Matamoros LFOS - Lean Assessment 2022 Midyear

Site Name: Matamoros Start Date: 7/12/2022
LFOS Assessment team Name Email

Lead Assessor
Regional Assessor
Regional Assessor
Assessor trainee
Key site team members Name Email

Regional Operations leader Conrado Hinojosa chinojosa@littelfuse.com
Site Director Conrado Hinojosa chinojosa@littelfuse.com
Plant Manager FE Ricardo Sanchez risanchez@littelfuse.com
Plant Manager BE Ricardo Sanchez risanchez@littelfuse.com
Regional Lean leader Ruben Rodriguez rrodriguez6@littelfuse.com
Site ELSS lead Fernando Bejarano fbejarano@littelfuse.com
Talent Management Talia de los Reyes tdelosreyes@littelfuse.com
NP&PD Alan Gomez agomez@littelfuse.com
Supply Chain Management Maria del Carmen Rosas mrosas@littelfuse.com
Quality Management System Iris Venegas ivenegas@littelfuse.com
IT & Industry 4.0 Alejandra Barbosa abarbosa@littelfuse.com
EHS Yessica Chavez ychavez@littelfuse.com
Sales and Operations Planning Erika Gracia egracia@littelfuse.com
Sustainability Anacleto Marquez amarquez2@littelfuse.com
Finance Jesus Benavidez jbenavidez@littelfuse.com
Security Anacleto Marquez amarquez2@littelfuse.com
Trade compliance Raul Rivera rrivera@littelfuse.com
Phone
A
B
C
D
E
Phone F
G
H
I
J
528687969205
528689039866
528689039896
528689039869
528689039896
Data Needed Response
Total number of associates at site 963
Total number of professionals 106
Total number of directors and managers 8
Total number of supervisors/line leads 17
Total number of 1% associates 4
Total number of technicians 88
Target # of kaizen blitzes n/20 -
Target # of kaizen blitzes n/15 50
Start date of all 1% associates
Total number of associates with "Engineer" in Workday title 35
Definition Plant Manager*, all direct and dotted-line reports of the Plant Manager*, and a
*Site Director if there is no Plant Manager
Instructions Fill in the title and name of every Site Leadership Team member in the table be
Title Name
Plant Manager (or Site Director) Ricardo Sanchez
Ruben Rodriguez
Marcos Licurgo Garcia
Iris Venegas
Erika Gracia
Fermin Rodriguez
Jesus Benavidez
Talia de los Reyes
Site Leadership Team Size: 8

nd dotted-line reports of the Plant Manager*, and all other functional leaders within the site who are responsible for the site's day-to-day
Plant Manager
every Site Leadership Team member in the table below. Email and Phone numbers are helpful, but not required.
Email Phone
risanchez@littelfuse.com
rrodriguez6@littelfuse.com
mgarcia2@littelfuse.com
ivenegas@littelfuse.com
egracia@littelfuse.com
frodriguez2@littelfuse.com
jbenavidez@littelfuse.com
tdelosreyes@littelfuse.com
e who are responsible for the site's day-to-day operation
ful, but not required.

Site: Matamoros Lead assessor:
7/12/2022
Date: Current Assessor 2:
(Year-End or
# of Qs Mid-Year) Assessment
Categories Score Year-End Target Questions Remaining
10 Commitment 5.22 7.83 0
4 Empowerment 6.50 7.75 0
3 Training 7.00 9.33 0
4 Hoshin 5.50 6.75 0
6 Continuous Improvement 9.50 10.00 0
6 VSM 8.33 8.50 0
8 6S 7.70 7.90 0
5 Set-Up Red. 7.20 7.20 0
9 Metrics 8.67 8.78 0
8 Std. Work 7.00 7.25 0
9 Flow and Pull 7.11 7.11 0
8 Visual Control 9.13 9.13 0
12 TPM 6.75 7.58 0
9 Proj. Mgmt. 7.56 7.56 0
5 Inv. Management 8.20 8.20 0
7 Supply Chain 5.57 5.71 0
7 Six Sigma 1.14 1.43 0
7 Lean NPD 7.29 7.29 0
0 NP&PD 4.79 4.86 0
11 QMS_Quality 7.15 7.30 0
15 Talent Management 7.47 7.53 0
9 S&OP 6.78 6.78 0
8 Finance 8.38 8.38 0
1 Security 9.00 9.00 0
1 Trade compliance 8.40 8.40 0
2 EHS 2.5 3.00 0
6 Supply Chain Management 3.67 3.67 0
19 IT & Industry 4.0 2.06 3.00 1
4 Business Continuity Mgt 3.00 3.00 0
4 Sustainability 3.25 3.25 0
207 Average 5.82 6.03
0
0
Last Year's Year-End Optional: Improvement
Scores (BL 2022) from Prior Score
8.33 -3.11
6.75 -0.25
8.67 -1.67
3.75 1.75
10.00 -0.50
8.50 -0.17
7.90 -0.20
7.60 -0.40
9.00 -0.33
6.50 0.50
7.33 -0.22
9.63 -0.50
6.83 -0.08
7.56 0.00
8.00 0.20
5.57 0.00
1.43 -0.29
7.29 0.00
4.79 0.00
8.00 -0.85
7.53 -0.07
6.11 0.67
7.63 0.75
9.00 0.00
8.40 0.00
2.50 0
3.50 0.17
2.11 -0.05
3.00 0.00
3.25 0.00
5.82 0.00
Site: Matamoros Lead assessor: 0
Date: 7/12/2022 Assessor 2: 0
Assessor 3: 0
# of Qs Current (Year-End or
Mid-Year) Assessment
Categories Score Weight Factor Year-End Target Questions Remaining
127 Lean Summary 6.13 2 6.65 0
0 NP&PD 4.79 1 4.86 0
11 QMS_Quality 7.15 1 7.30 0
15 Talent Management 7.47 1 7.53 0
9 S&OP 6.78 1 6.78 0
8 Finance 8.38 1 8.38 0
1 Security 9.00 1 9.00 0
1 Trade compliance 8.40 1 8.40 0
2 EHS 2.50 1 3.00 0
6 Supply Chain Management 3.67 1 3.67 0
19 IT & Industry 4.0 2.06 1 3.00 1
4 Business Continuity Mgt 3.00 0 3.00 0
4 Sustainability 3.25 1 3.25 0
207 Average 5.82 6.03
Optional:
Last Year's Year-End Improvement from
Scores (BL 2022) Prior Score
6.42 -0.29
4.79 0.00
8.00 -0.85
7.53 -0.07
6.11 0.67
7.63 0.75
9.00 0.00
8.40 0.00
2.50 0.00
3.50 0.17
2.11 -0.05
3.00 0.00
3.25 0.00
5.82 0.00
Site: Matamoros Lead assessor: 0
Date: 7/12/2022 Assessor 2: 0
Assessor 3: 0
# of Qs Current (Year-End or
Mid-Year) Assessment
Categories Score Weight Factor Year-End Target Questions Remaining
10 Commitment 5.22 1 7.83 0
4 Empowerment 6.50 1 7.75 0
3 Training 7.00 1 9.33 0
4 Hoshin 5.50 1 6.75 0
6 Continuous Improvement 9.50 1 10.00 0
6 VSM 8.33 1 8.50 0
8 6S 7.70 1 7.90 0
5 Set-Up Red. 7.20 1 7.20 0
9 Metrics 8.67 1 8.87 0
8 Std. Work 7.00 1 7.25 0
9 Flow and Pull 7.11 1 7.11 0
8 Visual Control 9.13 1 9.13 0
12 TPM 6.75 1 7.58 0
9 Proj. Mgmt. 7.56 1 7.56 0
5 Inv. Management 8.20 1 8.20 0
7 Supply Chain 5.57 1 5.71 0
7 Six Sigma 1.14 4 1.43 0
7 Lean NPD 7.29 1 7.29 0
127 Average 6.13 6.65 0
Optional:
Last Year's Year-End Improvement
Scores (BL 2022) from Prior Score
8.33 -3.11
6.75 -0.25
8.67 -1.67
3.75 1.75
10.00 -0.50
8.50 -0.17
7.90 -0.20
7.60 -0.40
9.00 -0.33
6.50 0.50
7.33 -0.22
9.63 -0.50
6.83 -0.08
7.56 0.00
8.00 0.20
5.57 0.00
1.43 -0.29
7.29 0.00
6.42 -0.29
Empowerment Q4 (If the site has rotating shifts, then a 1st shift only sample is ok)
10 Q1 Associates are empowered to stop the line (escalation procedure is in place) when they deem necessary on their own, without consulting a supervisor for any reason.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10% of 20% of 30% of 40% of 50% of 60% of 75% of 90% of 95% of 100% of
No
associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates
Comments/ The aim of this question is to ensure associates have the ability to stop the line immediately when they notice an issue, whether it is safety or quality. In
expectations: order to say "yes," associates should be able to stop production without consulting anyone.
Site
Response/
Evidence
Hoshin Q3
Associates have seen and can explain (how to read) the Corp or BU-level x-matrix. Additionally, they understand the relationship between Corp or BU and Site and lower
5 Q2 lower level X-matrices. They also can state some aspect of how the appropriate level matrix relates to their job. (Note: There will likely be no Corporate-level x-matrix in
2021, so associates will be asked about BU-level or site-level and other, lower-level matrices.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No
Note that this question is about the BU-LEVEL x-matrix. This scale can also be interpreted as a "depth of understanding" scale. For example, if the
Comments/ assessor talks with 4 or 5 associates about the x-matrix, and feels that the associates, on average, have about a 50% depth of understanding of the x-
expectations: matrix, how to read it, how to relate it to what they are working on, etc., then the assessor can score the question as a "5."
Site
Response/
Evidence
CI Q1
10 Q3 Associates can explain the 8 types of waste.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No
Comments/ The employee should be able to explain all 8 forms of waste. It is OK to use their own works to describe the waste forms as long as they understand all 8
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
CI Q2
10 Q4 Associates can discuss and explain recent continuous improvement (waste-removal, 6S, LSGA, etc.) activities in their area.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
VSM Q5
10 Q5 Associates can explain the Value Stream Map (VSM) for the department or process in which they work.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
None
The employee can quickly describe where to find the most recent version of the value stream map for their department or process. Additionally, they can
Comments/ explain the details of the map including, symbols and data contained on the map. They can also explain recent and upcoming improvements identified on
expectations: the map.
Site
Response/ 30/30=100%
Evidence
6S Q1
10 Q6 Associates can explain the importance of 6S as it relates to the overall lean initiative.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of 10% of 20% of 30% of 40% of 50% of 60% of 75% of 90% of 95% of 100% of
associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
Std Work Q7
10 Q7 Production associates are empowered to request/make changes to standard work (with appropriate approval).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
Visual Control Q1
10 Q8 Associates can identify what the andon signals mean.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
Visual Control Q4
10 Q9 Production associates know whether they are on track, ahead of, or behind schedule.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
Project Management Q1
6 Q10 Associates can explain the importance of A3s and how to fill them out.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments/ What is the problem or defect? Where is the defect being observed? When was it observed and is there a pattern? How Much and to what extent? How
expectations: Do I Know the sources or what standard we are failing to meet?
Site
Response/
Evidence
Commitment (Also: Lean Leadership, Gemba, Escalation Plans, Communication Plans) Back to overall results tab
Section score 5.22
Behavior: The Commitment questions are intended to understand the extent to which leadership supports ELSS goals and objectives. Resources with a full-time
focus on continuous improvement, along with training and certification efforts, are an important demonstration of a site's commitment level.
Grey means not an option to score that particular number

Score Question
The site has filled the 1% positions. (Note: for all "percentage" questions on the assessment, in order to score at a particular level, you must, at a minimum, achieve the
4 Q1
noted percentage.) (Note: This question is worth 50% of the Commitment score)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Greater than 0, 2 or more
1 extra
None but less than 39.5-49.4% 49.5-64.4% 64.5-74.4% 74.5-84.4% 84.5-94.4% 94.5-99.4% 99.5-100% extra
associate
39.5% associates
The number of 1% positions that should be filled = Total number of associates divided by 100 (If 49.4 or below, round down to 49; 49.5 or above, round up to
50) Data source: HR database of employees and list of dedicated lean associates Note: Temps/contract employees count towards the total number of
Comments/ employees as long as they’re working full time
expectations:
Ideal: monthly summary from their site Database: 1% target vs. actual 1% along with total headcount--shown for all months. Assessor has leeway to score vs.
any single snapshot in time. Can take into consideration whether each "1 percenter" is dedicated.
Site
HC=963, 1%=10; Current 1% is 7. We are currently in the process of transfer, so our high HC is due to the buffer we are preparing with temporary people. It
Response/
is expected that by the end of the year we will once again reach a total of 740 associates.
Evidence
10 Q2 The targeted number of Lean Experts (Level 2) has been achieved and maintained for 6 months.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
49.4% or less 49.5-74.4% 50-74.4% 74.5-89.4% 74.5-89.4% 89.5-99.9% 100% 100% 100% 100%
achieved; not achieved; not achieved and achieved; not achieved and achieved and achieved; not achieved and achieved and achieved and
0% achieved
yet maintained yet maintained maintained for yet maintained maintained for maintained for yet maintained maintained for maintained for maintained for
for 6 months for 6 months 6 months for 6 months 6 months 6 months for 6 months 6 months 12 months 18 months
This question is about Level 2 requirements for the required number of 1%, not for the total site. Determine the amount of 1% required based on the site's
total headcount. if the headcount ends in 50, round up. For example: 1% of 350 is 4 required. 1% of 349 is 3 required. Take the required number of 1% and
use that number to determine the required L2, 20% - 60%. The required number of Level 2 is based on the required number of 1%, not the actual number of
Comments/
1%. Compare that number with the actual L2 in the 1%. Example, site population of 350 so 4 required for the 1%. 20% - 60% of 4 = .8 - 2.4. rounding up
expectations:
would be 1-3 associates required for L2 of the 1%.
ELSS Global Database contains relevant data--Scores should be assigned based on this report.
Site
Response/ 2 people in certification process to Lean Expert
Evidence
1 Q3 All members of the site leadership team have been certified (Level 2 or 3) in Littelfuse Lean.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Greater than 0,
0% of
but less than 20-39.4% of 39.5-49.4% of 49.5-59.4% of 59.5-69.4% of 69.5-79.4% of 79.5-89.4% of 89.5-94.4% of 94.5-99.9% of 100% of
leadership+D2
20% of site leadership leadership leadership leadership leadership leadership leadership leadership leadership
3E12D22:D23
leadership
Site Leadership/management team defined in Tab titled Site Leadership Team

Comments/
expectations:
List of Supervisors/Managers/Directors that have achieved Level 2 Lean Certification, excluding those hired within the last 90 days
Site
Response/ 3/19=15.8%
Evidence
4 Q4 All associates (all grades/levels) who are not part of the dedicated 1% have achieved Level 1 lean certification.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Greater than 0,
74.5% or more
but less than 4.5-6.4% of all 6.5-9.4% of all 9.5-12.4% of all 12.5-14.4% of 14.5-17.4% of 17.5-19.4% of 19.5-49.4% of 49.5-74.4% of
0% of all
4.5% of all associates associates associates all associates all associates all associates all associates all associates
associates
associates
Comments/ List of associates who are not part of the dedicated 1% and have achieved Level 1 lean certification
expectations: Note: Exclude associates hired within the last 90 days
Site
Response/ 963-150 from the last 90 days - 3 fot the 1% team = 810. 88 are at least at L1, 88/810=10.8%
Evidence
10 Q5 The site is adhering to the Corporate model line program expectations.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
50% 60% 75% Minimum Site has Site has
implementatio implementation implementation model line implemented implemented
n of model line of model line of model line requirements minimum minimum
program program program met model line model line
No model line expectations expectations expectations requirements requirements
program in for one year. for two years.
place Or site has Or site has
implemented 1 implemented 2
extra model extra model
line line
All sites must have 1 model line. Sites with 2 Plants, Business Units or Sub Business units are required to have at least 2 model lines. Sites with 3 or more
Comments/ Plants, Business Units or Sub Business units are required to have at least 3 model lines. If a site is required to have 5 or fewer 1% staff (Headcount, n<550),
expectations: no more than 2 model lines are required. If a new BU is transferred or started at a site, a model line for that BU is not required until the BU has been fully
operational for 6 months or longer.
Site
Response/ Site has 3 BUs and has total 5 since 2020. 3 of these line are more that 3 years old
Evidence
3 Q6 Direct/indirect associates have had 12 or more hours of ELSS training/participation in the last rolling 12 months.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Greater than 0,
74.5% or more
0% of but less than 9.5-14.4% of 14.5-19.4% of 19.5-21.4% of 21.5-22.4% of 22.5-23.4% of 23.5-24.4% of 24.5-49.4% of 49.5-74.4% of
of
associates or 9.5% of direct/indirect direct/indirect direct/indirect direct/indirect direct/indirect direct/indirect direct/indirect direct/indirect
direct/indirect
not tracked direct/indirect associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates
associates
associates
Comments/ Participation level of IDL in It can be found in the 1% file submitted each month to Corp ELSS team
Expectations Note: Exclude associates hired within the last 90 days
Site
Response/ From database DL/IDL - 16% have 12hr or more
Evidence
2 Q7 Percent of Professional and management-level associates have had 40 or more hours of ELSS training/participation in the last rolling 12 months.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Greater than 0,
0% of 74.5% or more
but less than 14.5-24.4% of 24.5-29.4% of 29.5-34.4% of 34.5-39.4% of 39.5-44.4% of 44.5-49.4% of 49.5-59.4% of 59.5-74.4% of
associates or of
14.5% of professionals professionals professionals professionals professionals professionals professionals professionals
not tracked professionals
professionals
Comments/ Participation level of Professionals and Managers in 1% file submitted each month to Corp ELSS team. Note: Exclude associates hired within the last 90 days
expectations:
Site
Response/ 21/95=22%
Evidence
Tiered meetings are in place; Boards are updated regularly. Expectation: meetings are occurring daily for all tier levels on site. Tiered meetings are occurring for all functions
10 Q8
on site (production and administrative areas).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
One tier One tier One tier Minimum Minimum Minimum

missing; all missing; all missing; all program program program
other elements other elements other elements expectations expectations expectations
Some
in place (All in place (All in place (All met (All met (All met (All
No tiered meetings
expected expected expected expected expected expected
meeting occurring;
meetings are meetings are meetings are meetings are meetings are meetings are
program in Boards not
being held being held being held being held being held being held
place always
daily) and daily) and daily) and daily) and daily) and daily) and
updated
records show records show records show records show records show records show
this for 6 this for 9 this for 12 this for 6 this for 9 this for 12
months months months months months months
Comments/
Tiered meeting boards in production and administrative areas, with records indicating daily meetings over a period of time.
expectations:
Site
Response/ Tier 1, 3 & 4
Evidence
Escalation plans are documented and followed. (Note: This is escalation in general. Example: a piece of equipment breaks, an associate is injured, there is a need to
10 Q9
communicate something up the chain of command, etc.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No escalation One or two Escalation Escalation Escalation
plans examples of plans in place plans in place plans in place
escalation for major for major for major
provided projects projects projects
(projects, (projects, (projects,
equipment equipment equipment
downtime, downtime, downtime,
tiered tiered tiered
meetings, meetings, meetings,
budget issues, budget issues, budget issues,
etc.); Not etc.).; Mostly etc.).; Always
always followed followed and
followed driving the
intended
behavior
Escalation from tiered meeting boards and others. Could include: Lean Project Tracker, MES, Lock-out Tag-out, Problem Solving Procedure, Out of Control
Comments/ Action Plan, Safety procedures, etc. Provide document/procedure number where applicable. (Examples can be provided for any of the included, and show
expectations: clarification, this could be covered with notes from an LSGA meetings etc. Please show how escalations are communicated)
Site
Multiple escalation processes, Tiered meeting, Change management board, Red bin system, Andon light process. Use whatapp app as a team to facilitate
Response/
escalation
Evidence
8 Q10 Site leadership conducts formal, regular Gemba walks and provides appropriate feedback. (focus on specific topics, safety, behavior, guarding, etc.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Daily Gemba Daily Gemba Daily Gemba Daily Gemba

Daily Gemba Daily Gemba
walk by some walk by some walk by some walk by all
walk by some walk by all
No Gemba associates associates associates associates
associates associates
walks "supervisor" "supervisor" "manager" and "manager" and
"manager" and "manager" and
conducted and above; No and above; above; No above; No
above; Formal above; Formal
formal Formal formal formal feedback
feedback given feedback given
feedback given feedback given feedback given system
Comments/ Site leadership response to escalation from Tiered meeting boards in production and administrative areas; Site leadership has Gemba walk documentation
expectations: (ex: sent emails) that demonstrates formal feedback has been given. (e.g., documented notes with area/function, action items, dates, owner etc.)
Empowerment (Also: Lean Small Group Activity (LSGA), Suggestion Systems, Coaching) Back to overall results tab
Section score 6.5
Behavior: The Empowerment questions are intended to understand the extent to which associates are engaged in the company's continuous improvement efforts, and are
empowered to stop production when they deem necessary due to safety and/or quality concerns. Engagement is fundamental to the long-term success of ELSS.
Score Question
7 Q1 Percent of suggestions that are completed in last 12 months.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 25% 35% 50% 60% 70% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%
Comments/ Completed = implemented or evidence of review and feedback to the suggestor as to why the idea will not be used
expectations:
Site Response/
Total suggestions 393 (148 LSGA Projects, 23 mailbox suggestions and 222 Safety OFI), 85% of suggestions completed.
Evidence
1 Q2 The average number of suggestions per year per associate is six. (Note: expectation is that the suggestions will be in a suggestion system.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Greater than 0, 2-3.4 3.5-4.4 4.5-5.24 5.25-5.44 5.45-5.74 5.75-5.94 5.95-6.94 6.95 to 12 Greater than 12
0
but fewer than 2 suggestions suggestions suggestions suggestions suggestions suggestions suggestions suggestions suggestions
List of active projects in LSGA for the year, quantity from suggestion box, quantity from suggestion systems, etc. Note: the denominator in this question is the total number
Comments/
of associates at the site. This includes "just-do-it" suggestions, such as corrections to documentation. Note that suggestions in Kaizen bursts, Gemba walks, etc. are
expectations:
included in this--just need to be documented.
Site Response/
393 / 963 = 0.4 suggestions per associate.
Evidence
8 Q3 Percent of all associates that are part of LSGA teams. (includes everyone in the facility--including the site/plant manager)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Greater than 0,
No LSGA but less than 35-49.4% of all 49.5-59.4% of 59.5-69.4% of 69.5-79.4% of 79.5-84.4% of 84.5-89.4% of 89.5-94.4% of 94.5-99.9% of 100% of all
program 35% of all associates all associates all associates all associates all associates all associates all associates all associates associates
associates
Comments/ Evidence that all associates are part of an LSGA team. Note: the denominator in this question is the total number of associates at the site. Note: this includes all
expectations: associates, both production and administrative areas; focus is on participation.
Site Response/
862 associates are part of LSGA team. (862/963 = 89.5%)
Evidence
Associates are empowered to stop the line (escalation procedure is in place) when they deem necessary on their own, without consulting a supervisor for any reason. This question will
10 Q4
populate automatically when the employee survey questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, and written
procedure
exists, and line
is stopped (by a
Yes, but no
No
X X X X written
procedure exists
X X Yes, and written
procedure exists X production
associate,
without asking
for approval) on
an as-needed
basis
Greater than 0
20% of 30% of 40% of 50% of 60% of 75% of 90% of 95% of 100% of
No but less than
associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates associates
20%
The first scoring scale adresses the existance of a document saying the employees are empowered to stop a line for any reason. The second scale measures how well the
Comments/
employees understand that responsibility. This will be measured through the employee survey questions. The final score for this question is the lesser of the 2 scores.
expectations:
Reasons for stopping the line can include Safety, Quality, or any Process issue
Training Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.0
Behavior: The Training questions are intended to understand the extent to which the site is offering ELSS learning and development opportunities for associates, and the
extent to which associates are taking advantage of these opportunities. Training is important to ensure associates have a common language, the company continues to
progress in ELSS and associates feel they are being given opportunities for continued development.
Score Question
10 Q1 Phases 1 through 6 of lean training have been completed at this site (or site reps traveled to neighboring facility to participate in training).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
None 1 phase
X 2 phases
X 3 phases
X 4 phases 5 phases
X All 6 phases
This question is not about the current year. The current year is covered in Q2. This question is about if people from your site have had the Phase 1 - Phase 6
Comments/
training either at your site or have traveled someplace to receive it. If you had 1 person that went to another site, now or in the past, this counts. If someone from
expectations:
your site went to Lean Boot Camp to review phase 1 - Phase 5 training in 2017, that counts. If a person from your site went to another site in 2015, that counts.
Site Response/
All 6 have been offered in the past
Evidence
1 Q2 Site associates attend phases 1 through 6 of lean training annually.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2 phases 3 phases
Phases 1 All 6 phases
None
1 phase
annually X X annually OR all
5 phases every
three years
X annually OR all
5 phases every
two years
4 phases
annually
through 5
annually
All 6 phases
annually
plus Yellow belt
annually
Comments/ This question is about this year. Evidence: Sign-in sheets from phase training; evidence that associates traveled to other facilities to attend training or attended that
expectations: training virtually.
Site Response/
1 phase has been carried out at the site so far in the Mid Year.
Evidence
The site has a current and relevant skills matrix for associates that are visually displayed (i.e., is posted in the department and not simply a file on a computer) in the relevant area. If
10 Q3 not visually displayed, score does not count. (Note: Expectation is that posting is current and relevant (i.e., representative of current associates and current customer demand)).
Ideal state is included in the visual display (starting at score of 6)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, Displayed
for 100% of
Yes, Displayed Yes, Displayed Yes, Displayed
production Yes, Displayed
Yes, for greater for 79.5-89.4% for 89.5-99.9% for 100% of
Yes, for 33- Yes, for 39.5- Yes, for 49.5- Yes, for 66.5- associates and for all
No, or the skills than 0, but less of production of production production
39.4% of 49.4% of 66.4% of 79.4% of 50% of non- associates.
matrix is not than 33% of associates. associates. associates.
production production production production production Skills matrix
displayed production Skills matrix Skills matrix Skills matrix
associates associates associates associates associates. includes Ideal
associates includes Ideal includes Ideal includes Ideal
Skills matrix state
state state state
includes Ideal
state
Comments/
Should be observed during a Gemba walk. Each department or cell should have its own skills matrix
expectations:
Site Response/
Observed record in Gemba and files provided
Evidence
Hoshin Kanri Back to overall results tab
Section score 5.5
Behavior: It is important that all associates understand how what they do contributes to the goals of the site at which they work, the business unit in which they
work and the overall corporate objectives.
Score Question
10 Q1 The site has a site-level x-matrix and it is posted in local language. If not posted, score is "0"
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, and Yes, and Yes, and

highest-priority highest-priority highest-priority
items are items are items are
No, but the BU Yes, and closest to the closest to the closest to the
No, but the BU Yes, both BU
or Corp X- Working on highest-priority center; and the center; and the center; and the
No
X or Corp. X-
Matrix is
posted
X Matrix is site level, but
posted in the not done
or Corp and
site level
posted
items are site level x-
closest to the matrix has
site level x-
matrix has
site level x-
matrix has
local language center been review or been review or been review or
updated within updated within updated within
the last 12 the last 6 the last 4
months months months
Comments/ The x-matrix should be posted in the local language, organized by priority and updated. The sites are expected to have either the LF Corportate X-matrix or
expectations: their corresponding Business uinit(s) X-matrix posted. The site level X-Matrix should be derived (cascaded) from these higher level documents.
Site
Response/ Last revised in March 2022, the update is published in the local language
Evidence
The site-level x-matrix cascades into other, lower-level x-matrices. The expectation is that the standard X-Matrix template is used. (Note: This means that there must be at
6 Q2
least 2 matrices; the site-level x-matrix plus one lower-level x-matrix. More than 1 lower-level x-matrix is desirable.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, and
Yes, and Yes, and
highest-priority
highest-priority highest-priority
items are
Yes, and items are items are
closest to the
highest-priority closest to the closest to the
No other
matrices X X X X X Yes items are center; and all
closest to the x-matrices has
center; and all
x-matrices has
center; and all
x-matrices
have been
center been updated been updated
updated within
within the last within the last
the last 4
12 months 6 months
months
Comments/ The site-level x-matrix should cascade into at least one lower-level x-matrix. Both should be posted in the local language, organized by priority and updated.
expectations: The expectation is that the x-matrix or x-matrices are posted in a place where associates will see them.
Site
Response/ Supply chain department have cascaded x-matrix. Score will increase to 10 after posting the 2nd level matrix and updated 3 times per year.
Evidence
Associates have seen and can explain (how to read) the Corp or BU-level x-matrix. Additionally, they understand the relationship between Corp or BU and Site and lower
lower level X-matrices. They also can state some aspect of how the appropriate level matrix relates to their job. (Note: There will likely be no Corporate-level x-matrix in
5 Q3
2021, so associates will be asked about BU-level or site-level and other, lower-level matrices.) This question will populate automatically when the employee survey
questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of
49.5-59.4% of 59.5-74.4% of 89.5-94.4% of 94.5-99.9% of associates OR
20-29.4% of 29.5-39.4% of 39.5-49.4% of 74.5-89.4% of
Greater than 0, associates OR associates OR associates OR associates OR everyone
associates OR associates OR associates OR associates OR
but less than 50-59% 60-74% 90-94% 95-99% understands
No 20-29% depth 30-39% depth 40-49% depth 75-89% (solid)
20% of (partial) depth (acceptable) (significant) (exceptional) and could
of of of depth of
associates of depth of depth of depth of explain it well
understanding understanding understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding understanding to external
visitors
Comments/
Employee Survey question, the score should be recorded on the Employee questions tab and will be reflected here for roll up
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
1 Q4 A3s (current and updated within the last 3 months) exist for the site's x-matrix annual improvement priorities (AIPs).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, for all Yes, for all Yes, for all

Yes, for at AIPs, but not AIPs, but not AIPs, and all
No
least 1 AIP, Yes, for 30- Yes, for 49.5- Yes, for 59.5- Yes, for 75.5- all have been
but less than 49.4% of AIPs 59.4% of AIPs 74.4% of AIPs 99.4% of AIPs updated within
30% of AIPs the last 6
X all have been
updated within
the last 3
X have been
updated within
the last 3
Expectation: A3s exist for all of the site's annual improvement priorities (in other words: for each line in the 12 o'clock position on the site-level x-matrix, there
should be an A3). The A3s should be owned by the associate indicated as the owner on the site-level x-matrix. If the site-level x-matrix has an AIP for
Comments/ saving $50,000, there should be a "parent" A3 for saving $50,000. From this A3, there may also be "child" A3s, for small projects that will help the site
expectations: achieve the $50,000 savings, and those may be owned by associates who are not listed on the site-level x-matrix. However, to get any points on this
question, the expectation is that the A3s are for the site-level, 12 o'clock position. If a site-level A3 was closed more than 3 months ago, it does not need to
have been updated in the last 3 months (in other words: a completed A3 does not need to be updated recently and will not count against the site).
Site
Response/ A3 - Space release
Evidence
Continuous Improvement (Also: Waste, Kaizen) Back to overall results tab
Section score 9.5
Behavior: The Continuous Improvement questions are intended to determine how well all employees understand Continuous Improvement and the tools that help us achieve
a CI culture.
Score Question
10 Q1 Associates can explain the 8 types of waste. This question will populate automatically when the employee survey questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No
Comments/ Employee Survey question, the score should be recorded on the Employee questions tab and will be reflected here for roll up
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
Associates can discuss and explain recent continuous improvement (waste-removal, 6S, LSGA, etc.) activities in their area. This question will populate automatically when the
10 Q2
employee survey questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No
Comments/ Employee Survey question, the score should be recorded on the Employee questions tab and will be reflected here for roll up
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
7 Q3 The site conducts external benchmarking and members of the 1% are included.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes; multiple
Yes; 1 or 2 sites
Yes; 1 or 2 sites sites / multiple
visited per year;
Yes, one Yes, one Yes, one Yes, one visited per year; times per year;
multiple 1%
Internal external external external external multiple 1% multiple 1%
team members
benchmarking benchmarking benchmarking benchmarking benchmarking team members team members
are included;
No (other Littelfuse visit every two visit every two visit per year; visit per year; are included; are included;
Trip reports
facilities) years; no 1% years; 1% team no 1% team 1% team Trip reports Trip reports
(lessons
conducted team members members members members (lessons (lessons
learned) are
included included included included learned) are learned) are
sent to
shared locally sent to
Corporate Lean
Corporate Lean
Site needs to share evidence that report was shared with Corp lean. Ideally, Evidence should be posted on the ELSS website. If pre-approved by Corporate, other LF
sites can be counted as "external" partners.
Comments/
expectations: Multiple one percenter requirement waived for sites with only 1 one percenter.
https://littelfuse.sharepoint.com/sites/enterpriseleansixsigma/Benchmarking/Forms/AllItems.aspx
Site Response/ Site did 1 bench marck, pendng to sent to Matt

Evidence
10 Q4 Kaizen blitzes are completed on time.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10% within last 20% within last 30% within last 40% within last 50% within last 60% within last 65% within last 75% within last 90% within last 100% within last
0%
12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months
Evidence from the Project tracker.
Definition of Blitz:
a. 3 to 5 day event leveraging a cross-functional team
Comments/
b. 3 – 5 day continuous duration
expectations:
c. 100% core team members should be dedicated during the event week and cross-functional team should be involved
d. Kaizen event result is related to department high-level objective (customer complaint, inventory turn, cycle time, scrap, safety and etc.)
e. Majority of the actions (70% - 80%) are completed during the event week and follow-up actions are tied with corresponding persons responsible and due dates
f. The kaizen results are proven to be still effective after 3 months
Site Response/
Planned 50, completed 29 . All on time, good problem statement and meaningful results
Evidence
10 Q5 The site is hitting the n/20 Kaizen Blitz target (# of KBs = # of associates at facility/20). (Note: evidence = Project Tracker)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
The site is The site is

0% 10% 25% 40% 50% 60% 75% 90% 100%
achieving n/17 achieving n/15
Comments and Confirm that projects being counted actually meet the definition of a Kaizen blitz. Total head count should INCLUDE shared services.
evidence:
Site Response/
HC 740/15=49, site did 50
Evidence
10 Q6 All kaizen blitzes in Project Tracker have an A3 with meaningful results demonstrating that the problem statement has been addressed.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 75% 90% 95% 100%
Comments/ Review selected completed A3's for results Assessor can pull (about 5 completed projects) for review
expectations:
Value Stream Mapping Back to overall results tab
Section score 8.3
Behavior: The Value Stream Mapping questions are designed to gage the sites use and maturity of the VSM process. VSM should be one of the main drivers of
continuous improvement ideas through out the site with full participation of all employees.
Score Question
10 Q1 All major product families manufactured within the facility have a current- and future-state value stream map, completed/updated within the last 12 months.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
None
X X 50% within last
24 months X 50% within last 55% within last 60% within last 75% within last 90% within last 100% within
12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months last 12 months
Comments/ Observe in the Gemba walk(s). VSM should be posted in the Gemba
expectations: Note that sites define the Value Stream Map target areas
Site
Response/ 12VS, all have current and future state maps revised in past 12 months
Evidence
Q2 All major business processes at the facility have a current- and future-state value stream map, completed within the last 12 months. (One per function is the minimum for a
9 10) Non-production VSMs (current and future states) are posted in a location visible to all associates. (Note: a VSM in an associate's private office is not an appropriate
location if that is the only location.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
In addition to a
score of 9. the
Greater than Greater than site has
All non- All non- Greater than Greater than 100% of non-
50% or less of 75% of non- 90% of non- identified the
production production 50% of non- 60% of non- production
non-production production production most critical
areas have areas have production production areas have
areas have areas have areas have cross
No VSMs, but current and current and areas have areas have completed
completed completed completed functional
various areas future state future state completed completed current state
current state current state current state business
have process process maps process maps current state current state and future
and future and future and future processes and
maps; Some for the highest- for the highest- and future and future state VSM
None state VSM state VSM state VSM have current
evidence of priority priority state VSM state VSM within last 12
within last 12 within last 12 within last 12 and future
progress being functional functional within last 12 within last 12 months. Wide
months. Some months. Wide months. Wide state VSM
made, but not process; Some process; Some months. Some months. Some spread
evidence of spread spread within the past
significant evidence of evidence of evidence of evidence of evidence of
progress being evidence of evidence of 12 months.
progress being significant progress being significant significant
made, but not significant significant Wide spread
made, but not progress being made, but not progress being progress being
significant progress being progress being evidence of
significant made. significant made. made.
made. made. significant
progress being
made.
Practical explanation: VSM should be accessible to all associates who need that access. Observe in the Gemba. Must have some VSM to score a 4 or
Comments/
better. Expectation is that the VSM process is driving continuous improvement. Progress should be evident (A3's in project tracker, physical evidence of
expectations:
change, before and after pictures and KPI graphs, etc.)
Site
Response/ 7 major processes identified, all have current and future state = 100% All are located on a single board in the office
Evidence
Action items (i.e., kaizen events, kaizen blitz events) that are needed to achieve the desired future state are clearly indicated on the VSM or in a corresponding file. They
10 Q3 are posted on the VSM board (not residing on a computer) and acceptable progress is being made in a timely manner as it relates to the action items needed for the future
states.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Action items Action items Action items Action items Action items
organized and organized and organized and organized and organized and
Progress being
posted on the posted on the posted on the posted on the posted on the
Action item list Action item list made; No
No action appropriate appropriate appropriate appropriate appropriate
exists on a exists on a significant
items or no VSM, No VSM, At least VSM, At least VSM, At least VSM, At least
computer, little computer, improvements
progress significant 1 significant 1 significant 2 significant 3 significant
or no progress some progress in last 6
improvements improvement improvement improvement improvement
months
in last 6 in last 6 in last 3 in last 3 in last 3
months months months months months
Observe in the Gemba. Review several VSM's to determine the overall final score with respect to the timing, amount and significance of the improvements.
Comments
Significant improvements: 1, 2, or 3 significant improvements are counted across *all* VSM's not each
and evidence:
Note: for virtual teams, items can be shared through virtual means (Teams, etc.)
Site
Response/
Evidence
7 Q4 Cycle times, takt times and VA/(VA+NVA) are calculated and posted on the site's value stream maps. (Ratios must make sense and be plausible)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Not on any
10% of VSMs 20% of VSMs 30% of VSMs 40% of VSMs 50% of VSMs 60% of VSMs 75% of VSMs 90% of VSMs 95% of VSMs 100% of VSMs
VSMs
Comments/
Observe in the Gemba
expectations:
Site
Response/ All elements for factory VSM, Admin VSM, missing takt time cycle time Opportunity to improve
Evidence
Associates can explain the Value Stream Map (VSM) for the department or process in which they work. This question will populate automatically when the employee
10 Q5
survey questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
None
They can quickly describe where to find the most recent version of the value stream map for their department or process. Additionally, they can explain the
Comments/
details of the map including, symbols and data contained on the map. They can also explain recent and upcoming improvements identified on the map.
expectations:
Site
Response/ 30/30=100%
Evidence
4 Q6 All associates have, within the last 3 years, participated in a Value Stream Mapping exercise.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
None
Comments/
Site should have records of ALL associate's participation in lean including VSM participation
expectations:
Site
Response/ about 40% Opportunity to include more people
Evidence
6S (Also: EHS) Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.7
Behavior: The 6S questions are intended to measure the implementation for the six phases of 6S through out the entire site. How well do the employees understand 6S, the visual results in both
the factory and office/common areas and the sites focus on safety are assessed in this tab.
Score Question
10 Q1 Associates can explain the importance of 6S as it relates to the overall lean initiative. This question will populate automatically when the employee survey questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of
0% of associates 10% of associates 20% of associates 30% of associates 40% of associates 50% of associates 60% of associates 75% of associates 90% of associates 95% of associates
associates
Comments/
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
Production/Factory Areas: Expected standards are posted in the workplace, regular audits/inspections are taking place and audit scores are posted with action items necessary to raise the score. Note: If areas
7 Q2 have high scores, but assessors find that the condition of the area does not seem to match those scores, an appropriate score will be selected. All scores referenced are measured on a 5 point scale per CHI-
LN20-001 [Note: This is weighted 50%.]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
All audits taking All audits taking All audits taking

All audits taking All audits taking
place and action place and action place and action
place and action place and action
items posted; items posted; items posted;
All audits taking items posted; items posted;
Progress being Progress being Progress being
Few audits taking Most audits taking Most audits taking place and action Progress being Progress being
All audits taking made in a timely made in a timely made in a timely
place; Action place; No action place and results items posted; made in a timely made in a timely
No audits place and action manner; All audits manner; All audits manner; All audits
items may or may items or results posted; No action Progress being manner; All audits manner; All audits
items posted have maintained a have maintained have maintained a
not be posted posted items posted made in a timely have maintained a have maintained a
monthly average a monthly average monthly average
manner monthly average monthly average
rating of 3.5 or rating of 4 or rating of 4.5 or
rating of 4.5 or rating of 4.75 or
higher for 6 higher for 6 higher for 6
higher for 1 year higher for 1 year
Observe during Gemba walk. Also, review audit records. The expectation is that the area looks like the posted standards and that the audit scores are consistent with what the assessor
Comments/
observes in the Gemba. At the assessors discretion, any significate safety violations found in an area can result in a score of "0" regardless of the appearance of the area or the historical audit
expectations:
scores.
Site Response/
Many changes and movements in the plant, also some auditor training correction
Evidence
Office/Administrative Areas: Expected standards are posted in the workplace, regular audits/inspections are taking place and audit scores are posted with action items necessary to raise the score. Note: If areas
6 Q3 have high scores, but assessors find that the condition of the area does not seem to match those scores, an appropriate score will be selected. All scores referenced are measured on a 5 point scale per CHI-
LN20-001 [Note: This is weighted 20%.]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
All audits taking All audits taking All audits taking
All audits taking All audits taking
place and action place and action place and action
place and action place and action
items posted; items posted; items posted;
All audits taking items posted; items posted;
Progress being Progress being Progress being
Few audits taking Most audits taking Most audits taking place and action Progress being Progress being
All audits taking made in a timely made in a timely made in a timely
place; Action place; No action place and results items posted; made in a timely made in a timely
No audits place and action manner; All audits manner; All audits manner; All audits
items may or may items or results posted; No action Progress being manner; All audits manner; All audits
items posted have maintained a have maintained have maintained a
not be posted posted items posted made in a timely have maintained a have maintained a
monthly average a monthly average monthly average
manner monthly average monthly average
rating of 3.5 or rating of 4 or rating of 4.5 or
rating of 4.5 or rating of 4.75 or
higher for 6 higher for 6 higher for 6
higher for 1 year higher for 1 year
Observe during Gemba walk, which should include areas outside of building. Also, review audit records. The expectation is that the area looks like the posted standards and that the audit
Comments/
scores are consistent with what the assessor observes in the Gemba. At the assessors discretion, any significate safety violations found in an area can result in a score of "0" regardless of the
expectations:
appearance of the area or the historical audit scores.
Site Response/
Average 3.6
Evidence
10 Q4 An injury / incident investigation program ensures that all accidents are investigated, root causes are identified and corrective action is quickly taken.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Investigated, root
Investigated, root Investigated, root
cause identified, Investigated, root
cause identified, cause identified,
corrective action cause identified,
No program in
place X X corrective action
taken (none done
in a timely
X taken (two or more
of these not done
X X corrective action
taken (all in a
X corrective action
taken (all in a
timely manner);
in a timely timely manner)
manner) Shared globally
manner)
Comments/ Site should have an EHS document that clearly states what types of incidents require a formal investigation and reporting. Look for a standard reporting format (like an 8D) that includes
expectations: containment action and root cause analysis. Containment should be immediate, permanent corrective action should be timely.
Site Response/
Use the global 8D form
Evidence
10 Q5 Needed items (equipment, carts, pallets of material, etc.) are in a marked/outlined, labeled location. (It is easy to see if something is missing or out of place)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of items 10% of items 20% of items 30% of items 40% of items 50% of items 60% of items 75% of items 90% of items 95% of items 100% of items
Comments/
Observe through out the site (production and non-production areas) during the Gemba walk
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q6 There is a documented process and procedure for every machine type and process for workplace ergonomics, and is it being followed.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Documented in Documented Documented
Not documented; Documented and
most places; not everywhere; everywhere;
not followed followed
followed followed in some followed in most
everywhere everywhere
everywhere places places
Comments/
Review documents and ask for evidence of adherence.
expectations:
Site Response/
Use quick exposure check to verify MA1-EHS40-0011
Evidence
10 Q7 Personal protective equipment requirements are clearly noted/posted and followed by associates and visitors.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Posted
everywhere;
Posted Followed by all
Posted
everywhere; associates and all
everywhere;
Posted in some Followed by all visitors; No
Followed by all
Not posted; Not places; Followed associates and all violations
associates;
followed by most visitors; No observed during
Visitors seen
associates violations assessment;
without proper
observed during Associates
PPE
assessment report/correct
violators
immediately
Comments/ Observe during Gemba walk. Signs should be posted at employee entrances and in areas that require additional PPE. Observe employees are wearing proper PPE in each area. As the
expectations: assessor, the site hosts should communicate to you the requirements for each area.
Site Response/
Signs posted and included in work instructions
Evidence
10 Q8 The site has a safety policy and all associates (including contractors) have been trained on the policy. (Note: Expectation is that ALL associates (not just new hires) have been trained.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Policy in place; All
associates trained
Policy in place; All
Policy in place; Policy in place; as part of new
No policy; No
training X 50% of associates
trained
X X 90% of associates
trained
X X X employee
orientation (i.e.,
associates trained
in safety policy on
Day 1
within 1 month of
hire)
Comments/ Review documentation and training records/policy. Also, as the assessor, were you given appropriate training on the site's safety policy when you first entered the property? (There should be a
expectations: list of employees that have been trained; if this is a part of new employee orientation, there must be documentation.)
Set-Up Reduction (Also: SMED) Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.2
Behavior: The time we spend in changing a production line from one specification to the next is the focus of SMED. The idea is to identify and eliminate waste, while
streamlining the remaining work to minimize the lines non-productive time
Score Question
10 Q1 Change-over instructions identify both internal and external actions and are visual in nature.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Brief internal
Brief internal and external
and external instructions;
Instructions, but Internal or Internal and Internal and
instructions; Emphasis is on
not very visual external external external
No Emphasis is on photos rather
(i.e., few instructions; instructions; instructions;
photos (or than words;
photos) Mostly visual Visual Highly visual
videos) rather Post set-up
than words checklist is
followed
Comments/ Ideally the site is following the Corporate policy and documentation. If not, the site is responsible for identifying both internal and external steps and communicate a
expectations: streamlined procedure to the operators with both words and pictures
Site Response/
Site is following the standard process
Evidence
10 Q2 Change-overs are done by specific, clearly-defined teams with clear structured, documented, and posted process instructions as to their job before, during, and after the change-over.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Done by
Done by
specific teams
specific teams
/individuals;
/individuals;
Clear
Done by Done by Clear
Done by instruction;
specific teams specific teams instruction;
specific teams Easy to verify
No /individuals, but /individuals; Easy to verify
/individuals; that
no clear Some clear that
Clear instruction technician
instruction instruction technician
/operator is
/operator is
certified to do
certified to do
job; Process in
job
place for 1 year
Comments/
Review the entire set up process on a couple of lines throughout the facility
expectations:
Site Response/ Specific, clearly-defined teams to realize the C/O posted in each Change Over Instruction. Operator/technician certification are aligned on the skill matrix. Opportunity is
Evidence to do something more visual for the operator
6 Q3 Change-over times are clearly posted at the job site with a target and recording of each change over. Results are regularly reviewed to determine if actual times meet the standard
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Posted, with
Posted, with
target, at all
target, at all
Posted, with machines,
Posted, with machines,
Nothing posted target, at all Results
Posted, without target, at some Results
at any machines, reviewed every
target, at some machines, reviewed every
machines; No Results week or every
machines results reviewed month,
targets reviewed every set-up,
annually improvement
6 months improvement
actions
actions
identified
identified
Comments/ Review in the Gemba. Procedure and expected times should be posted. Additionally, results should be recorded on the line and evidence of review and corrective
expectations: action (as needed) is evident
Site Response/ Target are in the visual instructions for C/O that is posted back of the production board; real/actual set up times are recorded on the same sheet, and actions are take if
Evidence not according to target. Reviewed monthly with some actions, but not formalized yet
0 Q4 As change-over times are reduced, lot sizes are reviewed and reduced periodically. (Note: Proof - SAP/MES lot size changes.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Evidence of lots Evidence of lots Evidence of lots Lot size has

Evidence of lots
size reduction size reduction size reduction been reduced
Never
X X X X X size reduction
on a line in the
last 12 months
on 25% of lines
in the last 12
on 50% of lines
in the last 12
on 75% of lines
in the last 12
on each line in
the last 12
months months months months
Comments/ Lot size can be reduced for various reasons, this question is looking for evidence that lot size reduction is being driven by improvements in set-up times. The site should
expectations: be able to show a link between lot size reduction and change-over reduction efforts
Site Response/
Site need to figure out how to measure and track again
Evidence
10 Q5 After a change-over, initial parts are verified for quality and correctness of set-up.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
On 100% of
On 100% of
On 20% of On 30% of On 40% of On 50% of On 60% of On 75% of On 90% of On 100% of production lines
Never production lines
production lines production lines production lines production lines production lines production lines production lines production lines for the last 2
for the last year
years
Comments/ This question is concerning first article inspection. This should be a quality procedure and the production department should be able to show evidence they are following
expectations: the procedure for every set-up
Metrics (Includes True North Metrics, Key Performance Indicators) Back to overall results tab
Section score 8.7
Behavior: The TNM questions primarily focus on metric reporting in the Global Metric System (GMS). The expectation is that the site is reporting all metrics on time.
Evidence for this tab is found in the GMS and during the Gemba walk.
Score Question
10 Q1 The site has set up True North Metrics (not including traditional factory metrics) in GMS.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of site-
All required
50% of site- 60% of site- 70% of site- 80% of site- 90% of site- 100% of site- level metrics All required All required
metrics for all
level metrics level metrics level metrics level metrics level metrics level metrics set up; some metrics for all metrics for all
value streams
No charts set up set up; set up; set up; set up; set up; set up; value stream value streams value streams
set up;
populated with populated with populated with populated with populated with populated with metrics set up; set up; have 1 set up; have 2
populated with
data data data data data data populated with year of data years of data
data
data
Note: sites with new/transferred lines have 6 months from start of production to get TNM set up for line. Sites do not get penalized for having fewer than 2
Comments/
years of data for transferred lines that have been operational for fewer than 2 years. Sites do not get penalized for less than 2 years of data for new True
expectations:
North Metrics
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q2 The site has set up Traditional Plant Metrics in GMS and are using GMS for the monthly plant review.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of
Sites have Sites have
traditional
50% of 60% of 70% of 80% of 90% of 100% of been using been using
metrics set up; Sites are using
traditional traditional traditional traditional traditional traditional GMS for the GMS for the
populated with GMS for their
No charts set up metrics set up; metrics set up; metrics set up; metrics are set metrics set up; metrics set up; past 6 months past 12
data and have monthly plant
populated with populated with populated with up; populated populated with populated with for their months for
the previous 2 reviews
data data data with data data data monthly plant their monthly
years year to
reviews plant reviews
date and goals
Comments/
Sites do not get penalized for having fewer than 2 years of data for new traditional metrics if the data was not collected in the past
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q3 All True North Metrics charts (site level, VS level) and traditional metrics are current (not behind by more than 1 month).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% current 10% of charts 20% of charts 30% of charts 40% of charts 50% of charts 60% of charts 75% of charts 90% of charts 95% of charts 100% of charts
Comments/
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
8 Q4 All GMS Bowling Charts are fully updated (not behind by more than 1 month) and all required data is filled in.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
All comments
are clear,
There are
concise,
comments
explain the
entered for all
0% of charts 20% of charts 40% of charts 50% of charts 60% of charts 66% of charts 75% of charts 90% of charts 100% of charts problem and
metrics that
describes
are not
actions to
meeting goal
correct the
issues
Comments/
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q5 All True North Metrics and traditional charts (site level, VS level) have owners and goals/targets.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of 100% of
0% of charts 20% of charts 40% of charts 50% of charts 60% of charts 66% of charts 75% of charts 90% of charts 100% of charts charts, for 1 charts, for 2
year years straight
Comments/
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q6 The site's True North Metrics are posted in a public area.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, in a
Yes, in a location to
location where Yes, in a Yes, in a which all
few associates location (or location to associates
are likely to locations) which all have daily
No
X X X visit; OR Only
1 set posted
X where some
associates are
X associates
have daily
X access and
likely visit and
when 2 would likely to visit, access and electronic
be more but not all likely visit display is
appropriate being used in
the main lobby
Comments/ Expectation is that if more than 1 building on a site/campus, multiple sets are posted and visible for production and administrative personnel. Suggestion is
expectations: that a set be posted on the production floor at a minimum. Note: electronic display are encouraged.
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q7 Value stream True North Metrics are posted at the value stream
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of 100% of
0% of value 20% of value 40% of value 50% of value 60% of value 66% of value 75% of value 90% of value 100% of value
charts, for 1 charts, for 2
streams streams streams streams streams streams streams streams streams
year years straight
Comments/
The expectation is that the metrics are displayed near the value stream map/tiered meeting boards.
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
Site-Level True North Metrics and traditional metrics meet or exceed goal, the goal has not been made easier (unless there is justification) and the trend is in the appropriate
2 Q8
direction.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of 100% of
0% of charts 20% of charts 40% of charts 50% of charts 60% of charts 66% of charts 75% of charts 90% of charts 100% of charts charts, for 1 charts, for 2
year years straight
Comments/
Review in GMS
expectations:
Site Response/
21/50 meet = 42%
Evidence
Standard Work Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.0
Behavior: This set of questions looks at the use and maturity of Leader Standard Work (LSW) by the site's leadership team. Additionally, we look at the processes
around development, deployment and maintenance of work process documentation. Standard Work and SOP's are both included
Score Question
4 Q1 Site leadership has standard work documents (LSW) and are following them. (Note: "Supervisor" is equivalent to "line leads," "VS leads," etc.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
33% of site 33% of site 50% of site 50% of site 75% of site 75% of site 90% of site 100% of site 90% of site 100% of site
leaders leaders leaders leaders leaders leaders leaders leaders leaders leaders
("manager" ("supervisor" ("manager" ("supervisor" ("manager" ("supervisor" ("manager" ("manager" ("supervisor" ("supervisor" and
and above) and above) and above) and above) and above) and above) and above) and above) and above) above) Evidence
Evidence LSW Evidence LSW Evidence LSW Evidence LSW Evidence LSW LSW is being
is being is being is being is being is being reviewed and
None reviewed and reviewed and reviewed and reviewed and reviewed and updated as needed
updated as updated as updated as updated as updated as every month
needed every needed every needed every needed every needed every
month month month month month
Comments/ Ideally all leaders in the plant, regardless of level will have a LSW document. Records should indicate regular use and maintenance over a period of time
expectations:
Site Response/ 50% of site leaders have LSW
Evidence
7 Q2 All operations have work instructions (SOPs) and they… [Note: to earn a 4, 2 must also be true; to earn a 7, 2 and 4 must also be true; etc.]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
…have a
...are located defined owner;
at/near the operators
No (i.e., above …are reviewed
sentence cannot
be completed)
X work station
(easily
accessible to
X suggest
changes;
engineering
X X ...are reviewed
quarterly X X monthly or every
time they are used
operators) approves
changes
Comments/ Review multiple documents during Gemba walk.

expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q3 Lean Standard Work (not work instructions) in manufacturing cells exists and is designed to prevent over burdening of the associates (Muri), Must be displayed and followed.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, in 10% of Yes, in 20% of Yes, in 30% of Yes, in 40% of Yes, in 50% of Yes, in 60% of Yes, in 75% of Yes, in 90% of Yes, in 95% of Yes, in 100% of
No
cells cells cells cells cells cells cells cells cells cells
Comments/
Review the Lean Standard Work for various lines. Looking for line balance and takt time issues. In other words, the operators are not over burdened.
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
Lean Standard Work (in manufacturing cells and for office areas) is regularly reviewed and updated as necessary to ensure we have documented the best way we currently know
6 Q4
how to do that task.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Monthly; on all Monthly; on all
Every 2 years Every 2 years Annually on Quarterly on Monthly; on all
Annually on all Quarterly on production production
No
X on some
production
lines
on all
production
lines
some
production
lines
production
lines
some
production
lines
all production lines but not in lines and in
lines any office some office
production lines
and in all office
areas
areas areas
Review the Lean Standard Work for various lines or processes. There should be evidence that the documentation matches the work being done on line.
Comments/
Additionally, the Lean Standard Work documentation should be up to date and show evidence of continuous improvement in the revision history. (Note:
expectations:
Assessors should look for evidence that associates who do the job are included in the reviews and updating.)l
Site Response/
Evidence
There is a "playbook" for managing each value stream, which includes documented Lean Standard Work for different takt times as well as managing the required labor to meet
5 Q5
production; playbooks reviewed and updated as needed.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
For some
value streams;
Includes all Yes, and all
For some Yes, and all
required playbooks
value streams; playbooks have
No
X Includes some
required
X X content OR
For all value
streams;
X X Yes, for all
value streams
have been
reviewed
within the last
been reviewed
within the last 3
content months
Includes some 6 months
required
content
Comments/ Review during Gemba. The "Playbook" should be a collection of all the standard work documentation for a given work cell or value stream
expectations:
Site Response/ Procedures for high runners do not change much so not all lines have a playbook for different takt times.
Evidence
6 Q6 Audits are in place to ensure adherence to work instructions (SOP) and operations manuals.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Monthly; on all Monthly; on all
Every 2 years Every 2 years Annually on Quarterly on Monthly; on all Monthly; on all
Annually on all Quarterly on production production
on some on all some some production production lines
No production all production lines but not in lines and in
production production production production lines and in all and in all office
lines lines any office some office
lines lines lines lines office areas areas for 1 year
areas areas
Comments/ Ideally part of a Layered Process Audit (LPA) process. Additional evidence could come from other audit sources including regular internal or external quality
expectations: system audits
Site Response/
Evidence
Production associates are empowered to request/make changes to standard work (with appropriate approval). This question will populate automatically when the employee
10 Q7
survey questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of associates 100% of associates
Comments/ Review evidence of suggestions made by employees that have been implemented. Review the site's suggestion system, tiered meeting boards, VSM's, etc.
expectations:
Site Response/
0%
Evidence
8 Q8 A formalized document control system exists for Lean Standard Work, including appropriate signoff levels/personnel.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, there is a
Yes, there is a Yes, there is a system (includes
system (does system appropriate
No
X X X X not include
appropriate
X X (includes
appropriate
signoff); Evidence
of communication
signoff) signoff) to those affected by
change
Ideally the site is using the Littelfuse Global Document Management System (GDMS). Otherwise, review current system in use and determine if the
Comments/
approval/sign-off process is appropriate
expectations:
Final
Flow and Pull (Includes Level Loading, Plant Layout, Product and Information Systems, Kanban, Production Scheduling) Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.11
Behavior: The Flow and Pull questions are concerned with the plant and production floor layout. The expectation is that a systematic approach and lean tools are being
used to design the layout and flow. It is also expected that this effort is on-going and continuous.
Score Question
6 Q1 Kanban systems are in place and operating effectively.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Throughout Throughout
In most Throughout
No
X In some
production areas X production
areas
X the production
area
X the production
area; In some
office areas
X the production
and office
areas
Comments/ Observe during Gemba walk. Kanban's should be visible, calculated and have a pull replenishment method. Look for (and ask about) opportunities in the office
expectations: areas
Site Response/ Throughout production floor, not in the office yet

Evidence
0 Q2 Product families have been converted to flow; Batch sizes and/or WIP have been reduced.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of
0% of product 10% of product 20% of product 30% of product 40% of product 50% of product 60% of product 75% of product 90% of product 95% of product
product
families families families families families families families families families families
families
This question is about product families. Ask how many product families have been converted. Lean team should be able to explain how the Products were
Comments/ analyzed and divided into the various lines. Results from the question should be consistent with Q8 about the number of lines that have been converted to Flow.
expectations: Look for evidence that batch size of orders has been reduced over time and that the conversion to flow is the driver (not SMED). For WIP reduction, look for a
monthly inventory report showing Days of WIP inventory.
Site Response/
Evidence
Point of use inventory is used in production and there are clearly-defined roles (i.e., water spider) as to who is responsible for bringing the necessary material to the precise location
10 Q3
when it is needed.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of
product
families
Comments/ Observe in the Gemba. Ask about who, when and how the point of use inventory locations are restocked. System ideally should be visual and set up as a pull
expectations: (not push)
Site Response/
Evidence
9 Q4 All material flows are based on pull signals that are controlled/initiated by customer demand and/or internal consumption.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% for 1 100% for 2
No 20% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
year years
Comments/
Observe in the Gemba, review VSM's, ask associates how materials are replenished, what are the pull signals.
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
7 Q5 All inventory buffers are planned, sized, and controlled.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% for 1 100% for 2
No 20% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
year years
Comments/
Observe in the Gemba. Ask questions about how the inventory quantity was calculated, how the location was chosen, and how is the location controlled.
expectations:
Site Response/ Molding and SMT
Evidence
8 Q6 The manufacturing process utilizes FIFO and/or FEFO or similar approach to plan delivery.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of
product
families
Comments/ FIFO = first in, first out; FEFO = first to expire, first out
expectations: If the site claims that SAP is how they control FIFO, they will need to answer how they prevent a material handler from picking an incorrect lot
Site Response/ SAP and color coding

Evidence
Production lines incorporate flow principles, minimize travel, facilitate communication among team members, and minimize distance between operations. (i.e., u-shape, straight line,
5 Q7
1-piece flow, etc.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
30% of 40% of 50% of 60% of 90% of 95% of 100% of
0% of production 10% of 20% of 75% of
production production production production production production production
lines production lines production lines production lines
lines lines lines lines lines lines lines
Comments/ Observe in the Gemba, also review various VSM's. Flow should be evident. Look at line lay-out, material flow, distance traveled, inventory levels, etc. The
expectations: answer to this questions should be consistent with Q2 about the number of families that have been converted to flow
Site Response/ New transformers line converted to U shape, ATS converted to straight line
Evidence
Process villages (i.e., departments with one sole function; Welding Dept. that feeds entire plant) and monuments (large pieces of equipment that cannot easily be moved) have been
9 Q8
minimized.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Somewhat; A Yes; Only 1 or
No; Multiple There are no
few villages or 2 villages or
villages or villages or
monuments monuments
monuments exist monuments
exist exist
Comments/ Observe in the Gemba and ask questions
expectations:
Site Response/ Molding and SMT
Evidence
Final
Visual Control (Includes Andon) Back to overall results tab count questions 8
Section score 9.1 count score 8
difference 0
Behavior: Proper visual controls can reduce and even eliminate the need for meetings to communicate status through out the facility. The questions in this section
cover some of the more common approaches used to create a visual factory.
Score Question
10 Q1 Associates can identify what the andon signals mean. This question will populate automatically when the employee survey questions are answered. Employee Questions Q8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
10 Q2 Visual controls and Metrics are easy to understand and visitors can "read the workplace" with little help (i.e., know what is going on (on track? off track?) within 10 seconds).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Visual controls
Visual controls
Some visual Several visual used
Several visual used
No visual controls in controls in throughout
controls in
place
X place, but not
easily
X place, but not
easily
X controls in
place, Easily
understood
X throughout
production
area; Easily
X production and
office area;
understood understood Easily
understood
understood
Comments/ Observe in the Gemba. The assessor should be looking for elements like Andon lights, inventory pull signals, day-by-hour boards, Tiered meeting boards
expectations: with information about the cell TPM and 6S audit information, A3's and CI improvement projects, etc.
Site Feedback from visitors is positive, minor findings; Visuals controls in place helps associates to know current status.
Response/
Evidence
8 Q3 Visual controls are current (i.e., charts are up to date).

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Some visual Some visual Most visual All visual All visual
No visual controls in controls in controls in controls in controls in
controls are
current
X production
areas are
X production and
office areas
X production and
office areas
X production
areas are
X production and
office areas
current are current are current current are current
Comments/ Verify in the Gemba. Of the visual controls in place, are they up to date with current information. Assessor might ask who is responsible for updating the
expectations: data to confirm there is a process and owners.
Site
Response/ All Charts up to date; Many boards in the production areas, all support departments with functional board and 6'S visual standard posted in place
Evidence
Production associates know whether they are on track, ahead of, or behind schedule. This question will populate automatically when the employee survey questions
10 Q4 Employee Questions Q9
are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
10 Q5 For areas/lines/departments that have fallen behind schedule, timely actions are taken to address the problem(s).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Action item list

up to date; All
items have
Some of the Most of the Action item list
No owners; All
time time created
items have
due dates that
are met
Observe in the Gemba. The site could present records of where action was taken when the line/cell was behind. They could also, show actions and
Comments/
comments on their current day-by-hour boards. Ask about process documentation, how are issues recognized?, by who?, what actions should be taken?,
expectations:
and when/how does an issue escalate?
Site Tier meetings in place with escalation boards, Fast response boards, detailed AIR for each; also, actions seen on hr x hr boards. Hr x hr board using green
Response/ and red colors to show if met/not met.
Evidence
10 Q6 There is a person assigned to answer the calls of team members, with the authority to make decisions.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, for all

Yes, for all production
Yes, for most Yes, for all production lines;
No one
assigned X X X production
lines
X X X production
lines
lines and
information is
information is
posted;
posted Backup
identified
Comments/ This should be more formal than the supervisor get a call when something isn't right. Is the process documented, is the information posted in the Gemba,
expectations: how is it updated and maintained when changes occur?
Site Group leader for each area and backup associate identified in tier 1 meeting board.
Response/
Evidence
10 Q7 Andon signals are used and fully operational. Clarified

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, for most Yes, for most Yes, for most Used for all Used for all Yes, for all
No andon production production production production production production
signal in use lines; 50% lines; 75% lines; All lines; 50% lines; 85% lines; All
functional functional functional functioning functioning functioning
Comments/
Observe in the Gemba. Maybe ask what some of the signals mean. Production areas (e.g., molding) are treated like production lines.
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
5 Q8 Shelving appropriately identified/marked with min/max levels; Associates can easily identify min/max levels.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
All shelves are
marked; All
Shelves are associates
not marked; know; Review
Some shelves
Additional Min/max and All shelves are process in
are marked;
shelving is
added when
more inventory
X stop signals
not easily
understood
X X Some
associates
X X marked; All
associates
understand
X place to
ensure levels
are current
understand
shows up and based on
(unplanned) takt
time/customer
demand
Comments/ Observe in the Gemba. Look at supermarkets and point of use inventory locations. Ask: is there a visual system in place to trigger a pull signal for
expectations: replenishment?
Site
Response/
Evidence
Final
Total Productive Maintenance (Includes Jidoka and Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE)) Back to overall results tab
Section score 6.8
Behavior: Total Productive Maintenance is the most effective means by which a plant can improve their equipment reliability and therefore the bottom line. This set of questions covers all
of the elements of the LF TPM program. It is expected that each site will implement each element
Score Question
10 Q1 There is a TPM program in place focusing on all elements of the LFOS Maintenance Manual.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No* *If no, the score for the TPM section is a "0." Identify which, if any, elements a site is working on and score related questions as appropriate. Yes
Comments/ All elements must be addressed in the TPM program. Ideally the site is following the Corporate policy, if not, the local document should be reviewed to determine if it addresses all
expectations: elements.
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q2 There is a dedicated Maintenance group.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Group focuses Fully trained and Fully trained and Fully trained and
Group focuses
mainly on certified team; certified team; certified team;
mainly on
Group focused firefighting; Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance
firefighting; Some
on repair and Almost no accounts for 10% accounts for 30% accounts for 70%
equipment down
firefighting only equipment down or more of all or more of all or more of all
for more than 48
for more than 48 maintenance maintenance maintenance
hours
hours activities activities activities
Comments/ There is a Maintenance team with fulltime dedicated LF employees. Are they trained and certified to do the work? Also, the site should be tracking and trending planned
expectations: maintenance verses unplanned maintenance. Tracking and trending mean time to repair (MTTR) to confirm the length of downtime.
Site Response/
Yes there is a group 28 tech plus 5 leaders Planned is 86% in December Above 80% entire year. MTTR is about 31 mins
Evidence
9 Q3 Management fully supports TPM.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
All 8 elements of All 8 elements of

TPM have a TPM have a
Management All 8 elements of
focus and focus and
clearly TPM have a
Management improvement improvement
understand the focus and
clearly plans; all plans; all
Little support Management difference improvement
understand the elements (and/or elements (and/or
from clearly between "repair" plans; all
difference pillars) have an pillars) have an
management; understand the and elements (and/or
between "repair" owner or owners; owner or owners;
TPM rarely difference "maintenance"; pillars) have an
and Charts indicating Charts indicating
mentioned; "run- between "repair" "Repair" vs. owner or owners;
"maintenance"; "Planned" vs. "Planned" vs.
to-failure and "Maintenance" is Charts indicating
"Repair" vs. "Unplanned" "Unplanned"
mentality" "maintenance" tracked; Efforts "Planned" vs.
"Maintenance" is maintenance are maintenance are
are in place to "Unplanned"
tracked posted; Trend is posted; Trend is
shift more work maintenance are
in appropriate in appropriate
to "Maintenance" posted
direction for 1 direction for 2
year years
This question is for the site/operation leadership. Ask for them to explain the difference between repair and maintenance (unplanned vs planned) and is that information being
Comments/ tracked over time. If site has completed and documented a JIPM company benchmarking, an extra point will be added to their score with a maximum score of 10 possible
expectations:
On the TPM Board, the site should display weekly chart of planned vs. unplanned maintenance, per the TPM Manual.
Site Response/
Evidence
9 Q4 Maintenance team has a skills matrix with current state, ideal state, and training plans
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Future/ideal state Future/ideal state

cross-functional cross-functional
Current cross- Future/ideal state Future/ideal state
Cross-functional training needs training needs
functional cross-functional cross-functional
factory/area identified; Posted identified; Posted
factory/area training needs training needs
training needs in an area in an area
training needs identified; not yet identified; being
not defined associates can associates can
defined fully met fully met
easily access; at easily access; at
60% of goal 85% of goal
Comments/
expectations:
Site Response/
Observe train matrix 30/290 still open = 90%
Evidence
7 Q5 Technician Score Card: Technicians have development plans, are cross-trained, and all technicians are up to date on certification requirements.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
All technicians
All technicians
All technicians All technicians are cross-trained
All technicians are cross-trained
are cross-trained are cross-trained and capable of
are cross-trained and capable of
and capable of and capable of working on
and capable of working on
working on working on almost all
Some, but not all, All technicians working on almost all
almost all almost all machines in their
technicians have have Progress being almost all machines in their
machines in their machines in their area of
No plans in place development development made against machines in their area of
area of area of responsibility;
plans for cross- plans for cross- plans area of responsibility;
responsibility; responsibility; Test
training training responsibility; Test
Certification Certification Requirements
Certification Requirements
Requirements Requirements and Certification
Requirements and Certification
are not all up to are mostly up to Requirements
are all up to date Requirements
date date are mostly up to
are all up to date
date
Comments/
Maintenance technicians have a training plan that includes cross training and any certifications that are required or needed
expectations:
Site Response/
Training for maintenance technicians is being reinstated.
Evidence
All Repair and Maintenance Technicians are part of Self Directed Work Teams (LSGA) and have related goals. (Note: the expectation is that R&M Techs have their own LSGA teams/meetings, even if
1 Q6
they participate in other departments' meetings.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
R&M associates
participate on a
LSGA Training
LSGA Training LSGA Training LSGA Training dedicated R&M
Completed, 90%
No R&M LSGA Completed, 25% Completed, 50% Completed, 75% LSGA team and
of R&M team on
Teams of R&M team on of R&M team on of R&M team on are meeting
a dedicated R&M
an LSGA team an LSGA team an LSGA team goals for
LSGA team
completed
projects
Comments/
All maintenance technicians are expected to be members of a dedicated maintenance LSGA team. This team(s) should focus on the maintenance processes and their improvement.
expectations:
Site Response/
A team of technicians will be formed and is expected to participate in an LSGA event.
Evidence
8 Q7 OEE (following the SEMI E10 standard per the LFOS TPM Manual) is measured and is at world-class levels.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
OEE measured
Majority of OEE
Site has a with capabilities OEE for all
Uptime Uptime measurements Average OEE Average OEE
documented to data-mine machines
Uptime not Uptime Measured; No Measured; No are automated above 80% for all above 85% for all
machine down to the (production and
measured measured equipment under equipment under and a major machines (for machines (for
overhaul plan in reason code for facilities) above
50% Uptime 75% Uptime focus of R&M last 3 months) last 3 months)
its PFEF any unplanned 90% for 6 months
performance
downtime
Comments/
OEE (using the Semi E10 standard) is tracked, trended, analyzed and communicated in a visual way in the Gemba. Site should display a chart of OEE on the TPM board.
expectations:
Site Response/
From Metric system average for all areas measured is about 81%
Evidence
9 Q8 Preventive Maintenance (PM) procedures exist and are followed.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PM procedures PM procedures
PM procedures PM procedures PM procedures
exist for all exist for all
PM procedures exist for most exist for all exist for all
production & production &
for less than 25% production production production
Support Support
of all production equipment. equipment. equipment.
equipment. equipment.
machines Conformance Conformance Conformance
Conformance Conformance
above 50% above 60% above 75%
above 90% 100%
Comments/ Sources of data for this question include MES preventative maintenance schedule and completion records. Also, can be accomplished with a visual board. Conformance refers to
expectations: the percentage of PM's conducted on time
Site Response/ Conformance of preventive maintenance is around 91%; there is a software (fastmaint) to schedule PM activities; procedure MA1-PCE25-0007. Shelf used to put the PM orders for
Evidence all areas in the plant with color code, Engineers are responsible to audit if PM was done or not.
1 Q9 Autonomous Maintenance (AM) procedures exist and are followed.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
AM procedures AM procedures
AM procedures AM procedures AM procedures
exist for all exist for all
AM Procedures exist for most exist for all exist for all
production & production &
for less than 25% production production production
support support
of all production equipment. equipment. equipment.
equipment. equipment.
Machines Conformance Conformance Conformance
Conformance Conformance
above 90% above 100%
Comments/
Observe in the Gemba. Procedures and schedule should be at or near each line along with records of completion. Conformance refers to the percentage of AM's conducted on time.
expectations:
Site Response/
Procedures exist, however training was restricted due to covid Started year at 61% ended with 49%
Evidence
4 Q10 Predictive Maintenance (PdM) procedures exist and are followed. For equipment targeted for PdM
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PdM procedures PdM procedures

PdM procedures PdM procedures PdM procedures
Site conducts exist for all exist for all
exist for some exist for most exist for all
annual risk targeted targeted
targeted targeted targeted
No PdM Process assessment to production & production &
production production production
or Procedures identify support support
equipment. equipment. equipment.
equipment that equipment. equipment.
Conformance Conformance Conformance
requires PdM Conformance Conformance
above 90% above 100%
Site is required to identify equipment in need of PdM and maintain a list of action and frequency. Conformance is the percentage of identified work that is completed with records. If
Comments/
an machine/equipment type does not require PdM, justification must be provided based upon risk. Look for evidence of the annual risk assessment (updated PdM list, attendees,
expectations:
Action Items, etc.)
Site Response/
Evidence
6 Q11 Spare Parts are grouped and classified; Reviewed annually.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
All parts grouped All parts grouped All parts grouped All parts grouped
as class A, B, or as class A, B, or as class A, B, or as class A, B, or
C; All parts C; All parts C; All parts C; All parts
Spare parts not Most spare parts
reviewed reviewed reviewed reviewed
readily available; grouped as A, B,
annually to annually to annually to annually to
No review of or C; Infrequent
ensure correct ensure correct ensure correct ensure correct
spare parts min/max level
min/max levels; min/max levels; min/max levels; min/max levels;
needs reviews
Average spare Average spare Average spare Average spare
parts turns above parts turns above parts turns above parts turns above
2 3 4 5
Ask how the site's spare parts inventory is managed. Data for inventory turns is now tracked and reported by the local finance team. (It use to be a Corp. report)
Useful formulas:
Comments/
> Annualized Expense (Issued from W/H) = Last 3 Months Total Expense x 4
expectations:
> Inventory Turns = Annualized Expense / Moving Average 3 months inventory
> Inventory Days = 365 days / Inventory Turns
> Inventory Days = (365 days x Moving average 3 month inventory) / (Last 3 Months Total Expense x 4)
Site Response/
Master spare part list, ABC Turns are not measure, estimated to be 3-4 times
Evidence
7 Q12 Early Equipment Management: Equipment meets Littelfuse-provided specification.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
33% of the 66% of the 66% of the
All equipment
equipment equipment equipment All equipment
purchased in the
purchased in the purchased in the purchased in the purchased in the
last 12 months
last 6 months last 6 months last 12 months last 2 years met
met the
met the met the met the the Littelfuse-
Littelfuse-
Littelfuse- Littelfuse- Littelfuse- provided
provided
provided provided provided specification (on
No equipment specification (on
specification (on specification (on specification (on time, on budget,
meets time, on budget,
time, on budget, time, on budget, time, on budget, meets throughput
specification; meets throughput
meets throughput meets throughput meets throughput capacity,
Specification not capacity,
capacity, capacity, capacity, ergonomic
provided ergonomic
ergonomic ergonomic ergonomic design)
design)
design) design) design) submitted to the
submitted to the
submitted to the submitted to the submitted to the supplier; Safety
supplier; Safety
supplier; Safety supplier; Safety supplier; Safety requirements met
requirements met
requirements met requirements met requirements met on 100% of
on 100% of
on 100% of on 100% of on 100% of equipment
equipment
equipment equipment equipment
Early Equipment Management means minimizing the time to achieve stable operation during the installation, test-run, and handover phases. This requires
Comments/
techniques for discovering and responding-to problems during each phase. It mandates collecting data for future equipment designs. The initial goal is rapid and trouble free start up.
expectations:
Site should be following document CHI-OP20-0004 (TPM Manaual), CHI-EQP20-0001 (New Equipment Specification) and/or equivalent specifications.
Site Response/
6 of 8 machines used the process/template
Evidence
Project Management Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.6
Behavior: Many continuous improvement efforts are implemented through a project. This tab looks at the discipline of project management with in the site.
Score Question
6 Q1 Associates can explain the importance of A3s and how to fill them out. This question will populate automatically when the employee survey questions are answered.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Comments/
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
10 Q2 A3s led by associates at this site have appropriate problem statements. (Statements address the what, where, when, how much, how do I know.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of A3s 10% of A3s 20% of A3s 30% of A3s 40% of A3s 50% of A3s 60% of A3s 75% of A3s 90% of A3s 95% of A3s 100% of A3s
Comments/ Assessors should pay special attention to projects whose A3's are authored by non-1% associates. For example an A3 from a LSGA project. Review a
expectations: sample of A3's and evaluate the quality of the problem statement
Site
Response/
Evidence
6 Q3 Departments are using A3s for team-based problem-solving efforts.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of departments departments departments departments departments departments departments departments departments departments
departments (production (production (production (production (production (production (production (production (production (production
and office) and office) and office) and office) and office) and office) and office) and office) and office) and office)
Comments/ Are the various functional departments in the plant using A3's as part of their continuous improvement effort. Note: manufacturing can be counted as one of
expectations: those departments. Total departments that are using A3's/ total departments in plant. Note that this applies to the most recent year.
Site
Response/
Evidence
Cross-functional projects utilize Gantt charts, and Gantt charts are updated on a regular basis. (Note: Visual boards, or similar are an acceptable replacement for Gantt
6 Q4
charts.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of projects
projects projects projects projects projects projects projects projects projects projects
Comments/
Sample several projects and review the method and quality of project and governance tracking
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
10 Q5 Complex projects are being led by trained/capable associates.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of projects
Other than NPD projects. Review a sample of projects, determine who the leader is, and understand that person's experience level and training that
Comments/
qualifies them to run a project a challenging project. This determination is left to the discretion of the assessor. (Make sure to have experience levels noted,
expectations:
which can include previous work or area experience.)
Site
Response/
Evidence
6 Q6 Complex/customer-critical projects have evidence of risk mitigation efforts.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of projects
Comments/
Other than NPD projects. Looking for risks that have been identified and mitigated or a mitigation plan is in place.
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
6 Q7 Projects over the last year have been delivered on time.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of projects
Comments/
Source of data is the Project Tracker or any other project tracking system in use at the site
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
8 Q8 Project Managers are managing an appropriate number of projects.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Most PMs are Most PMs are Most PMs are
Most PMs are All PMs are
focused on 15 focused on 10 focused on 5
focused on 1 focused on 1
projects projects projects
20 or more major project, major project,
(combination (combination (combination
projects and no more and no more
of major and of major and of major and
than 2 minor than 2 minor
minor) at one minor) at one minor) at one
projects projects
time time time
Comments/
Other than NPD projects.
expectations:
Final
Inventory Management (Includes Shipping, Receiving, Material Handling) Back to overall results tab
Section score 8.2
Behavior: This tab is aimed at how well we manage our inventory of raw, work in progress (WIP), and finished goods.
Score Question
10 Q1 Parts are consumed on a first-in, first-out (FIFO) or first-expired first-out (FEFO) basis.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Throughout the Throughout the
Nowhere
X X X In most places
X X X Throughout the
facility
facility for two
years
facility for three
years
Comments/
Verify the employees can not "pick" a different lot than SAP (or other ERP system) tells them to pick.
expectations:
Site Response/ FIFO in SAP and color coding by month
Evidence
10 Q2 Finished goods inventory locations are clearly marked.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No locations 10% of locations 20% of locations 30% of locations 40% of locations 50% of locations 60% of locations 75% of locations 90% of locations 95% of locations 100% of locations
marked marked marked marked marked marked marked marked marked marked marked
Comments/ Observe in the Gemba. This is all inventory locations through-out the plant. Includes raw, WIP and finished goods locations.(Don't forget pallet locations on the floor). The physical
expectations: location must be labeled with an identifier in addition to the label on the material in that location.
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q3 Material handling equipment is appropriate and enables safe and efficient movement of materials.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No; An incident Yes, and there Yes, and there Yes, and there Yes, and there
has occurred
within the last
year
X X No
X X X have been no
incidents in the
last 6 months
have been no
incidents in the
last year
have been no
incidents in the
last 18 months
have been no
incidents in the
last 2 years
Observe in the Gemba:

Comments/ 1) Are associates moving heavy items with appropriate aids (carts, fork lifts, etc)?
expectations: 2) Is material handling equipment kept in good working order and have appropriate safety features?
3) Ask about any incidents related to material handling equipment
Site Response/
Evidence
Final
Supply Chain (Includes MRO Spend, VA/VE) Back to overall results tab
Section score 5.6
Behavior: The supply chain questions focus on how well the site manages and drive continuous improvement regarding supplied materials and the relationship with
our suppliers
Score Question
7 Q1 Percentage of time our suppliers meet (or beat) the "On time to promise" delivery date?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% on time 100% on time 100% on time

Less than or Greater than Greater than Greater than Greater than Greater than Greater than
0 to promise for to request for 6 to request for 1
equal to 70% 80% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99%
6 months months year
Comments/ The expectation is that the site tracks (and trends) this metric and issue a customer complaint or Corrective action request (CAR) as needed. Look for
expectations: evidence of both
Site Response/
Evidence
0 Q2 Premium freight costs (PFCs; abnormal freight to meet customer demand) are decreasing year over year.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PFCs have PFCs have

PFCs have
decreased by decreased by
decreased by
40% or more 50% or more
50% or more
PFCs have PFCs have PFCs have PFCs have PFCs have PFCs have PFCs have for 2 years for 2 years
over the last
No change in last decreased by decreased by decreased by decreased by decreased by decreased by decreased by straight. Or straight. Or
year. Or the
year, or PFCs 10% or more 15% or more 20% or more 25% or more 30% or more 35% or more 40% or more the PFC for the PFC for
PFC for the
have increased over the last over the last over the last over the last over the last over the last over the last the entire site the entire site
entire site
year year year year year year year have been less have been less
have been less
than $20K for than $20K for
than $20K for
the last 2 the last 3
the last year.
years. years.
Comments/
The site is expected to track and trend PCF. The graph should be posted in the Gemba
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
8 Q3 All key suppliers are certified for "dock to stock" status, requiring only skip lot (audit) incoming receiving inspection.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of key 100% of key
20% of key 30% of key 40% of key 50% of key 60% of key 75% of key 90% of key 100% of key suppliers; Also suppliers; Also
No key suppliers
suppliers suppliers suppliers suppliers suppliers suppliers suppliers suppliers 30% of other 50% of other
suppliers suppliers
Comments/ The site should provide the documentation for how the manage incoming inspections. This documentation must describe the skip lot process and criteria.
expectations: Confirm the site is following the process
Site Response/
Evidence
5 Q4 100% of suppliers ship 100% quality (i.e., to spec) production material/parts. (Note: this includes gasses, consumables, etc., but does not include prototype parts.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Fewer than Fewer than

Fewer than 2% Fewer than 1% No bad No bad
0.5% of 0.1% of No bad
Greater than 3% of shipments of shipments production production
shipments shipments production
of shipments received have received have material or material or
received have received have material or
received have included included parts have parts have
included included parts have
included defective defective defective been received been received
defective defective been received
materials or parts materials or materials or in the last 3 in the last 6
materials or materials or in the last year
parts parts months months
parts parts
Comments/ Looking for the percent of incoming material lots that are rejected for not meeting the quality expectations. This includes all materials (gases and
expectations: consumables too). Do not include prototype parts. Data should be tracked, trended and visual
Site Response/
Evidence
9 Q5 There is a process for non-conforming incoming material to be dispositioned and taken care of in a timely manner.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Yes, and all Yes, and all Yes, and all Yes, and all Yes, and all
incoming incoming incoming incoming incoming
No
X X Yes material
dispositioned
material material material material
dispositioned dispositioned dispositioned dispositioned
within 2 days within 1 day within 12 hours within 8 hours within 4 hours
Comments/ Measure, track and trend the time required to disposition rejected incoming material. Site must provide evidence documenting whether dispositions are
expectations: "timely" (procedure is not sufficient)
Site Response/
Evidence
Site is working with top 10 suppliers (by dollars spent or some other measure) on lean initiatives (electronic pull signals; cycle time reduction efforts; etc.). (Note: If a site has
0 Q6 fewer than 10 suppliers, that number becomes the equivalent of a 10. i.e., if a site has 6 suppliers and has worked on lean initiatives with all 6 suppliers for the last year, site
receives a 9.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Top 10
Top 10
No key suppliers
X X Top supplier
Top 2
suppliers
Top 3
suppliers
Top 5
suppliers
Top 8
suppliers
Top 10
suppliers
suppliers for
the last year
suppliers for
the last 2
years
Comments/ Does the site have a top 10 supplier list? Is there any formal documentation on how LF would engage this list of suppliers to help improve quality, delivery
expectations: or cost? What evidence can the site present to demonstrate continuous improvement efforts (projects) with their top 10 suppliers?
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q7 Site is using Value Analysis/Value Engineering principles to improve product / process cost.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
On 2 or more On 3 or more On 4 or more On 5 or more

Not in use
X X X X X On 1 product products per products per
year year
products per
year
products per
year
Comments/
Look for evidence of projects or Kaizen events that were aimed and improving product cost.
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
Final
Six Sigma (Includes SIPOC) Back to overall results tab
Section score 1.1
Behavior: This set of questions is designed to measure the commitment and execution of the local Six Sigma program
Score Question
5 Q1 All associates employed with Littelfuse for six months or more are certified Yellow Belts (or higher).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of associates 5% of associates
Number of associates = site population at the time of the audit. Associates with less than 6 months of service are not included in this number. Certified YBs are currently employed
(does not include previously employed associates who have left LF) associates.
Score = List of associates achieving at least YB certification / number of associates. This means YB, GB, BB, MBB certifications are all included in the numerator.
Comments/
expectations: Example 1: 398 site population - 23 associates < 6 months of service = 375 associates. YB+ Certified associates (still LF employed) = 208 / 375 = 0.5546 or 55%. The level is 6.
Example 2: 1489 site population - 182 associates < 6 months of service = 1307 associates. YB+ Certified associates (still LF employed) = 719 / 1307 = 0.5501 or 55%. The level is 6.
Site Response/
320 YB / (963 actual-342 less than 6 months) HC = 52%
Evidence
3 Q2 Site Supervisors/Managers/Directors have Green Belt Certification. (Note: "Supervisor" is equivalent to "line leads," "VS leads," etc.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% of
0% of leadership 20% of leadership 30% of leadership 40% of leadership 50% of leadership 60% of leadership 70% of leadership 80% of leadership 90% of leadership 95% of leadership
leadership
Number of leaders = site supervisors, managers, and directors at the time of the audit. Certified GBs includes legacy GBs originally recognized in LF, external GBs approved by
Corporate ELSS, and current certified GBs from 2016 Six Sigma program launch.
Comments/ Score = Certified GB (or higher) leaders / number of leaders. This means GB, BB, MBB certifications are all included in the numerator.
expectations:
Example 1: 26 site leaders. Certified GB leaders = 11 / 26 = 0.4231 or 42%. The level is 3.
Example 2: 13 site leaders. Certified GB leaders = 6 / 13 = 0.4615 or 46%. The level is 3.
Site Response/
9 /19 = 47%
Evidence
Final
Lean New Product Development (Includes 3P) Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.3
Behavior: Is the site incorporating Lean Design processes and tools into their New Product Development (NPD) processes
Score Question
3 Q1 Lean Product Development tools are used to document design criteria (i.e., Critical-to-Quality, Critical-to-Cost lists).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Used on 50% Used on 75% Used on 100% Used on 100%

Used on 100%
Not used on
any projects X X of projects for
the last 6
months
X of projects for
the last 6
months
X of projects for
the last 6
months
of projects for
the last year
X of projects for
the last 2
years
Look for evidence the New product development process has incorporated Critical-to-quality (CTQ) and Critical-to cost (CTC) processes into the NPD
process. Site should identify CTQ's and CTC's, prioritize those lists and then systematically drive improvements
Comments/
expectations:
Tools accepted: House of Quality (QFD), Engineering Requirements form, Risk analysis tool, CTQ / CTC (Phase 6), or other approaches that fulfill the intent
of documenting CTQ/CTC requirements and priorities
Site
Response/
Evidence
10 Q2 Lean Product Development tools are used to document design selection (i.e., Pugh Matrix, Process Design Evaluation w/0-5 scoring).
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Used on 100%
Not used on
any platforms X X of platforms for
the last 6
months
X of platforms for
the last 6
months
X of platforms for
the last 6
months
of platforms for
the last year
X of platforms for
the last 2
years
Comments/
Review the sites use of Pugh matrix for product design selection.
expectations:
Site
Response/
Evidence
4 Q3 3P events (Design, Process, Production) are used for new platform launches. (Note: scoring expectation is that all three event types are used on 100% of projects.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% (i.e., all
60% (i.e., two 100% (i.e., all
30% (i.e., one of the 3P event
of the 3P of the 3P event
30% (i.e., one of the 3P event types have
0% (i.e., none events types types have
of the 3P event types is used) been used) on
of the 3P event are used) on been used) on
types is used); on all new all new
types are all new all new
For some platform platform
used) platform platform
launches launches in the launches for
launches in the launches in the
last year the past 2
last year last year
years)
Comments/
Review the site's use of all 3 types of 3P events. Ask about preparation, the actual event and improvement actions taken after the event.
expectations:
Site
SP10806, Review prep email sent to cross functional team, event took 2-3 hrs. This has elements of a 3p but was really a design review. Customer driven
Response/
design, leads to design reviews. Opportunities are mostly in the process.
Evidence
Visual Project Management tools and techniques are used for New Product Development efforts. (Note: focus is on individual project boards, as opposed to multi-project
10 Q4
boards.)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0% of projects
Observe in the Gemba or as evidence presented from digital collaboration solutions (ex. Mural).
Expectations for board: captures status, progress and plans. Recommended elements include:
1) Displays 2-3 week action plan
Comments/
2) Displays project timeline (for whole project)
expectations:
3) Displays planned work
4) Displays unplanned work
5) Has "Parking Lot"
6) Problem solving space (displays risks/concerns/blockers/issues...)
Site
NPD project board divided by phases with critical path actions; weekly meetings with core team; all the actions are tracked on an excel file. Include the 100%
Response/
of projects in the NPD project board.
Evidence
7 Q5 Market Requirements Events capturing Voice of the Customer (VOC) are used for new platform launches.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Used on 100%
of platform of platform of platform of platform
Not used
X X launches for
the last 6
X launches for
the last 6
X launches for
the last 6
of platform
launches for
the last year
X launches for
the last 2
months months months years
Review use of cross functional market requirements events and the capture and analysis of VOC for new platform projects.
Comments/
A platform refers to a family of products with a common set of design features. The individual products within the platform are distinguished based upon one
expectations:
controlled property, such as the amperage at which they are designed to operate. For example, Minifuse could be considered a platform, and the individual
products are fuses rated for different amperage: 2A, 5A, 10A, 12A, 15A, 20A.
Site
Specs are provided by the customer. Events done via Webex together with the customer; Plan together with sales and customer are participating; No
Response/
platforms in 2022 Keep previous score
Evidence
10 Q6 Planning/Risk Mitigation Events are used for new platform launches.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Used on 100%
of platform of platform of platform of platform
Not used
X X launches for
the last 6
X launches for
the last 6
X launches for
the last 6
of platform
launches for
the last year
X launches for
the last 2
months months months years
Does the site use risk identification and mitigation tools/process for platform launches on both the project schedule and product design.
Comments/
A platform refers to a family of products with a common set of design features. The individual products within the platform are distinguished based upon one
expectations:
controlled property, such as the amperage at which they are designed to operate. For example, Minifuse could be considered a platform, and the individual
products are fuses rated for different amperage: 2A, 5A, 10A, 12A, 15A, 20A.
Site
Response/ Risk analysis and actions performed on all products and platforms. Found in Prism
Evidence
7 Q7 With regard to New Product Development, improvement efforts have been made in variety reduction (i.e., part re-use), and increasing commonality and modularity.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
System or
process in
place to collect
Some Significant best practices
No evidence of
effort X X X evidence and
effort
X X evidence and
effort
X X and lessons
learned to
facilitate reuse
of engineering
knowledge
Discuss the sites practice of collecting lessons learned for various projects. Is it consistent from project manager to project manager? Is it written down in a
Comments/
document? Who attends the review and are action items identified and implemented. Site should also be able to identify design features and part re-use
expectations:
success stories.
Site
Response/ Site improve process to ask about component re-use. Reviewed ABU global database Need to develop written process and train
Evidence
5 - Phase New Product & Process Development - Operations Site Assessment (PMO Council GLM Leaders) Back to overall results tab
Section score 4.79 Note: Q14 is a standard question so all questions are now averaged.
- Green shaded cells have been edited to improve clarity
Score Employee Readiness: Resource Planning, Participation and Capacity Management

7 Q1 How do the NP&PD teams at the Site ensure capacity, appropriate core team and support function resource availability and participation, to execute 5-phase projects?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Resource planning and

capacity management for
Resource planning and
There is a dedicated Core NP&PD is part of a business
All projects show that Site capacity management for
Team at the Site assigned to For each project the Site core Hour tracking of Site core unit management reviews. A
There is a documented team The site has guidelines or resources are balanced and Site has a total project list or NP&PD is part of all business
all NP&PD projects including team resources are tracked team members is used to set Resource planning and YoY comparison is available
There is no evidence of list which shows the Site rules for number of projects within the acceptable resource list that shows unit management reviews. A
EHS as well as the required on the total projects list so more accurate guidelines or capacity management for demonstrating improvements
Resource tracking resource planning within the
core team of: Project Lead,
team members
that it is clear how many
for every core team member threshold for number of
rules for balance of resources
hours committed and hours
NP&PD is part of all site
YoY comparison is available
in resource productivity
Site for NP&PD projects. responsibilities for each assigned to projects from the projects per resource. Hours available for NP&PD projects demonstrating improvements
Design Engr, Prod Mngr, projects there are for each by projects supported at the management reviews. through analysis of limiting
project activity in PRISM. site. are tracked for Site core team by Site core team resources. in resource productivity
Quality, and Mfg at a resource site factors. Continuous
members. through analysis of limiting
minimum improvements are
factors.
documented and available for
review.
Project Leader is closing Project Leader is closing

Project Leader is closing all Project Leader is closing 25%
>90% of activities within the >75% of the activities for Full core team participation in Full core team participation in Full core team participation in
Team participation in activities within the project; of the other core team
project, minor participation other core team members / closing NP&PD activities for closing NP&PD activities for closing NP&PD activities for
PRISM no active participation from members activities within the
from one or two other core no participation from Quality, 60% of the projects. >80% of projects. 100% of projects.
the core team members project
team members Ops or EHS
Resource Tracking: Provide a project tracking list, guidelines on how many projects a core team member should be working on, how engineering hours are tracked and where resource loading is reviewed.
Team Participation to be verified by the PLIO: Five projects from PRISM will be audited. Team participation will be the focus. Site should show the standard template to compare with the projects being reviewed.
Site Response/
Evidence
Employee Readiness: Core Team & Management Engagement and Empowerment
5 Q2 Are core team members and management involved in design reviews, exception reviews and phase reviews to actively manage priorities, risks and escalating issues to influence project trajectory?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A regular meeting occurs - Meeting minutes includes

There is only evidence of Site regular communications Site regular communications
evidence is a meeting notice review of site developed
management review of Meeting notice has standing Meeting minutes includes Site regular communications with management are with management are
There is no evidence of on calendar for site NP&PD NP&PD leadership metrics used to drive
Management Participation projects after issues have agenda to follow that includes attendees, action item with management are standardized including standardized including
communication at site of management including participates in all phase continuous improvement of
in Reviews occurred and project is review of project priorities register, including owners standardized including metrics review and metrics review with evidence
project status'. project leads with a standing reviews (1,2,3,4,5) launch (e.g. on time to
escalated from project leader and review of risks and status metrics review. continuous improvement of continuous improvements
agenda to follow, including sample builds for DV-PV-
to BU management review. actions are documented. in place.
review of escalations Run@Rate)
Two out of the three

Two our of three functions,
EHS, Quality and Operations EHS, Quality and Operations functions, EHS, Quality and EHS, Quality and Operations EHS, Quality and Operations EHS, Quality and Operations Full core team participation in Full core team participation in
EHS, Quality and Operations EHS, Quality and Operations Full core team participation in
Ops Participation in do not sign off on (approve) sign off on 40% of the phase, Operations sign off on 60% of sign off on 60% of the phase, sign off on 80% of the phase, sign off on 100% of the approving phase reviews for approving phase reviews,
sign off on fewer than 20% of sign off on 40% of the phase, approving phase reviews and
Reviews phase, design and/or
the projects design and exception reviews
design and exception reviews the phase, design and design and exception reviews design and exception reviews phase, design and exception all projects (PjM, Engr, Ops,
design reviews for all projects
design reviews and exception
exception reviews for all projects exception reviews for all for all projects for all projects reviews for all projects Quality, Prod Mngt) reviews for all projects
for all projects
projects
Secondary Qualitative /
Risk register is current with
Qualitative Risk analysis is Quantitative Risk analysis is
Risks are identified in phase Risks are identified in phase Risks are identified in phase mitigation responses for the Evidence of successfull risk Evidence of successfull risk
No evidence of risk performed (the risk register performed (e.g. Delphi
Risk Mitigation Tool identification available
1 on <25% projects and 1 on 50% projects and 1 on all projects and
has the probability and Technique; Decision Tree,
top risks planned response strategies for the response strategies for all
documented in a risk register documented in a risk register documented in a risk register (considering different top 5 risks on all projects risks on all projects
impact of risks provided) bow-tie or Monte Carlo
response strategies).
analysis; SWIFT, etc.)
Comments and evidence: Audit five projects, confirm approvals from Ops, Quality and EHS on either a phase review, design review or exception review (if applicable) in each. Preferably choose a different phase or design review within the different projects. Site should be able to show a risk
register with follow up action items. Evidence of management review of the key deliverables such as team mtg minutes.
Site Response/
Evidence
Employee Readiness: Engagement and Empowerment

5 Q3 How does the site staff and build capabilities to meet or exceed capabilities needed for 5-phase projects?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Training records include 5-
Phase NP&PD training. This
5-Phase playbook training All core team members with All core team members with All core team members with All core team members with
must be completed for All core team members that
There is no evidence of Functional leaders of core and LEAN NPD is completed site have completed 5-Phase site longer than 24 months site longer than 12 months site longer than 6 months
Training records exist for Operation Leaders and support NPD projects from
Training Records training records for core team
Operations Leaders Quality members involved Site have completed 5-phase
team members have skills for all core team members playbook, Lean NPD, have completed trainings for have completed trainings for have completed trainings for
members at the site. matrices for the role (PjM, Engr, Ops, Quality, Greenbelt, and Design for Six LEAN NPD, GB, DFSS, and LEAN NPD, GB, DFSS, and LEAN NPD, GB, DFSS, and
with NP&PD projects (new playbook training
Prod Mngt) Sigma trainings. Playbook Playbook Playbook
hires less than 6 months
excluded)
5-Phase playbook training,
Operations leaders (new
LEAN NPD training, Six The skills matrix is up to date Per the skills matrix the
hires less than 12 months
Sigma Greenbelt training, by team member with skills Operations leaders at the site
Skills Matrix & Training records exist for excluded) have experience
and Design for Six Sigma completed and level achieved are trainers for NP&PD
Training Plan NP&PD quality persons as a facilitator of a 3P event
training are in skills matrix (e.g. basic, certified, expert, playbook (new hires less than
for design for
plan for quality and launch trainer) 6 months excluded)
manufacturability
leaders
Review training records and skills matrix. Launch Leaders has been replaced with Operations Leaders (which may be Manufacturing Engineers, Launch Leaders, etc.). All core team members working on projects at this Site should have the appropriate training, even if the
Comments and evidence:
core team member is located at a different location.
Site Response/
Evidence
Technology Readiness - Design for "X"
5 Q4 How does the Site participate in design reviews in time to influence opportunities for savings, manufacturability, quality, reliability, and competitive differentiation?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Participants from sites and
comments are recorded on L-
The only evidence of Site 2 Checklist for PV Design Participants from sites and Participants from Sites and 3P events used competitive
Participants from Sites and
There is no evidence of cross participation in design Review (Phase 4) comments are recorded on L- comments are recorded on L- teardown analysis and
Team Participation in comments are recorded on L- 100% of the L-2 Checklists
functional participation in reviews is to discuss issues 2 Checklist for P3 Design 2 Checklist for Concept benchmarking to further
Reviews 2 Checklist for Supplier (five) are used on all projects
design reviews after design is considered Participants from sites and Review (Design Freeze / Design Review (Phase 1 / improve Pugh Matrix criteria
Design Review (Phase 2)
frozen comments are recorded on L- Phase 3) Phase 2) for selecting best alternatives
2 Checklist for VA/VE Design
Review (Phase 5)
3P Events occurred, with
3P Events occurred, with 3P Events occurred, with 3P Events occurred, with 3P Events occurred, with
participants from site or
participants from site or participants from site or participants from site or participants from site or
hosted at site, on >100% of
3P Events hosted at site, on >35% of all hosted at site, on >50% of all hosted at site, on >75% of all hosted at site, on >90% of all
all active H1 (Type 1)
active H1 (Type 1) projects active H1 (Type 1) projects active H1 (Type 1) projects active H1 (Type 1) projects
projects as well as all H1+
as well as all H1+ and H2. as well as all H1+ and H2. as well as all H1+ and H2. as well as all H1+ and H2.
and H2.
3P events used existing

3P events included supplier
process and product
Design/Process participation as part of
benchmarking to create
Alternatives evaluating alternatives
Pugh Matrix target criteria for
selected
selecting best alternatives.
For all active projects the record of participation in design reviews is the L-2 Checklists. Five projects will be audited. We are looking for evidence of core team involvement in the process, incl. Mfg, Sales, Engr, Prod Mngt, etc. Record of technical analysis tools being
utilized. Review the list of 3P events which occurred vs. the list of active type 1 projects
Site Response/
Evidence
Technology Readiness - On-Site Capacity and Capabilities for Reverse Engineering (Business Unit Assessment), Prototyping, Failure Analysis, Quality Inspection and Metrology (PIR / Calibrated / Correlated). Product Validation (BU Assessment)
5 Q5 What resources are provided by the Site to improve capability and capacity for early product builds, failure analysis, and inspection? If any evidence is found of product or process change without proper change management process followed then this is a zero.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
The site core team members Site core team completes 7 90% active projects have All active projects have zero
Site does inspection reports
There is no evidence that site are a part of sample builds Site core team members lead Site core team completes 7 Defect failure analysis from Section report for Run @ zero defects associated with defects associated with
but there is no evidence of
supports product builds, only when build needs to all readiness reviews Section report for Run @ each step of the process is Rate / Pre-production trial run product measurement product measurement
Prototypes failure analysis, and occur at the site. Not all
review with design
(prototype, pre-launch, Rate / Pre-production trial run conducted for prototype, DV, for all projects AND all (dimensional) issues from (dimensional) issues from
engineering for signed
inspection reports. projects have participation launch) for all projects and PV builds. previous builds for DV and already approved tooling and already approved tooling and
approval of report
from site in early builds PV processes. processes.
Problem solving tools and Zero PCNs or ECOs have

root cause analysis tools are been initiated by site request,
Inspection reports completed
shown to be used for on any active project, related
Root Cause Analysis by the site are reviewed and
categorizing, quantifying, and to change of product or
signed off by design engineer
reducing/eliminating potential process specifications due to
failure modes defects.
Site launch leader and quality

engineer input the results to
the KPIs worksheet (1 of the
KPI Worksheet 5 mandatory NPD Metrics)
for the DV, PV, and Pre-
Production builds
Comments and evidence: Review the 7-section report, Q&R Goals template and PV Test results. Review the containment plan and the prototype build review documentation.
Site Response/
Evidence
Goals Readiness: Setting, Measuring, and Drive for Continuous Improvement

Quality and Quality Management Systems (QSM)
Section score 7.2 Note that Question 8 is worth 25% of the overall score in this PO
Behavior: The Quality Management System questions look at the site's maturity in the use of several co
Score Question
9 Q1 Robust Control Plans (CP) are established, continuously improved and updated to drive enhanced Q
0 1 2 3
Person
General Work Rough structure
No Manufacturing Dependent Instructions (WI): using WI's:
Plans in place Practice: Unit Operations based Unit Operations based
Rough Manufacturing SOP's in place. SOP's in place.
Plans in place.
Comments/ Plant quality manager provides evidence for released product families (Randomly
expectations: time in-process adjustments. RFC: Response Flow Checklist
Site Response/
Evidence
8 Q2 Efforts have been made to optimize in-line and final inspection by associates.
0 1 2 3
No attempt to Plan in place to Historical Plan in place to
optimize in-line or optimize in-line inspection data is convert EOL
final inspection and final being analyzed manual visual
inspection across and used to drive inspection to AOI
the facility process and
product
improvement
Comments/ The goal of Automated Optical Inspection (AOI) is to minimize visual inspection b
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q3 Customer Quality Complaint Management

0 1 2 3
No structured Customer Issue resolution Problem solving
process in place to Complaints are team defined, tools appropriately
capture, track and captured & consistent use of utilized, customer
respond to managed in problem solving tool 1st pass
customer quality Corrective Action is not present (LF acceptance of LF
complaints Tracking Tool; 8D template, 5 8D is > 50%
limited coordination Why, Ishikawa, etc)
in place to drive to
rapid resolution
1. Customer complaint management – are the tools we deploy & advocate being u
Comments/ communication – as measure by customer acceptance of our work in the 1st pass
expectations: customer commit date
Site Response/
Evidence
6 Q4 Rolled Throughput Yield (RTY): Increased Yield performance drives Continuous Improvement of Qua
0 1 2 3
None of the top 5 Average weekly Rework levels
products Yields are >80% have averaged
(technologies) on the top 5 <3% for all
have an average products product families
weekly Yield of (technologies) over the past 12
<70% manufactured months
over the past 6
months
Rolled Throughput Yield (RTY) = P(FPYi) = FPY1*FPY2*FPY3…….FPYN where
ASSESSMENT NOTES:
Overall scores should be based on the lowest scoring individual Product or Produc
Comments/
They cannot be higher than any requirement that is not fully met. For example:
expectations:
- If any of the top 5 Technology products has a Yield <80%, the score cannot b
- Without a statistically based Maverick lot identification method, the score cann
- If rework is permitted at any step in the process flow, the score cannot be >5
- If Raw Throughput Yield is not measured, the score cannot be ≥6
Site Response/
Evidence
6 Q5 Repeat quality issues from customer complaints and external audits have been eliminated. Correctiv
0 1 2 3
One or more No repeat issues
major audit have occurred in
nonconformance the last six
in the last year months
Comments/ Review CA Web for any repeat issues. Note: For 0 Score, Major Audit Noncon
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
7 Q6 Quality uses ELSS to drive systematic product quality improvements

0 1 2 3
> 80% Quality 50% of Yearly 75% of Yearly

Not using ELSS
Engineers have Quality ELSS Quality ELSS
to drive product
attended LF Projects have Projects have
quality
Green Belt been been
improvements
Training implemented implemented
Comments/ Formerly the "Zero Defects. Zero Excuses" program. The expectation is that the
expectations: product and process quality levels
Site Response/
Evidence
7 Q7 PFMEAs have been reviewed (and updated as necessary) at least once in the past year.
0 1 2 3
20% 30% 40%

No PFMEAs; No
reviewed/updated reviewed/updated reviewed/updated
updates in the
within the past within the past within the past
past 180 days
Year Year Year
Comments/ Look at several Process - Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA) for various
expectations: evidence in the revision history of a linkage between customer complaints and a re
Site Response/
Evidence
Approved Global QMS processes are being used (Global Document Management System, Supplier
7 Q8
documents noted in CHI-QS10-0001.]
0 1 2 3
0% of processes 25% of processes 40% of processes 50% of processes
Comments/
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
10 Q9 Cost of Poor Quality (COPQ)

0 1 2 3
Littelfuse COPQ
Each COPQ COPQ Metrics
COPQ metrics metrics and
metric has an are systematically
are not tracked definitions are
owner collected
used
Comments/ 2019 COPQ metrics: 1. Internal - Yield Fallout, 2. Premium freight, 3. RMA costs,
expectations: (monthly in 2021), 7. Customer Settlements (1x/year -- NOT part of Plant LFOS
Site Response/
Evidence
7 Q10 Supplier Quality Management and Supplier Development (SQMS)

0 1 2 3
1. Global SQMS
is in place to 1. Metric [SQI]
track and often meet the
manage supplier target set
No system
Incoming quality complaint
established on
inspection is 2. Supplier
supplier quality
implemented 2. SQMS Metrics scorecard is
management and
inspect material are established to implemented to
supplier
quality measure supplier measure overall
development
quality supplier
performance performance
[SQI]
Comments/
Key Suppliers must be either 10% of suppliers or a minimum of Top 10.
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
2 Q11 Product and Process Change Management (PCCM) - NEW QUESTION

0 1 2 3
The PCCM
No system
procedure is also
established for There is a PCCM
PCCM is ad-hoc followed by the
product and procedure that
with little to no product
process change the plant
documentation development
management complies with
teams and
(PCCM)
suppliers
Comments/ Plant PCCM Goals: 1) Cycle time for Manufacturing Change Orders (MCO). 2) Ye
expectations: Scrapped inventory and RMA based on previous years actuals (e.g. 2021 is PCCM
Site Response/
Evidence
Final
Back to overall results tab
orth 25% of the overall score in this POCa
maturity in the use of several core Quality processes and metrics along with our Customer care processes.
oved and updated to drive enhanced Quality & Reliability in all products
4 5 6 7 8 9
Partial Definition Full Structure of Focused & Deployment of

of CP: CP: Responsive CP: Process Robust CP: Linked PFMEA:
Fill in specifics-- Response:
Basic elements of Adds SPC, 10 KPI's, Adds Error Proofing & Live response based
Parameters, Specs,
CP--Part, Plant & OCAP and APC. sufficient In-Process on SOD level.
Metrology, Sampling,
general flow. Traceability. Monitors..
etc.
r released product families (Randomly choose 5). Advanced Process Control (APC): Direct linkage between OOC events and OCAP to rea
se Flow Checklist
by associates.
4 5 6 7 8 9
50% of 75% of No lines have
production lines production lines had EOL manual
have no EOL have no EOL visual inspection
manual visual manual visual by associates for
inspection and inspection and 1 year
converted to AOI converted to AOI
AOI) is to minimize visual inspection by associates.
4 5 6 7 8 9
Customer 1st pass Customer 1st pass Customer 1st pass Customer 1st pass Customer 1st pass Customer 1st pass
acceptance of LF acceptance of LF acceptance of 8D is acceptance of 8D is acceptance of 8D is acceptance of 8D is
8D is > 70% 8D is > 85% > 85%, response > 85%, response > 85%, response > 90%, response
time to customer time to customer time to customer time to customer
original commit original commit original commit original commit
date > 50% date > 70% date > 85% date > 90%
he tools we deploy & advocate being used in issue resolution teams? 2. Quality of problem solving approach, evidence provided & clarity o
acceptance of our work in the 1st pass acceptance of the LF 8D issued. 3. Speed of our execution – as measured by % on time response to
drives Continuous Improvement of Quality & Reliability across all Product families
4 5 6 7 8 9
Statistical Bin Rework is not RTY has The percentage RTY has RTY has
Limits, identifying allowed on any averaged >85% of Maverick lots averaged >90% averaged >95%
Maverick lots & processing steps on the top 5 per week has on the top 5 on all products
statistical outliers, where the final products (or been reduced to products (or (or technologies)
exist for all product is technologies) <3% on each of technologies) manufactured in
Product families impacted (Re-test manufactured in the top 5 product manufactured in the past 12
is okay, for the past 12 families the past 12 months
example) months months
FPY1*FPY2*FPY3…….FPYN where FPYi is the First Pass Yield of individual steps in the process flow, with no rework included.
st scoring individual Product or Product Family.

t that is not fully met. For example:
s has a Yield <80%, the score cannot be >2
ot identification method, the score cannot >4
process flow, the score cannot be >5
ed, the score cannot be ≥6
audits have been eliminated. Corrective actions have been implemented effectively. (Note: CA Web should be used as the source.)
4 5 6 7 8 9
No repeat issues No repeat issues
have occurred in have occurred in
the last year the last 2 years
e: For 0 Score, Major Audit Nonconformances NOT Major Customer Complaints
ements
4 5 6 7 8 9
ELSS Certified
ELSS Projects ELSS Projects ELSS Projects
professional
are targeted to have improved have improved
provides Quality
improve LFOS Quality Metrics in Quality Metrics
ELSS Project
Quality Metrics past 12 months Year-over-Year
Oversight
program. The expectation is that the quality team will develop GB's and BB's and that they are systematically driving improvement in the
east once in the past year.

4 5 6 7 8 9
50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 95%

reviewed/updated reviewed/updated reviewed/updated reviewed/updated reviewed/updated reviewed/updated
within the past within the past within the past within the past within the past within the past
Year Year Year Year Year Year
Effects Analysis (PFMEA) for various products. Current last revision date is expected to be with-in the past 12 months. Also, look for
between customer complaints and a revision to the corresponding PFMEA to mitigate the risk of future complaints or repeat issues.
ument Management System, Supplier Management, Internal Audit, Risk Management, etc.) [Note: The scoring should be done against the
4 5 6 7 8 9
100% of
100% of
60% of processes 70% of processes 80% of processes 90% of processes processes for 1
processes
year
4 5 6 7 8 9
COPQ driving COPQ metrics COPQ metrics COPQ metrics COPQ metrics
COPQ targets
continuous are meeting 50% are meeting 75% are meeting 95% are meeting or
are part of Plant
improvement of Plant Quality of Plant Quality of Plant Quality exceeding Plant
Quality goals
projects goals goals goal Quality goals
out, 2. Premium freight, 3. RMA costs, 4. Supplier RMA, 5. Sorting and rework costs, 6. Customer Shipment Level (CSL) Final inspection
s (1x/year -- NOT part of Plant LFOS Assessment)
MS)
4 5 6 7 8 9
Proactive local
supplier
> 80% of critical / improvement / Littelfuse ELSS Littelfuse ELSS
Supplier Quality Total number of
key supplier supplier program is program is
Engineers (SQE) key supplier
scorecards are development implemented to at implemented to at
are actively quality complaints
"Green" in program is least 30% of least 70% of
managing their are declining
quality, delivery implemented, as critical /key critical /key
suppliers
and cost part of continuous suppliers suppliers
improvement
effort
ers or a minimum of Top 10.
UESTION
4 5 6 7 8 9
Plant has
The plant is using maintained MCO
Plant is achieving Plant is achieving Plant is achieving
Aras PRISM for Goals established performance at
50% of 80% of 95%+ of
PCCM and all for Manufacturing >95% of goal for
Manufacturing Manufacturing Manufacturing
SMEs have been PCCM two or more
MCO Goals MCO Goals MCO Goals
trained consecutive
years
acturing Change Orders (MCO). 2) Yearly Scrapped inventory and RMA due to manufacturing changes. Baseline for MCO cycle time,
vious years actuals (e.g. 2021 is PCCM baseline for 2022 Goals).
erall results tab count questions 11
count score 11
difference 0
re processes.
10
Linked OCAP
Automation:
From live RFC's to
auto shutdown &
Quarantine.
OC events and OCAP to real
10
No lines have
had EOL manual
visual inspection
by associates for
2 years
10
Customer 1st pass
acceptance of 8D is
> 95%, response
time to customer
original commit
date > 95%
vidence provided & clarity of

ed by % on time response to
10
RTY has
averaged >98%
on all products
(or technologies)
manufactured in
the past 12
months
no rework included.
used as the source.)
10
No repeat issues
have occurred in
the last 3 years
10
ELSS Projects
have improved
Quality Metrics
for 3+ years
driving improvement in the
10
100%
reviewed/updated
within the past
Year
months. Also, look for

nts or repeat issues.
should be done against the
10
100% of
processes for 2
years
Increase weight to
25% of POCa
10
COPQ metrics
are improving
year over year
evel (CSL) Final inspection
10
Littelfuse ELSS
program is
implemented to at
least 95% of
critical /key
suppliers
10
Zero scrapped
inventory or RMA
due to
manufacturing New Question
related product
change
management
ne for MCO cycle time,

Talent Management Final Back to overall results tab
Section score 7.4666667
Behavior: The questions on this tab look at the Talent management processes from recruiting, making an offer, on-boarding, training and development and
performance management. This includes several survey questions that measure the experience of using some of these processes.
Score
Sales & Operations Planning Back to overall results tab
Section score 6.78
Behavior: This set of questions begins with a look at the forecast provided to the plant (typically from the BU). It continues to look at how the site team then plans for the supply materials and
resources. Finally, the maturity of the Sale and Operations Planning processes is measured through the robustness of the site and BU level planning and communication meetings.
Score Demand Planning

6 Q1 Does the Business unit collect unconstrained market inputs to create a 12+ month demand forecast ?
Score Criteria
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Similar to a score of Evidence of a

Process has recently
Little or no evidence 1, but the assessor longer-term been documented,
a process is observes more or practice is Process is fully documented and
Observe some but not fully Process is fully documented and released in a recognized system with proper
followed. Site longer-term observable with released in a recognized system with
evidence of the released in a approval and revision control for more than ___ year(s). Evidence of process
Process might be able to evidence of the more than one proper approval and revision control for
local practice being recognized system improvement from version history.
explain a local practice. More person involved. ___ months or less.
practice performed followed. than one person Some with proper
approval and
by 1 individual. can accurately documentation may
revision control.
explain the practice. exist.
6 12 1 2 3 4
Evidence that Evidence that Training is complete

Training is mostly
others have been others have been and has been
Training is still complete, or has Same as 6, plus Evidence of employees trained on revision history per process
Training Nothing to train. shown the practice. trained and are institutionalized for
underway. been completed in documentation.
No records of following the the last 6 months. revision control and
training. practice. future employees.
Some data/metrics are being tracked Critical KPIs (CKPIs) are posted and/or reported AND have been tracked for…
and posted and/or reported publicly.
They ___ meet expectations, and ___ CKPIs than
...less have1been
year. at least 1 year. over 2 years.
require extra effort to "make the analyzed for
Analysis for stability and/or predictability is occurring.
numbers." stability and/or
predictability.
Some data/metrics
are being tracked. CKPIs consistently
KPIs No data is collected. Not posted or ...at least 6 months. meet the target CKPIs exceed the
reported. with some target.
CKPIs generally CKPIs consistently
may or may not, all generally, meet the target. meet the target. exceeding.
do may
A forecast of at least 3 months is

Improvement plans provided.
have been Evidence of at least ___ completed improvement project(s)
Site recognizes the need for continuous implemented and at with a positive impact on ___ critical KPI(s) in the past year.
improvement. least 1 CI project is
complete with 1, 1 2, more than 1 3, more than 1
tangible results.
Improvement plans
CI effort No evidence of continuous improvement activity. Site has identified
Plans are in place or have been
the next
possibly a project implemented and at Site has identified and maintains a list of potential
has started, but not least 1 CI project is improvement improvement projects for this process.
project for this
yet complete. complete with
process.
tangible results.
Comments and Completeness and Accuracy are the most important attributes of a good Demand Forecast. Is the demand forecast COMPLETE & ACCURATE ?
expectations Analyze with unconstrained inputs.
Site Response/
Evidence
Demand Planning
Are the inputs being compared against previous data and used to develop an updated Demand Forecast that is complete including new markets, new customers, new products, and allows for the
6 Q2
Score Criteria appropriate Supply Planning time horizon?
Score Criteria
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Similar to a score of Evidence of a

Process has recently
Little or no evidence 1, but the assessor longer-term Process is fully documented and
a process is observes more or practice is been documented, Process is fully documented and released in a recognized system with proper
Observe some but not fully released in a recognized system with
followed. Site longer-term observable with approval and revision control for more than ___ year(s). Evidence of process
evidence of the released in a proper approval and revision control for improvement from version history.
Process might be able to evidence of the more than one ___ months or less.
local practice being recognized system
explain a local practice. More person involved.
followed. with proper
practice performed than one person Some
by 1 individual. can accurately documentation may approval and
revision control.
explain the practice. exist.
6 12 1 2 3 4
Evidence that Evidence that Training is complete

Training is mostly
others have been others have been and has been
Training is still complete, or has Same as 6, plus Evidence of employees trained on revision history per process
Training Nothing to train. shown the practice. trained and are institutionalized for
underway. been completed in documentation.
No records of following the the last 6 months. revision control and
training. practice. future employees.
Critical KPIs (CKPIs) are posted and/or reported AND have been tracked for…
Some data/metrics are being tracked ...less than 1 year. at least 1 year. over 2 years.
and posted and/or reported publicly.
They ___ meet expectations, and ___
require extra effort to "make the CKPIs have been
numbers." analyzed for
Analysis for stability and/or predictability is occurring.
Some data/metrics stability and/or
are being tracked. predictability.
KPIs No data is collected.
Not posted or
reported. ...at least 6 months.
CKPIs consistently
meet the target CKPIs exceed the
with some target.
CKPIs generally CKPIs consistently exceeding.
may or may not, all generally, meet the target. meet the target.
do may
A forecast of at least 3 months is
provided.
Improvement plans Evidence of at least ___ completed improvement project(s)

have been with a positive impact on ___ critical KPI(s) in the past year.
Site recognizes the need for continuous implemented and at
improvement. least 1 CI project is
complete with
tangible results.
1, 1 2, more than 1 3, more than 1
CI effort No evidence of continuous improvement activity.
Improvement plans
Site has identified
Plans are in place or have been
the next
possibly a project implemented and at Site has identified and maintains a list of potential
improvement
has started, but not least 1 CI project is improvement projects for this process.
yet complete. complete with project for this
process.
tangible results.
Comments and Completeness and Accuracy are the most important attributes of a good Demand Forecast. Is the demand forecast COMPLETE & ACCURATE ? Does the financial forecast and S&OP unconstrained forecast align within +/- 20% )
evidence: Speed and accuracy
Site Response/
Evidence
Supply Planning
5 Q3 Based on the updated Demand Forecast, is an appropriate Supply Plan calculated to meet the BU requirements?
Score Criteria
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Final Back to overall results tab
Finance
Section score 8.375
Security Enter the Site's current Security assessment score
Section score 9.00
Site security is evaluated by a separate assessment, the current LFOS score for that assessm
Separate Assessment scores

Back to overall results tab count questions 1
count score 1
difference 0
OS score for that assessment can be found here:
Enter the Site's current Trade Compliance assessment score
Section score 8.40
Site Trade Compliance is evaluated by a separate assessment, the current LFOS score
Separate Assessment scores

Back to overall results tab count questions 1
count score 1
difference 0
ment, the current LFOS score for that assessment can be found here:
EHS
Section score 2.50
Score Question
3 Q1 Does the site have a fully implemented Lock-out, Tag-out program?
0 1 2
Site has a written policy or The site has inventoried

procedure for LOTO that and prioritized all
incorporates the Global EHS equipment that requires
procedure, including (1) LOTO, including
machine-specific procedures, (2) maintenance and facility
The site has no written,
training program for affected and support equipment
documented policy or
authorized employees, (3) (HVAC, overhead doors,
procedure for LOTO.
periodic program review and boilers, etc.) . 50% Project
inspections of the procedures, plan for high risk
(4) group and contractor equipment has been
lockouts and (5) enforcement of written and plant manager
the use of the procedures has signed off.
Each site should have a controlling policy or procedure. Individual or spec

time on the floor or around equipment must be trained in the procedures, o
Site Response/
Evidence
2 Q2 Does the site have a fully implemented machine guarding program?

0 1 2
Machine guarding procedure, Risk assessment
including risk assessment conducted on at least 25%
No documented procedure
checklist, has been written. of all equipment. New,
for machine guarding, no
Inventory of equipment needed modified, or transferred
training, no risk
guarding (any piece of equipment risk
assessment and
equipment without 1-plug, safe assessment procedure
evaluation checklist.
control) has been developed and and process is in place,
mapped. complete with a checklist.
Comments and evidence: Each site should have a machine guarding risk assessment checklist for a
Site Response/
Evidence
final
3 4 5 6
Machine-specific
Machine-specific
The site has inventoried procedures exist for each
procedures exist for each
and prioritized all piece of high and medium
piece of equipment: 50% Machine-specific
equipment that requires risk equipment.(100%.)
of high priority/risk procedures exist for each
LOTO, including Procedures for APM
equipment complete. piece of equipment: 100%
maintenance and facility machines are on track.
Equipment needing high priority/risk
support equipment APMs that have been
Alternate Protective equipment complete.
(HVAC, overhead doors, written and approved by
Measures (APMs) have 100% of affected
boilers, etc.) . 100% Regional/Global EHS.
been identified and employees are trained.
Project plan for high risk Equipment that requires
approved by Site has started writing
equipment has been modification to make
Regional/Global EHS. APMs.
written and plant manager LOTO points accessible at
100% of authorized
has signed off. the machine has been
employees are trained.
identified.
edure. Individual or specific procedures should be documented in the SOP's for each specific piece of equipment. Evidence that everyon
ained in the procedures, office employees should be trained on awareness. Should see evidence during the Gemba walk of Locks and tags
3 4 5 6
Risk assessment
Engineering guarding
conducted on at least 75%
solutions defined,
of all equipment. New
Risk assessment designed, on order,
equipment risk
Risk assessment completed for all budget and project plan
assessment procedure
conducted on at least 50% equipment. Prioritized list prepared. Project plan
and process is in place
of all equipment. of guarding needed approved (Site Manager,
and integrated into
developed. Regional EHS). 50% of
engineering equipment
top high risk items have
specification and
been guarded.
procurement process.
ssessment checklist for all equipment. Evidence that everyone in the plant has been trained to an appropriate level for their role. There sh
7 8 9 10
Equipment has machine-

specific photos or signage
identifying energy isolation LOTO and APM process
points, installed at the is fully complete for
LOTO and APM process
point of use, to provide existing equipment.
is fully complete for
employees with clear, Process has been audited
existing equipment.
visually-intuitive by external party (another
Process has been audited
Process completed instructions. APMs are plant, Regional/Global
by external party (another
through Step 6. All complete and have been EHS or Engineering.)
plant, Regional/Global
procedures for APMs are approved by Corporate Each piece of equipment
EHS or Engineering.)
on track. Project plan and EHS. Signage on APM requiring APM has been
Each piece of equipment
budget, approved by Site equipment is posted at the evaluated by Engineering
requiring APM has been
Manager, exist to retrofit equipment. Process to re- for methods to engineer
evaluated by Engineering
equipment to make LOTO evaluate APMs has out the hazard.
for methods to engineer
points accessible at the started to identify Procedure in place to
out the hazard. Projects
machine. opportunities to eliminate review equipment prior to
to eliminate APMs are in
APMs and conduct the purchase, transfer,
progress to conduct
activity under full LOTO installation and start-up is
activities under full LOTO.
has started. 25% of in place. APMs are the
machine retrofit project to exception and only a few
make LOTO points exist, if any.
accessible at machine is
completed.
ment. Evidence that everyone in the plant has been trained to an appropriate level for their role (Anyone that spends
Gemba walk of Locks and tags. Should ask employees what they know about the process.)
7 8 9 10
Project plan on track. All
All top high priority/risk Guarding complete.
high priority/risk machines
machines are guarded Process for annual Continuous improvement.
are guarded and have
and verified. Machine machine guarding Annual audits completed
been re-evaluated. The
guarding for remainder of assessment and new and corrective action
machine guarding for all
machines is 25% equipment assessment in plans prepared.
machines/equipment is
complete. place.
75% complete.
e level for their role. There should be a project plan for guarding (likely 2-3 years).
count questions 2
count score 2
difference 0
~~ ~~~~
Final
Supply Chain Management - Procurement Back to overall results tab
Section score 3.66666666666667
Behavior: The Category Management questions look at the site's maturity in the use of several core Procurement processes. Additionally, the maturity of training and reporting metrics, as compared to metric targets, are measured.
Score Question
5 Q1 Is the True North Metric Direct Material Savings performing at or above current target?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Out performing target

Metrics not being Not achieving target Not achieving target and Not achieving target At or near target with At or near target and flat At or near target with Out performing target Out performing target Out performing with for 2+ years or
captured or greater than with negative trend flat trend with positive trend negative trend trend positive trend with negative trend and flat trend positive trend Significantly above
20% off target
target by 20% or better
Comments/ Direct Materials Monthly Saving tracker

expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
3 Q2 Is Days Payable Outstanding (DPO) metric performing at or above current target?

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Out performing target

Metrics not being
captured or greater than Not achieving target Not achieving target and Not achieving target At or near target with At or near target and flat At or near target with Out performing target Out performing target Out performing with for 2+ years or
20% off target with negative trend flat trend with positive trend negative trend trend positive trend with negative trend and flat trend positive trend Significantly above
target by 20% or better
No evidence of payment No evidence of payment No evidence of payment No evidence of payment Have evidence of Have evidence of Have evidence of Have evidence of Have evidence of Have evidence of Have evidence of
term extension for the term extension for the term extension for the term extension for the payment term extension payment term extension payment term extension payment term extension payment term extension payment term extension payment term extension
site in the past 12 site in the past 12 site in the past 12 site in the past 12 in the past 12 months, in the past 12 months, in the past 12 months, in the past 12 months, in the past 12 months, in the past 12 months, in the past 12 months,
months months months months but no continue but no continue and continue and continue and continue and continue and continue
improvement plan for improvement plan for improvement plan for improvement plan for improvement plan for improvement plan for improvement plan for
the next 6 months the next 6 months the next 6 months the next 6 months the next 12 months the next 12 months the next 12 months
Comments/ Monthly DPO report, and DPO actions tracker

expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
0 Q3 Has the site implemented a tiered supplier model?

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Site has not Site has implemented a Site has implemented a Site has implemented a Site has implemented a Site has implemented a Site has implemented a Site has implemented a Site has implemented a
implemented a tiered tiered supplier model tiered supplier model tiered supplier model tiered supplier model tiered supplier model tiered supplier model tiered supplier model tiered supplier model
supplier model and participated in and participated in and participated in and participated in and participated in and participated in at and participated in at
business reviews with at business reviews with business reviews with business reviews with business reviews with all least 2 business reviews least 3 business reviews
<25% of its strategic 25-50% of its strategic 50-75% of its strategic >75% of its strategic of its strategic suppliers each of its strategic each of its strategic
X X
suppliers suppliers suppliers suppliers within the past 12 suppliers in the past 24 suppliers in the past 36
No evidence of Site recognizes the need Improvement plans have At least 1 CI project with Evidence of at least 1 Evidence of at least 2 Evidence of at least 3 Evidence of at least 4
continuous for continuous been implemented and a strategic supplier is completed improvement completed improvement completed improvement completed improvement
improvement activity improvement. One CI at least 1 CI project is complete with tangible project with a positive project with a positive project with a positive project with a positive
with any strategic project has been started complete with tangible results. Site has impact on a critical KPI in impact on a critical KPI in impact on a critical KPI in impact on a critical KPI in
supplier with a strategic supplier results with a strategic developed a prioritized the past year. Site has the past year. Site has the past year. Site has the past year. Site has
supplier list of potential CI created and prioritized created and prioritized a identified and created a identified and created a
projects with the a list of potential CI list of potential CI prioritized list of prioritized list of
supplier and agreed on projects with its top 3 projects with all of its potential CI projects potential CI projects
X X X the next project that will
be executed
strategic suppliers strategic suppliers with all of its strategic with all of its strategic
suppliers suppliers
Tier 1: strategic supplier

Comments/
Tier 2: preferred supplier
expectations:
Tier 3: approved supplier
Site Response/
Evidence
4 Q4 Is the site managing supplier risk according to risk management procedure CHI-SDE20-0001?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No objective evidence Some evidence that the Evidence that the site Evidence that the site Evidence that Evidence that Evidence that Evidence that
the procedure is procedure is followed. maintains a list of the maintains a list of Critical representatives from at representatives from representatives from representatives from
followed. Site can provide Critical Risk Suppliers Risk Suppliers (CSR) from least 2 of the following SDE, Procurement, and SDE, Procurement, and SDE, Procurement, and
overview / explanation (CSR) from which they which they purchase. In organizations associated Operations associated Operations associated Operations associated
of the process, but can purchase addition, site can show with the site have met at with the site have met at with the site have met at with the site have met at
provide little or no evidence that it least once in the past 12 least once in the past 12 least once in the past 12 least twice in the past 24
formal documentation participates in reviews of months to evaluate months to evaluate months to evaluate months to evaluate
of site activities vendors on the CSR List suppliers on the Critical suppliers on the Critical suppliers on the Critical suppliers on the Critical
Risk Supplier (CRS) List: Risk Supplier (CRS) List. Risk Supplier (CRS) List. Risk Supplier (CRS) List.
SDE, Procurement, and In addition, evidence In addition, evidence
Operations. that said representatives that said representatives
meet to review meet on a regular basis
suppliers' general to review suppliers'
performance against the general performance
X X criteria for adding them
to the CSR List. X against the criteria for
adding them to the CSR
List.
No risk scoring is Site has risk scores for Site has risk scores for Site has risk scores for Site has risk scores for Site has risk scores for all Site has risk scores for all Site has risk scores for all Site has risk scores for all Site has risk scores for all Site has risk scores for all
calculated <25% of its A Vendors 25-50% of its A Vendors 50-75% of its A Vendors 75-100% of its A of its A Vendors and has of its A Vendors and has of its A Vendors and has of its A Vendors and has of its A Vendors and has of its A Vendors and has
Vendors risk mitigation plans risk mitigation plans risk mitigation plans risk mitigation plans risk mitigation plans risk mitigation plans
with timelines with timelines with timelines with timelines with timelines with timelines
established established. Action plans established. Action plans established. Action plans established. Action plans established. Action plans
are started with at least are started with all of are started with all of are completing, and the are completing, and the
half of the A Vendors the A Vendors the A Vendors and are risk score has dropped risk scores have dropped
on track at one A Vendor at multiple A Vendors
CRS assessment file

Comments/
A Vendor: vendor with annual spend over $100K; new or emerging vendor to LFUS where annual spend expected to exceed $100K; critical supplier to LFUS, even if annual spend is below $100K
expectations:
Sites must provide evidence of the CSR list, review meetings, risk scoring, risk mitigation plans listed above
Site Response/
Evidence
5 Q5 Is spend with Direct Material preferred & strategic suppliers within categories completed through Stage 4 metric performing at or above current target? Procedure - CHI-PUR20-0010
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Little or no evidence a Observe some evidence Similar to a score of 1, Evidence of a longer Process has recently Process is fully Process is fully Process is fully Process is fully Process is fully Process is fully
process is followed. Site of the local practice but the assessor term practice is been documented, but documented and documented and documented and documented and documented and documented and
might be able to explain being followed. observes more or longer observable with more not fully released in a released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized
a local practice term evidence of the than one person recognized system with system with proper system with proper system with proper system with proper system with proper system with proper
performed by 1 practice. More than one involved. Some proper approval and approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision
individual person can accurately documentation may version control control for 6 months or control for 12 months or control for more than 1 control for more than 2 control for more than 3 control for more than 4
explain the practice exist less. less. year. Evidence of years. Evidence of years. Evidence of years. Evidence of
process improvement process improvement process improvement process improvement
from version history from version history from version history from version history
Nothing to train Evidence that others Evidence that others Training is still Training is mostly Training is complete and Training is complete and Training is complete and Training is complete and Training is complete and
have been shown the have been trained and underway. complete, or has been has been has been has been has been has been
practice. No records of are following the completed in the last 6 institutionalized for institutionalized for institutionalized for institutionalized for institutionalized for
training practice months. revision control and revision control and revision control and revision control and revision control and
future employees. future employees. future employees. future employees. future employees.
Evidence of employees Evidence of employees Evidence of employees Evidence of employees
trained on revision trained on revision trained on revision trained on revision
history per process history per process history per process history per process
documentation documentation documentation documentation
No data is collected No data is collected Some data/metrics are Some data/metrics are Some data/metrics are All critical KPI's have All critical KPI's have All critical KPI's have All critical KPI's have All critical KPI's have
being tracked. Not being tracked and being tracked and been identified and been tracked for 12 been tracked for over 1 been tracked for over 2 been tracked for over 2
posted or reported. posted/reported reported publicly. They tracked for at least 6 months or less and year with analysis for year with analysis for year with analysis for
publicly. They may or all generally meet months. Metrics are Critical KPI's have been stability and/or stability and/or stability and/or
may not meet expectations, and may posted and/or reported. analyzed for stability predictability. All predictability. All predictability. All
expectations, and require extra effort to and/or predictability and consistently meet the consistently meet the exceed the target.
require extra effort to "make the numbers" generally meet the target. Metrics are target with some Metrics are posted
"make the numbers" target. Metrics are posted and/or reported. exceeding. Metrics are and/or reported.
posted and/or reported. posted and/or reported.
No evidence of No evidence of No evidence of No evidence of Site recognizes the need Site recognizes the need Improvement plans have Evidence of at least 1 Evidence of at least 2 Evidence of at least 3
continuous continuous continuous continuous for continuous for continuous been implemented and completed improvement completed improvement completed improvement
improvement activity improvement activity improvement activity improvement activity improvement. Plans are improvement. at least 1 CI project is project with a positive projects with a positive projects with a positive
in place or possibly a Improvement plans have complete with tangible impact on a critical KPI in impact on critical KPI's in impact on critical KPI's in
project has started, but been implemented and results. Site has ID'd the the past year. Site has the past year. Site has the past year. Site has
not yet complete. at least 1 CI project is next improvement ID'd and maintains a list ID'd and maintains a list ID'd and maintains a list
complete with tangible project for this process of potential of potential of potential
results. improvement projects improvement projects improvement projects
for this process. for this process. for this process.
Comments/
Preferred Supplier Spend percentage of Spend in that Category. Direct Materials Monthly Metrics Dashboard.
expectations:
Site Response/
Evidence
Information Technology
Section score 2.06 All new
Behavior: Insert expanation of desired behaviors being driven by these questions
Score
2 Q1 Does the site use a standard Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) program?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Little or no evidence that Evidence that the site Implementation timeline Evidence that a standard Evidence that a standard Evidence that a standard Evidence that a standard Evidence that a standard Evidence that a standard Evidence that a standard Evidence that a standard
a standard software is has a plan for for a standard software software has been software has been LFUS software has been LFUS software has been LFUS software is software is installed on software is installed on software is installed on
used. implementing a standard developed with IT. Local installed on select installed on all relevant installed and a few local installed and is in use by installed on all relevant all relevant all relevant all relevant
software. ownership / resourcing devices for testing; or, devices, and a few local personnel know how to all relevant personnel. A machines/systems and machines/systems and machines/systems and machines/systems and
defined for the the software has been personnel know how to use it. A procedure for procedure for using the is used by all relevant is used by all relevant is used by all relevant is used by all relevant
implementation. installed on all relevant use it. A procedure for using this software has software is fully personnel. Use of the personnel. Use of the personnel. Use of the personnel. Use of the
devices and is running in using this software is been written and is documented and standard LFUS software standard LFUS software standard LFUS software standard LFUS software
a test environment for being written by qualified ready for release, released in a recognized is fully documented and is fully documented and is fully documented and is fully documented and
evaluation/debugging. personnel. including testing of the system with proper released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized
written procedure by approval and revision system with proper system with proper system with proper system with proper
future users control. approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision
control for at least 1 control for at least 2 control for at least 3 control for at least 4
year. years. Evidence that the years. Evidence that the years. Evidence that the
site has a mechanism for site has a mechanism for site has a mechanism for
gathering and reporting gathering and reporting gathering and reporting
Software
needed/wanted needed/wanted needed/wanted

improvements to the improvements to the improvements to the
platform that are platform that are platform that are
communicated to IT for communicated to IT for communicated to IT for
potential upgrades or potential upgrades or potential upgrades or
new revisions. new revisions. Evidence new revisions. Evidence
that the site has a that the site has a
supported revision of the supported revision of the
software, consistent with software, consistent with
IT rollouts. IT rollouts.
Nothing to train. Evidence that select Evidence that training Evidence that training Evidence that training Evidence that training Training is complete and Training is complete and Training is complete and Training is complete and
local personnel know has been developed and has been developed and has been developed and has been developed and has been has been has been has been
how to use the software. delivered to up to 50% of delivered between 50- delivered to 100% of delivered to 100% of institutionalized for institutionalized for institutionalized for institutionalized for
No records of training. relevant personnel. 100% of relevant relevant personnel. relevant personnel. revision control and revision control and revision control and revision control and
Training
personnel. future employees. future employees. future employees. future employees.

documentation. documentation. documentation. documentation.
What is the software that Do you have a plan to Do you have a firm Have you completed the Has the standardized LF Has the standardized LF Has the standardized LF Has the standardized LF Has the standardized LF Has the standardized LF Has the standardized LF
is currently being used implement LF timeline to implement the configuration of LF SAP solution rolled out SAP solution rolled out SAP solution rolled out SAP solution rolled out SAP solution rolled out SAP solution rolled out SAP solution rolled out
for enteprise resource standardized SAP LF standardized SAP standardized SAP and at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this
planning? solution at your site? and do you have a are you now in a position now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by now being utilized by the
Are you using a working plan established to test the capabilities of operators on the shop functional users? Do you functional users? Do you functional usersr? Do functional users? Do you tthe functional users? Do functional users? Do you
Standardized ERP? in collaboration with IT? the solution? floor? have established user have established user you have established have established user you have established have established user
manual and training manual and training user manual and training manual and training user manual and training manual and training
Example: SAP, Oracle, process established? process established? Do process established? Do process established? Do process established? Do process established? Do
JD Edwards, SAGE etc. you have established you have established you have established you have established you have established
*Procedure can be a process and system to process and system to process and system to process and system to process and system to
(for scoring software line)
The ERP program must local document, keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual
be a supported version including training updated and released updated and released updated and released updated and released updated and released
presentations. periodically? periodically? periodically? periodically? periodically?
Explanation
Do you have a change Do you have a change Do you have a change Do you have a change
*Procedure can be a management (CICD) management (CICD) management (CICD) management (CICD)
local document, process established in process established in process established in process established in
including training collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT?
presentations. Have you deployed in Have you deployed in Have you deployed in
the last two years any the last three years any the last four years any
major functionality major functionality major functionality
upgrades to the LF upgrades to the LF upgrades to the LF
standardized SAP standardized SAP standardized SAP
solution? solution? solution?
Site Response/
Evidence
Q2 non- Does the site use a standard program as its Manufacturing Execution System (MES) for Non-FAB? NOTE: Sites that are Fab only should leave this question blank.
2
FAB
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Little or no evidence that Evidence that the site Implementation timeline Evidence that the Evidence that the Evidence that the Evidence that the Use of the standard Use of the standard Use of the standard Use of the standard
standard LFUS software has a plan for for LFUS standard standard LFUS software standard LFUS software standard LFUS software standard LFUS software LFUS software is fully LFUS software is fully LFUS software is fully LFUS software is fully
is used. implementing LFUS software developed with has been installed on has been installed on all has been installed and a has been installed and is documented and documented and documented and documented and
standard software. IT. Local ownership / select devices for relevant devices, and a few local personnel in use by all relevant released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized
resourcing defined for testing; or, the software few local personnel know how to use it. A personnel. A procedure system with proper system with proper system with proper system with proper
the implementation. has been installed on all know how to use it. A procedure for using this for using the software is approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision
relevant devices and is procedure for using this software has been fully documented and control for at least 1 control for at least 2 control for at least 3 control for at least 4
Software
running in a test software is being written written and is ready for released in a recognized year. Evidence of plans years. Evidence of years. Evidence of years. Evidence of
environment for by qualified personnel. release, including testing system with proper to upgrade software with upgrades to software upgrades to software upgrades to software
evaluation/debugging. of the written procedure approval and revision IT, using feedback from using feedback from using feedback from using feedback from
by future users control. users and/or additional users and/or additional users and/or additional users and/or additional
identified capabilities. identified capabilities. identified capabilities. identified capabilities.
personnel. Evidence that training future employees. future employees. future employees. future employees.
Training
materials have been Evidence of employees Evidence of employees Evidence of employees Evidence of employees
is currently being used implement LF timeline to implement the configuration of LF MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out
for manufacturing standardized MES LF standardized MES standardized MES and at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this
execution? solution at your site? and do you have a are you now in a position now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the
Are you using LF working plan established to test the capabilities of operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop
Standardized MES for in collaboration with IT? the solution? floor? floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have
manufacturing established user manual established user manual established user manual established user manual established user manual established user manual
execution? and training process and training process and training process and training process and training process and training process
established? established? Do you established? Do you established? Do you established? Do you established? Do you
have established have established have established have established have established
process and system to process and system to process and system to process and system to process and system to
keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual
updated and released updated and released updated and released updated and released updated and released
Explanation
periodically? periodically? periodically? periodically? periodically?

management (CICD) management (CICD) management (CICD) management (CICD)
process established in process established in process established in process established in
collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT?
Have you deployed in Have you deployed in Have you deployed in
standardized MES standardized MES standardized MES
Site Response/
Evidence
Q2 FAB Does the site use a standard program as its Manufacturing Execution System (MES) for FAB? NOTE: Sites that are non-Fab only should leave this question blank.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
standard LFUS software has a plan for for LFUS standard standard LFUS software standard LFUS software standard LFUS software standard LFUS software LFUS software is fully LFUS software is fully LFUS software is fully LFUS software is fully
is used. implementing LFUS software developed with has been installed on has been installed on all has been installed and a has been installed and is documented and documented and documented and documented and
standard software. IT. Local ownership / select devices for relevant devices, and a few local personnel in use by all relevant released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized
resourcing defined for testing; or, the software few local personnel know how to use it. A personnel. A procedure system with proper system with proper system with proper system with proper
the implementation. has been installed on all know how to use it. A procedure for using this for using the software is approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision
relevant devices and is procedure for using this software has been fully documented and control for at least 1 control for at least 2 control for at least 3 control for at least 4
running in a test software is being written written and is ready for released in a recognized year. Evidence of plans years. Evidence of years. Evidence of years. Evidence of
environment for by qualified personnel. release, including testing system with proper to upgrade software with upgrades to software upgrades to software upgrades to software
evaluation/debugging. of the written procedure approval and revision IT, using feedback from using feedback from using feedback from using feedback from
Software
personnel. future employees. future employees. future employees. future employees.
Training

is currently being used implement LF timeline to implement the configuration of LF MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out MES solution rolled out
for manufacturing standardized MES LF standardized MES standardized MES and at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this at your site and is this
execution? solution at your site? and do you have a are you now in a position now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the now being utilized by the
Are you using LF working plan established to test the capabilities of operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop operators on the shop
Standardized MES for in collaboration with IT? the solution? floor? floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have floor? Do you have
manufacturing established user manual established user manual established user manual established user manual established user manual established user manual
execution? and training process and training process and training process and training process and training process and training process
established? established? Do you established? Do you established? Do you established? Do you established? Do you
have established have established have established have established have established
process and system to process and system to process and system to process and system to process and system to
Explanation
keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual keep the user manual
updated and released updated and released updated and released updated and released updated and released
periodically? periodically? periodically? periodically? periodically?
management (CICD) management (CICD) management (CICD) management (CICD)
process established in process established in process established in process established in
collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT?
Have you deployed in Have you deployed in Have you deployed in
standardized MES standardized MES standardized MES
Site Response/
Evidence
2 Q3 Does the site use a standard (commercially available, supported) program for supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)?
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
standard software is has a plan for for standard software standard software has standard software has standard software has standard software has software is fully software is fully software is fully software is fully
used. implementing standard developed with IT. Local been installed on select been installed on all been installed and a few been installed and is in documented and documented and documented and documented and
software. ownership / resourcing devices for testing; or, relevant devices, and a local personnel know use by all relevant released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized released in a recognized
defined for the the software has been few local personnel how to use it. A personnel. A procedure system with proper system with proper system with proper system with proper
implementation. installed on all relevant know how to use it. A procedure for using this for using the software is approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision approval and revision
devices and is running in procedure for using this software has been fully documented and control for at least 1 control for at least 2 control for at least 3 control for at least 4
a test environment for software is being written written and is ready for released in a recognized year. Evidence of plans years. Evidence of years. Evidence of years. Evidence of
evaluation/debugging. by qualified personnel. release, including testing system with proper to upgrade software with upgrades to software upgrades to software upgrades to software
of the written procedure approval and revision IT, using feedback from using feedback from using feedback from using feedback from
Software
personnel. Evidence that training future employees. future employees. future employees. future employees.
materials have been Evidence of employees Evidence of employees Evidence of employees Evidence of employees
Training
What is the software If No, Do you have a Do you have a firm Have you completed the Has the SCADA Solution Has the SCADA Solution Has the SCADA Solution Has the SCADA Solution Has the BU level Has the SCADA Solution Has the SCADA Solution
that is currently being plan to implement timeline to implement configuration of SCADA rolled out at your site rolled out at your site rolled out at your site rolled out at your site standard SCADA rolled out at your site rolled out at your site
used for Equipment & SCADA solution at your SCADA Solution at your Solution ? are you now and is this now being and is this now being and is this now being and is this now being Solution rolled out at and is this now being and is this now being
Process data collection site ? site ? and do you have a in a position to test the utilized by the operators utilized by the operators utilized by the operators utilized by the operators your site and is this now utilized by the operators utilized by the operators
& Control as well as working plan established capabilities of the on the shop floor? on the shop floor? Do on the shop floor? Do on the shop floor? Do being utilized by the on the shop floor? Do on the shop floor? Do
equipment maintenance in collaboration with IT? solution? you have established you have established you have established operators on the shop you have established you have established
management ? user manual and user manual and user manual and floor? Do you have user manual and user manual and
Are you using SCADA training process training process training process established user manual training process training process
solution for Predictive established? established? Do you established? Do you and training process established? Do you established? Do you
Equipment maintenance have established have established established? Do you have established have established
management process and system to process and system to have established process and system to process and system to
keep the user manual keep the user manual process and system to keep the user manual keep the user manual
updated and released updated and released keep the user manual updated and released updated and released
periodically? periodically? updated and released periodically? periodically?
Explanation
Do you have a change periodically? Do you have a change Do you have a change
management (CICD) Do you have a change management (CICD) management (CICD)
process established in management (CICD) process established in process established in
collaboration with IT? process established in collaboration with IT? collaboration with IT?
collaboration with IT? Have you deployed in Have you deployed in
Have you deployed in the last three years any the last four years any
the last two years any major functionality major functionality
major functionality upgrades to the LF upgrades to the LF
upgrades to the LF standardized MES standardized MES
standardized MES solution? solution?
solution?
Site Response/
Evidence
Business Continuity Management (BCM)
Behavior: Business Continuity Management (BCM) is required at all sites. Understanding the risk allows for deve
Score Question
6 Q1 Has the site performed a BCM risk assessments and created risk mitigation plans?
Element 0 1
BCM Risk Assessments
Mitigation Plans
The site has never

The Site has started a
completed a BCM risk
&
BCM Risk assessment

assessment.
Each site or region should complete a BCM risk assessment following th

for each site to be able to identify the top risk for each site. Look for res
Site Response/
Evidence
2 Q2 Does the site have a BCP plan with leadership roles identified. Does the site perform annual
Element 0 1
Business Continuity Plan
Management Review / Internal
The site does not have a
BCP or leadership roles
identified.
x
The site has not perfomed
x
Audit
a Management Review of
the BCP.
Comments and evidence: Look for evidence that the site has a BCP with roles, backup roles and
Site Response/
Evidence
2 Q3 Does the site have a communication plan,incident response plans or activity recovery plans
Element 0 1
Communication Plan
local Key Contacts List
x
Incident Response Plans
The Site does not have

any Incident Response
Plans
x
x
Activity Recovery
The Site does not have

Plans
any released Activity

Recovery Plans
Comments and evidence: Look for evidence of a communication plan for the site, confirm use of th
Site Response/
Evidence
2 Q4 Does the site have any BCP related training & awareness campaigns? Does the site perform
Element 0 1
Training & Awareness

BCP training plan for any
BCP related risk.
x
x
Exercise & Testing
The site has not performed
any exercises or testing of
BCP risk.
Comments and evidence: Look for evidence of training or awareness campaigns to communicate o
Site Response/
Evidence
Reference Procedures
Corporate Business Continuity Policy (CHI-BCM10_0001)
Site Business Continuity Plan (BCP) Template--under development
BCM Risk Assessment Process--under development
Risk Mitigation Template--under development
Definitions
BCM = Business Continuity Management
BCP = Business Continuity Plan
RPN = Risk Priority Number
GDMS = Global Document Management System
ng the risk allows for development of effective BCM plans, communication and incident recovery plans.
mitigation plans?
2 3 4 5
x
The site completed a BCM
The site has completed a The site has started a risk assessment in the last
BCM risk assessment, but BCM risk assessment in year with a list of risks and
more than two years ago. the last year. some sort of ranking of the
risk.
risk assessment following the corporate BCM risk assessment process (CHI-BCM10_0001). A region may coordinate a risk assessment f
sk for each site. Look for results of a BCM risk assessment and mitigation plans.
es the site perform annual BCP management reviews and/or internal audits?
2 3 4 5
The site has a BCP with
leadership roles identified.
x The site has a BCP with
leadership roles and
backups identified.
x
x x
Management Review of
The site has had some
the BCP has occurred
sort of BCP related
within the last year with
Management Review in
management review
the last two years.
minutes
with roles, backup roles and responsibilities. In addition, the site has set up a governance (annual management review) process for BCP a
s or activity recovery plans?

2 3 4 5
x x
The site has a local Key
Contacts List. The site has
The site has a local Key a communication plan that
Contacts List. includes a process to
contact most employees
(>80%) from the site.
x x
The site has released the
Pandemic Response Plan
The Site has released
and is utilizing the
their Pandemic Plan
Corporate Logistics and IT
Recovery Plans
x x
The Site has released at The Site has released at
least one Activity recovery least one Activity recovery
Response Plan from the Response Plan from the
risk assessment risk assessment.
for the site, confirm use of the Corp Communication Plan CHI-BCM20_0004 and look for Incident Response Plans and Activity Recovery P
gns? Does the site perform excercises/testing of the BCP?

2 3 4 5
x x
The site has a BCP
related procedures
The site has a BCP
training plan with timing
related procedures
intervals and key
participants identified for
intervals for training.
training for at least one
BCP related risk.
x x
Exercises or testing of at
The site lists the exercises
least one BCP risk item
or tests that should occur
occurs at a prescribed
in their BCP, but has not
timeline (annually,
performed the exercises
biannually, etc.) to confirm
or testing.
the plan is effective.
campaigns to communicate or advertise BCP to all associates. Look for evidence of drills or tests for BCP risk items.
s.
6 7 8 9

risk assessment in the last
risk assessment in the last
year utilizing the Corporate
year utilizing the
risk assessment procedure
Corporate risk
x x
that is released on GDMS
assessment procedure
(Global Document
that is released on GDMS
Management System) or
(Global Document
equivalent risk assessment
Management System) or
process. The risk
equivalent risk
assessment must include
assessment process. The
RPN (Risk Priority Number) /
risk assessment must
Risk Score and risk owner
include RPN (Risk Priority
for each risk. The site has
Number) / Risk Score and
completed 2-3 risk mitigation
risk owner for each risk
plans.
oordinate a risk assessment for multiple sites within the region and divide shared mitigation plans across the sites. However, each risk mus
6 7 8 9
The site has a BCP
documented in a procedure
that is released on GDMS or
equivalent document
management system and is
reviewed and/or updated
x x
The site has a BCP annually. The BCP includes
released on GDMS or the leadership roles, backup
equivalent document roles and responsibilities.
management system with The BCP is released with at
leadership roles and least two of the following:
backups identified. Incident Response Plans
and logs, List of Continuity
Sites, Transportation Plan,
Disaster Recovery Plan,
Activity Recovery Plans,
Communication Plan,
Pandemic Plan.
Management Review occurs,

Management Review
x x
review minutes are provided
occurs, review minutes
with corrective actions
are provided with
determined and the actions
corrective actions
for the top five risk must be
determined. The site also
closed or in process. The
performed an internal
site also performed an
audit with corrective
internal audit with corrective
actions determined.
actions determined.
ent review) process for BCP and/or completed an internal audit.
6 7 8 9
x x x
The site has a local Key
Contacts List. The site has
a communication plan that
includes a process to
contact every employee
from the site.

x x
and is utilizing the
and is utilizing the Corporate
Corporate Logistics and IT
Logistics and IT Recovery
Recovery Plans. In
Plans. In addition, at least
addition, at least two other
three other Response Plans
Response Plans related to
related to the top five risk are
the top five risk are
released.
released.
x x
The Site has released at The Site has released at
least one Activity recovery least two Activity recovery
Response Plan from the Response Plan from the risk
risk assessment assessment
Plans and Activity Recovery Plans.
6 7 8 9
x x
The site has a BCP
The site has a BCP related
related procedures
procedures training plan with
timing intervals and key
intervals and key
training for at least three
training for at least two
BCP related risk.
BCP related risk.
Exercises or testing of at Exercises or testing of at
x x
least two BCP risk item least three BCP risk item
occurs at a prescribed occurs at a prescribed
timeline (annually, timeline (annually,
biannually, etc.) to confirm biannually, etc.) to confirm
the plan is effective. the plan is effective.
Management participates Management participates in
in the exercises. the exercises.
k items.
l results tab count questions 4
count score 4
difference 0
10
Risk assessments are

completed on an annual basis
utilizing the Corporate risk
assessment procedure that is
released on GDMS (Global
Document Management
System) or equivalent risk
assessment process. The top
5 risk are identified by RPN
scores, risk owners and risk
mitigation plans are
documented. Risk mitigation
plans are in process and
revised RPN estimates for a
minimum of the top 5 risk.
The total risk list can be

determined as a region. Each
site must have an RPN for
each risk, but mitigation plans
for common risk may be
shared between the sites
within the region. Some sites
may have unique risk on their
top 5 list.
es. However, each risk must have an RPN
10
The site has a BCP
documented in a procedure
that is released on GDMS or
equivalent document
management system and is
reviewed and/or updated
annually. The BCP includes
the leadership roles, backup
roles and responsibilities. The
BCP is released with the
following: Incident Response
Plans and logs, List of
Continuity Sites,
Transportation Plan, Disaster
Recovery Plan, Activity
Recovery Plans,
Communication Plan,
Pandemic Plan.
Management Review occurs,

review minutes are provided
with corrective actions
determined and the actions
for more than the top five risk
must be closed or in process.
The site also performed an
internal audit with corrective
actions determined.
10
The site does not have a local
Key Contacts List. The site
has a communication plan
that includes a process to
contact every employee from
the site. The site utilizes the
Corporate Communication
plan to communicate outside
the site.

Pandemic Response Plan and
is utilizing the Corporate
Logistics and IT Recovery
Plans. In addition, Response
Plans related to the top five
risk are released.
The Site has released at least

three Activity recovery
Response Plans from the risk
assessment
10
The site has a BCP related

procedures training plan with
timing intervals and key
training for all top five BCP
related risk. Communication
plans exist on site to increase
awareness to Business
Continuity events identified in
the risk assessments.
Exercises or testing of the top
five BCP risk item occurs at a
prescribed timeline (annually,
biannually, etc.) to confirm the
plan is effective. Management
participates in the exercises.
Sustainability
Behavior: sites should be establishing Sustainability programs that focus on reducing water consumpt
Score
4 Q1 Does the site track, report, and have a program to manage water usage in the facility?
0 1
Process
Water usage is not Water usage is

monitored regularly. monitored regularly.
Little or no evidence a Observe some evidence
process is followed. Site of the local practice
might be able to explain being followed to assure
a local practice water is returned clean
performed by 1 (within regulatory
individual. parameters).
Process: site has a process for tracking water usage

Training: parties responsible for tracking and reporting water usage have been traine
Explanation/ KPI: is water usage a KPI? Are there other metrics that predict or give insight into wa
Notes: CI effort: is there a formal effort in place to reduce water usage at the site?
NOV: Notice of Violation (Regulatory Fine)
Process Water: Water used exclusively for manufacturing process or product proces
Site Evidence
3 Q2 Does the site track, report, and have a program to reduce energy consumption?
0 1
Process
Energy consumption is
Site has conducted an
not monitored regularly.
Energy Audit in the past
Little or no evidence a
12 months. Energy
process is followed. Site
consumption is
might be able to explain
monitored regularly, and
a local practice
the site can validate the
performed by 1
data.
individual.
Process: site has a process for tracking energy consumption

Training: parties responsible for tracking and reporting energy consumption have bee
Explanation
KPI: is energy consumption a KPI? Are there other metrics that predict or give insigh
CI effort: is there a formal effort in place to reduce energy consumption at the site?
Site Evidence
3 Q3 Does the site track, report, and have a program to reduce Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) em
0 1
Process
Greenhouse Gas
GHG emissions are
emissions are not
monitored regularly.
monitored regularly.
Process: site has a process for tracking greenhouse gas emissions

Training: parties responsible for tracking and reporting greenhouse gas emissions ha
Explanation
KPI: is greenhouse gas emissions a KPI? Are there other metrics that predict or give
CI effort: is there a formal effort in place to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the s
Site Evidence
3 Q4 Does the site track, report, and have a program to reduce waste generation/disposal?
0 1
Process Site does not monitor Site monitors waste
waste generation / generation/disposal
disposal regularly. regularly. Site can
validate the amount of
waste generated and the
waste treatment
methods (combusted,
recycled, and landfilled)
Process: site has a process for tracking waste generation and disposal
Training: parties responsible for tracking and reporting waste generation and disposa
Explanation
KPI: is waste generation and disposal a KPI? Are there other metrics that predict or g
CI effort: is there a formal effort in place to reduce waste generation and disposal at t
Site Evidence
Final
hat focus on reducing water consumption, energy consumption, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and waste gener
manage water usage in the facility?

2 3 4 5
Water usage metrics are

reviewed during
Management Review
No NOV's related to process and actions
Similar to a score of 1, water usage have been taken for continuous
Efforts to treat/reuse
but the assessor issued in the past two improvement. Process
process water and
observes more or years. Evidence of a for reuse and
optimize overall facility
longer-term evidence of longer-term practice is optimization of total
water usage in the
the practice. More than observable with more water usage for the
facility have started. No
one person can than one person facility is fully
water is disposed as
accurately explain the involved. Some documented and
hazardous waste.
practice. documentation may released in a recognized
exist. system with proper
approval and revision
control for 6 months or
less.
water usage
g and reporting water usage have been trained in the process
her metrics that predict or give insight into water usage?
e to reduce water usage at the site?
ine)
y for manufacturing process or product processing (i.e parts washing, manufacturing equipment cooling, etc.). Does not include restrooms,
reduce energy consumption?

2 3 4 5
Energy usage is
monitored during regular
Management Review
Energy efficiency and
meetings. Improvement
Similar to a score of 1, optimization action plan
actions have been
but the assessor is monitored and
Site has generated an identified and captured
observes more or tracked. Energy
action plan based on the in the site action plans.
longer-term evidence of efficiency projects
Energy Audit. Energy Energy efficiency and
the practice. More than (motors, meters, etc.)
usage metrics are optimization process is
one person can have been identified.
available. fully documented and
accurately explain the Funding has been
released in a recognized
practice. requested for energy
system with proper
efficiency projects.
approval and revision
control for 6 months or
less.
energy consumption
g and reporting energy consumption have been trained in the process
there other metrics that predict or give insight into energy consumption?
e to reduce energy consumption at the site?
reduce Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from refrigerants, ozone-depleting process chemicals and fossil fuels?
2 3 4 5
Site has implemented
the corporate procedure
for GHG and
Environmental Data
Similar to a score of 1, GHG usage and release
collection, validation,
but the assessor is monitored during
and reporting.
observes more or Site has identified and regular Management
Elimination
longer-term evidence of documented all of the Review meetings.
(replacement) of green
the practice. More than greenhouse gases it Improvement actions
house gases has
one person can generates. have been identified and
started; viable options
accurately explain the captured in the site
have been identified and
practice. action plans.
a plan for replacement
exists when possible.
Funding has been
requested.
greenhouse gas emissions

g and reporting greenhouse gas emissions have been trained in the process
I? Are there other metrics that predict or give insight into greenhouse gas emissions?
e to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the site?
reduce waste generation/disposal?

2 3 4 5
Site has a written waste No NOV's related to Some waste Waste generation
disposal procedure. This waste disposal or waste minimization projects minimization,
includes practices for: management have been have been implemented. recycling/reuse/repurpos
waste generation issued in the past two Written waste disposal ing, and hazardous
minimization, years. process is released in a waste management and
recycling/reuse/repurpos recognized system with disposal are all
ing, and hazardous proper approval and monitored during regular
waste management and revision control. Monthly Management Review
disposal. waste generation is meetings. Improvement
reviewed during actions have been
Management Review identified and captured
meetings. in the site action plans.
waste generation and disposal

g and reporting waste generation and disposal have been trained in the process
KPI? Are there other metrics that predict or give insight into waste generation and disposal?
e to reduce waste generation and disposal at the site?
G) emissions, and waste generation/disposal.
6 7 8 9
Water conservation is
evident and continuously
Process water is treated improved. Water
for reusage or released All departments Every project (CI, program includes water
within regulatory participate in, and are infrastructure, capacity, source pollution
parameters and NOT aware of, water usage etc.) includes a review of prevention and
disposed as hazardous optimization process. its impact on site water protection elements
waste. Water usage and Process is fully usage. Process is fully (i.e., storm water, source
optimization process is documented and documented and replenishment and
fully documented and released in a recognized released in a recognized source preservation).
released in a recognized system with proper system with proper Process is fully
system with proper approval and revision approval and revision documented and
approval and revision control for more than 1 control for more than 2 released in a recognized
control for 12 months or year. years. system with proper
less approval and revision
control for more than 3
years.
, etc.). Does not include restrooms, kitchens, facilities, etc. water.
6 7 8 9
Site has developed a
long-term plan to deliver Several significant
on the "38% by 2035" energy efficiency
At least one Energy Littelfuse energy projects have been
Usage/Optimization reduction goal. Energy completed and savings
project has been efficiency is considered are tracked and
completed within the last during Management of documented. Site has a
12 months. Energy Change, and documented renewable
All projects (CI,
usage savings have Procurement includes an energy plan. Site has
infrastructure, capacity,
been captured and can energy assessment completed at least two
etc.) include a review of
be verified. Energy when sourcing new Energy Audit cycles.
energy efficiency
efficiency and equipment. Energy Energy efficiency and
requirements. Site is
optimization process is efficiency and optimization process is
evaluating renewable
fully documented and optimization process is fully documented and
energy technologies.
released in a recognized fully documented and released in a recognized
system with proper released in a recognized system with proper
approval and revision system with proper approval and revision
control for 12 months or approval and revision control for more than 3
less. control for more than 1 years. Evidence of
year. Evidence of process improvement
process improvement from version history.
from version history.
hemicals and fossil fuels?

6 7 8 9
GHG generation/usage
At least one GHG is considered during
All projects (CI, Several significant GHG
reduction project has Management of Change,
infrastructure, capacity, reduction projects have
been completed within and Procurement
etc.) include a review of been completed and
the last 12 months. includes a GHG
GHG generation/usage. improvements are
GHG reduction has been generation/usage
Site is evaluating GHG tracked and
captured and can be assessment when
alternatives. documented.
verified. sourcing new equipment
or materials.
6 7 8 9
At least one waste Waste generation is Every project (CI, The site contributes to
generation minimization considered during infrastructure, capacity, environmental projects
project has been Management of Change etc.) includes a review of within the community.
completed within the last assessments for process its impact on waste These can include
12 months. Waste development and generation. Site is clean-up and waste
generation reduction has optimization projects. evaluating waste reduction, and resource
been captured and can disposal and treatment replenishment projects.
be verified. alternatives. The site
recycles / reuses /
repurposes 90- 97% of
its waste.
count questions 4
count score 4
difference 0
10
Site engages in local

community water
conservation efforts
for the past 2 years.
10
Site has achieved
energy efficiency
gains documented in
the Energy Audits
and energy efficiency
plans over the past 3
years.
10
Site has an ongoing
GHG reduction
program that extends
to its suppliers.
10
The site recycles /
reuses / repurposes
over 97% of its
waste.
Site Period Section Tab
2022 Baseline Lean (0) Employee questions
2022 Baseline Lean (1) Commitment
2022 Baseline Lean (2) Empowerment
2022 Baseline Lean (3) Training
2022 Baseline Lean (4) Hoshin
2022 Baseline Lean (5) CI
2022 Baseline Lean (6) VSM
2022 Baseline Lean (7) 6S
2022 Baseline Lean (8) Set-Up Red.
2022 Baseline Lean (9) Metrics
2022 Baseline Lean (10) Std. Work
2022 Baseline Lean (11) Flow & Pull
2022 Baseline Lean (12) Visual Control
2022 Baseline Lean (13) TPM
2022 Baseline Lean (14) Proj. Mgmt.
2022 Baseline Lean (15) Inv. Mgmt.
2022 Baseline Lean (16) Supply Chain
2022 Baseline Lean (17) Six Sigma
2022 Baseline Lean (18) Lean NPD
2022 Baseline LFOS (19) NP&PD
2022 Baseline LFOS (20) QMS_Quality
2022 Baseline LFOS (21) Talent management
2022 Baseline LFOS (22) S&OP
2022 Baseline LFOS (23) Finance
2022 Baseline LFOS (24) Security
2022 Baseline LFOS (25) Trade compliance
2022 Baseline LFOS (26) EHS
2022 Baseline LFOS (26) EHS
2022 Baseline LFOS (27) Supply Chain Management
2022 Baseline LFOS (28) IT and Industry 4.0
2022 Baseline LFOS (29) Business Continuity Mgt
2022 Baseline LFOS (30) Sustainability
Number of Questions Question # Question Question Score
10 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 5
3 Q3 10
4 Q4 10
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 10
7 Q7 10
8 Q8 10
9 Q9 10
10 Q10 6
10 1 Q1 4
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 1
4 Q4 4
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 3
7 Q7 2
8 Q8 10
9 Q9 10
10 Q10 8
4 1 Q1 7
2 Q2 1
3 Q3 8
4 Q4 10
3 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 1
3 Q3 10
4 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 6
3 Q3 5
4 Q4 1
6 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 7
4 Q4 10
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 10
6 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 9
3 Q3 10
4 Q4 7
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 4
8 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 7
3 Q3 6
4 Q4 10
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 10
7 Q7 10
8 Q8 10
5 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 6
4 Q4 0
5 Q5 10
9 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 10
4 Q4 8
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 10
7 Q7 10
8 Q8 2
9 Q9 8
8 1 Q1 4
2 Q2 7
3 Q3 10
4 Q4 6
5 Q5 5
6 Q6 6
7 Q7 10
8 Q8 8
9 1 Q1 6
2 Q2 0
3 Q3 10
4 Q4 9
5 Q5 7
6 Q6 8
7 Q7 5
8 Q8 9
9 Q9 10
8 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 8
4 Q4 10
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 10
7 Q7 10
8 Q8 5
12 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 9
4 Q4 9
5 Q5 7
6 Q6 1
7 Q7 8
8 Q8 9
9 Q9 1
10 Q10 4
11 Q11 6
12 Q12 7
9 1 Q1 6
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 6
4 Q4 6
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 6
7 Q7 6
8 Q8 8
9 Q9 10
5 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 10
4 Q4 5
5 Q5 6
7 1 Q1 7
2 Q2 0
3 Q3 8
4 Q4 5
5 Q5 9
6 Q6 0
7 Q7 10
7 1 Q1 5
2 Q2 3
3 Q3 0
4 Q4 0
5 Q5 0
6 Q6 0
7 Q7 0
7 1 Q1 3
2 Q2 10
3 Q3 4
4 Q4 10
5 Q5 7
6 Q6 10
7 Q7 7
14 1 Q1 7
2 Q2 5
3 Q3 5
4 Q4 5
5 Q5 5
6 Q6 5
7 Q7 4
8 Q8 4
9 Q9 4
10 Q10 10
11 Q11 5
12 Q12 2
13 Q13 5
14 Q14 1
11 1 Q1 9
2 Q2 8
3 Q3 10
4 Q4 6
5 Q5 6
6 Q6 7
7 Q7 7
8 Q8 7
9 Q9 10
10 Q10 7
11 Q11 2
15 1 Q1 10
2 Q2 5
3 Q3 6
4 Q4 6
5 Q5 9
6 Q6 5
7 Q7 9
8 Q8 6
9 Q9 9
10 Q10 9
11 Q11 6
12 Q12 7
13 Q13 7
14 Q14 9
15 Q15 9
9 1 Q1 6
2 Q2 6
3 Q3 5
4 Q4 7
5 Q5 6
6 Q6 9
7 Q7 8
8 Q8 8
9 Q9 6
8 1 Q1 8
2 Q2 5
3 Q3 7
4 Q4 9
5 Q5 10
6 Q6 10
7 Q7 9
8 Q8 9
1 1 Q1 9
1 1 Q1 8.4
2 1 Q1 3
2 Q2 2
6 1 Q1 5
2 Q2 3
3 Q3 0
4 Q4 4
5 Q5 5
6 Q6 5
19 1 Q1 2
2 Q2 non-FAB 2
2 Q2 FAB
3 Q3 2
4 Q4 1
5 Q5 2
6 Q6 2
7 Q7 2
8 Q8 2
9 Q9 2
10 Q10 1
11 Q11 0
12 Q12 0
13 Q13 0
14 Q14 5
15 Q15 5
16 Q16 2
17 Q17 5
18 Q18 2
4 1 Q1 6
2 Q2 2
3 Q3 2
4 Q4 2
4 1 Q1 4
2 Q2 3
3 Q3 3
4 Q4 3

Matamoros LFOS - Lean Assessment 2022 Midyear

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Matamoros LFOS - Lean Assessment 2022 Midyear

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Site Name: Matamoros Start Date: 7/12/2022

LFOS Assessment team Name Email

Key site team members Name Email

Site Leadership Team Size: 8

ful, but not required.

Grey means not an option to score that particular number

Site Leadership/management team defined in Tab titled Site Leadership Team

10 Q5 The site is adhering to the Corporate model line program expectations.

One tier One tier One tier Minimum Minimum Minimum

Daily Gemba Daily Gemba Daily Gemba Daily Gemba

1 Q2 Site associates attend phases 1 through 6 of lean training annually.

Yes, and Yes, and Yes, and

Yes, for all Yes, for all Yes, for all

Site Response/ Site did 1 bench marck, pendng to sent to Matt

Evidence from the Project tracker.

The site is The site is

All audits taking All audits taking All audits taking

Evidence of lots Evidence of lots Evidence of lots Lot size has

10 Q6 The site's True North Metrics are posted in a public area.

Comments/ Review multiple documents during Gemba walk.

Site Response/ Throughout production floor, not in the office yet

7 Q5 All inventory buffers are planned, sized, and controlled.

Site Response/ SAP and color coding

8 Q3 Visual controls are current (i.e., charts are up to date).

Action item list

Yes, for all

10 Q7 Andon signals are used and fully operational. Clarified

10 Q2 There is a dedicated Maintenance group.

9 Q3 Management fully supports TPM.

All 8 elements of All 8 elements of

Future/ideal state Future/ideal state

9 Q8 Preventive Maintenance (PM) procedures exist and are followed.

1 Q9 Autonomous Maintenance (AM) procedures exist and are followed.

PdM procedures PdM procedures

6 Q11 Spare Parts are grouped and classified; Reviewed annually.

7 Q12 Early Equipment Management: Equipment meets Littelfuse-provided specification.

6 Q3 Departments are using A3s for team-based problem-solving efforts.

10 Q5 Complex projects are being led by trained/capable associates.

6 Q6 Complex/customer-critical projects have evidence of risk mitigation efforts.

6 Q7 Projects over the last year have been delivered on time.

8 Q8 Project Managers are managing an appropriate number of projects.

10 Q2 Finished goods inventory locations are clearly marked.

Observe in the Gemba:

100% on time 100% on time 100% on time

PFCs have PFCs have

Fewer than Fewer than

On 2 or more On 3 or more On 4 or more On 5 or more

Used on 50% Used on 75% Used on 100% Used on 100%

Used on 50% Used on 75% Used on 100% Used on 100%

Used on 50% Used on 75% Used on 100% Used on 100%

Used on 50% Used on 75% Used on 100% Used on 100%

Score Employee Readiness: Resource Planning, Participation and Capacity Management

Resource planning and

Project Leader is closing Project Leader is closing

Employee Readiness: Core Team & Management Engagement and Empowerment

A regular meeting occurs - Meeting minutes includes

Two out of the three

Employee Readiness: Engagement and Empowerment

Technology Readiness - Design for "X"

3P events used existing

Problem solving tools and Zero PCNs or ECOs have

Site launch leader and quality

Rolled Throughput Yield (RTY) = P(FPYi) = FPY1FPY2FPY3…….FPYN where