that is required
Purchase Order review by the
customer to ensure the correct
notes are applied to the contract is
not robust
7.4.2 Change Management
Requirements change, with no required a
change incorporation request or date.
Supplier wasn't even notified of the change.
Problems with the KUTD system
Process changes occur in the middle of
the product realization process.
Supplier submits errors in the drawing/
specs, but we don't correct it promptly
Customer gives the wrong revision level of
a drawing or spec to a supplier or doesn't
ensure the supplier is aware of changes to
drawings or specs
7.2.2 Contract Review
Contract review
process is not robust
enough, not 2 way
communication
Do a better job of
discussing
requirements on
some major
projects
We aren't connecting
the quality customer
with the quality supplier
6.2.2 Resources
Suppliers don't want
to question
customers and risk
losing the work.
7.2.2 PO Review
7.2.2 People who
own the task of PO
review, how do they
know how to do it?
7.2.2 Suppliers
accept work they
cannot meet
requirements
7.2.2 9100 oversight by
some CRBs is sometimes
insufficient to detect the
lack of compliance
7.2.2 Supplier
misunderstands
requirements
7.2.2 Supplier agreed to meet
requirements they couldn't meet
7.4.2 Flow Down
7.4.2a,e &f Access to
specs by subtiers. . The
first tier is responsible to
identify and send the
required data.
7.4.2a Specification
Pull system is a
problem .. suppliers
overloaded
7.4.2j Sub tiers are getting the suppliers
interpretation of what the customer's
requirements are, not the accurate flowdown.
Poor communication with sub-tier
suppliers ... not getting specs
Supplier
2.3 How to manage revisions to requirements after initial
contract/purchase order release
Sub tiers get PO exceptions, and they will cert to
that exception. That isn't caught by the ultimate
customer. The cert explicitly states that they
aren't meeting all requirements, but our system
may routinely file them instead of validating them.
Supplier submits errors in the drawing/
specs, but we don't correct it promptly
Customer & Supplier
2.2 How to generate a shared understanding of the
requirements
Process changes occur in the middle of
the product realization process.
Customer
2.1 How to clearly identify and communicate requirements
throughout the supply chain
Team Leader: John Skokos
Team Members: Dale Gordon
Special process houses
don't have access to our
specs!
Customer
Access to specs by subtiers. . First tier can go to
"pull", but subtiers cannot. (CITIS/BPN network) The
first tier is responsible to identify and send the
required data. What is our oversight of first tier
suppliers and their ability to do this well?
Supplier
Customer
Customer & Supplier
Supplier agreed to
meet requirements
they couldn't meet
or weren't positive
they could meet
Poor communication with suppliers
around SPDM (drawing push
system) and our oversight doesn't
always detect that they haven't
accessed the system regularly.
Specification Pull system is a problem for
suppliers to multiple customers, they feel
overloaded with the challenge of checking for all
the spec updates:
Get over it, that's your job, and you get paid to
do it. How do suppliers approve/reject the
change.
Supplier
Supplier
misunderstands the
requirement: bad
drawings, unclear
drawings, old specs.
Do new suppliers
get all the info?
What about from
inside to the
supply base?
Supplier C & S Customer
All the necessary
requirements aren't
flowed.
Chapter 2.0 Requirements and Flowdown
2.0 Requirements and Flowdown
2.1 How to clearly identify and communicate
requirements throughout the supply chain
2.2 How to generate a shared understanding of the
requirements
2.3 How to manage revisions to requirements after initial
contract/purchase order release
Chapter 2 - Requirements and Flowdown
• Deliverables by Seville:
– Connect to others doing similar work (Missile Defense Agency,
Space Quality Improvement Council) to see if we can combine
efforts
– Communicate our work to others (AIA, ASQ)
– Collect best practices and white papers from aerospace and other
industries
• Actions to be completed later
– Benchmark Medical Device Industry and SEA on Requirements &
Flowdown
– Publish guidelines/best practices by June 07
Product Realization Activities have been
tasked Chapters 3, 4 and 7
1.0 Supplier Selection
& Capability Assessment
4.0 Process
Control
7.0 Work Transfer
Management
2.0 Requirements
and Flowdown
5.0 Product
Verification
& Acceptance
8.0 Supply Chain
Mgmnt and
Performance
Measures
In work by Product Realization Stream
In work by Supply Chain Process Capability Stream
3.0 New Product
Introduction
6.0 Controlling
Non-Conf Product
9.0 On going Approval
And Maintenance
10.0 Program
Management
Chapter 3 – New Product Introduction
• Background:
 The Aerospace Industry developed a successful product
introduction process based on a 20%-80% outsource ratio and
the industry has migrated to a 80%-20% outsource ratio
 This change was gradual and a change in the product
introduction process was not undertaken
• Corrective Action proposed:
 Develop a product introduction process that accurately
predicts supplier performance at production levels
Chapter 3 – New Product Introduction
• Status:
– Benchmarking performed:
• Dell computers
• Toyota USA
• Knowles (Medical)
– Lessons learned and brainstorming have produced
Sub-chapters headings
Chapter 3 – New product introduction
3.0 New Product Introduction
3.1 Pre-production Process validation (product specific)
3.2 Review of Quality Planning including Key Characteristics
3.3 Product and Process Qualification
3.4 Pre-approval of test methods (where applicable)
3.5 FAI (9102)
3.6 Design Change Requirements
3.7 Product Maturity Assurance
Chapter 3 - New product introduction
• Deliverables by Seville:
– Confirm sub-chapters headings, resolve overlaps with other
chapters
– Collect best practices from IAQG and other companies
• Actions to be completed later
– Publish guidelines/best practices by June 07
Chapter 4 - Process Control
• 9103 (Variation Management of Key
Characteristics) not sufficiently and adequately
deployed
 Value not clearly identified
or understood
 All functions to be involved,
not only Quality
Lack of buy-in
 Training required
 Need to explain how to
apply 9103 based upon
supplier & product complexity
Lack of skills
Chapter 4 - Process Control
• Since Montreal, EAQG has worked on 9103 education
package:
•
–
Common part (key concepts with IAQG banner) for all
companies using the training
–
Some area to be adapted by each company when training its
staff or its suppliers (examples, tools, forms, etc…)
–
Education package content:

Will focus on value of doing it and risks and/or costs of not doing it

Should take difficulties of doing it into consideration
Work is on going
Chapter 4 - Process Control
9103 deployment Constraints
 Application of 9103 should be risk oriented (not used if no added value,
should focus on the results, not on the tool or the process)
 More chance to succeed if convinced of business value than if strict
mandate: Improve communication and learn more from supplier experience
and constraints
 3 ways of flowing 9103 down (deployment drivers) ?
Mandated (high risk product and/or existing
key characteristics)
–
–Guideline
–Best
practices sharing
Mandate from customer
At supplier own initiative or
supplier development
 Need to create a global culture (prime, suppliers) rather than one way
(mandate) => engagement within all levels and functions of the supply chain
Chapter 4 - Process Control
Further Actions
• Measure the effectiveness of 9103 deployment and its
benefits on the overall business
• Build on lessons learned
–
–
–
See how to define key characteristics
Introduce concept of FAI stage 1 (initial) and stage 2 (confirm
capability at ramp up)
Evaluate how to use 9103 results to optimize design for
manufacturing
Chapter 4 - Process Control
Interconnection between several topics
“Global Process Control” brainstorming : We can build from 9103 but
shall not limit to it and shall not consider it as the only key factor of
success
Product
performances
(requirements)
KC = key
Characteristics
New product
introduction
R = Results
Industrial
Capability
Design for
Manufacturing
R
R
KC
KC
Design changes
Variation
Management
of Key
Characteristics
(9103)
R
Product
Maturity
Work transfer
KC
Process
changes
Chapter 4 - Process Control
4.0 Process Control
4.1 Variation management of Key Characteristics (9103)
4.2 Root cause analysis and problem Solving
4.3 Process capability and control
4.4 Design for Manufacturing and Relation with Manufacturing
Capability
4.5 Process Change Requirements
4.6 Industrial Capability and Capacity Assessment
4.7 First Article Inspection
4.8 Special Process Control
Chapter 4 - Process Control
Proposed Short Term Action plan
• Deliverables by Seville:
– Finalize 9103 education package
– Be ready for deployment of the 9103 training
• Actions to be completed later
– Start to work on Root Cause Analysis and Problem solving
– Evaluate the effectiveness of 9103 deployment
– Reviewing opportunity for Process Control improvement based on
feedback from deployment (industry expectations)
– Build on 9103 (evolution of the standard or complementary
standards or methodology)
Chapter 7 – Work Transfer
Supplier A
Supplier B
• Unsuccessful work transfer is a major problem for the industry and we
feel it is one of our priorities
• We have not standardised process to do it
Chapter 7 – Work Transfer
• Collected Industry Best Practices (Benchmarking)
– Dell computers
– Toyota USA
– Knowles (Medical)
• Standardize Knowledge and Lessons learned
– Pre-transition Program Planning
• Pre-production meeting(s) – upfront effort
–
–
–
–
Multidiscipline Team (Agreement: quality, eng., purch.)
Capture Hidden Factory – Last Article audit (product and process)
Receiving Supplier Process Capability & Assessment
Supplier Development – as required
Chapter 7 – Work Transfer
• Deliverables in Seville:
– Confirm sub-chapters headings
– Identify overlaps, existing/needed standards
– Collect best practices from IAQG and other companies
• Actions to be completed later
– Develop a transition process from best practices, ensuring
risks are identified and mitigated prior to the work transfer
decision and launch
– Publish guidelines/best practices by June 07
Supply Chain Management Handbook
Next steps
• Finalize Chapter Headings and Sub Chapter titles and
content/objectives to eliminate overlaps, improve clarity and
integration (June 06)
• SAE has provided a “public web space” for our team to
communicate with the general public on our progress. We
will populate this web space in coordination with the IAQG
communications team