QSB 1124041

FAST RESPONSE
PROCESS
Standardized Rapid Reaction to
Quality Issues
This presentation was developed by General Motors Corporation Worldwide Purchasing.

All rights reserved. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or by any method,
for any purpose, without written permission of General Motors Worldwide Purchasing.
General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

QSB WORKSHOP REV. 112404 1
FAST RESPONSE
• Fast Response is a system that:
- standardizes reaction to significant External/Internal
Quality failures.
- promotes communication and discipline through daily meetings.
- utilizes a visual method of displaying important information.
In preparation for the Fast Response meeting, at the start of the day,
Quality shall identify significant quality concerns from the last 24 hours
which may include:
- Customer concerns
- Supplier concerns The workshop team
- Line stops (Internal / Customer) should discuss how
- Dock Audits / Audit issues to define a significant
- Other internal quality concerns Quality concern.

The Fast Response meeting:
- shall be held daily to review the significant Quality
concerns gathered by Quality. Meetings are held daily at
minimum, some organizations may hold meetings every
shift.
- is a communications meeting, not a problem solving
meeting. It can be a 10 - 20 minute stand up meeting held
on the shop floor or in a production conference room.
- is a manufacturing review meeting owned by manufacturing
and supported by Quality, Engineering, Maintenance, etc…
At the Fast Response meeting, leadership shall:

- Designate a leader (owner) for each concern/issue.
- Assign owner report out for next meeting
Owners shall be responsible for assuring all problem solving

and exit criteria are met in a timely manner.
• Owner report out shall include updates on the following:
- Fast Response Tracking Sheets
- Standardized Work Instructions
- Problem Solving Form(s)
- PFMEA
- Control Plan
- Layered Audit
- Workforce Notification
- Other documentation as appropriate
• Report out to Leadership is scheduled on the Fast Response

Tracking form as deemed necessary.
• The Fast Response Tracking form should be part of a visual

management system. The format should be displayed as large
as is practical in the meeting area.

FAST RESPONSE TRACKING (Example)
To optimize visual management, this form is displayed in the meeting
area (ex.: 4’ x 8’ dry erase board, laminated poster, etc…).
GQP-029b
EXIT CRITERIA
Overall Status
Standard Work
Error Proofing
Layered Audit
Containment
Date Closed
PFMEA / CP
Next Date
(of Owner
Issue Date Report out
Number Issue Description Opened Unit I.D. # Owner to Staff)
Y 1 Material contaminated 1/10/2004 333933 McGrath 4/29/2004 G G Y G Y
G 2 Burrs 2/15/2004 98002222 Smith CLOSED G G N/A N/A G 3/11/2004
R 3 Part mislocated on assembly 3/21/2004 950560607 McGrath 4/29/2004 G G R G G
Y 4 Mixed parts 3/21/2004 34523339 McIntosh 4/29/2004 G G Y G G
Paint dots f ound on loose & mis-

R 5 3/28/2004 98002222 Carpenter 5/30/2004 G N/A N/A R R
built parts
R 6 Loose 7mm bolt on f ront cover 4/17/2004 98002222 Davis 4/18/2004 R R R R R
EXIT CRITERIA STATUS KEY
R Required but not initiated

Y
Points to Review:
Initiated but not com plete
G Com plete
Ownership
N/A Not Applicable Exit Criteria
Overall Status

Leadership shall display a visual quality status.
Any type of visual management can be used: calendar, chart, etc …
Daily Quality Chart
Month Year
January 2004
31 (Example)
29
28 30
22 24 26
21 23 25 27
13 15 17 19
12 14 16 18 20
2 4 6 8 10
1 3 5 7 9 11
LEGEND:
Green No Quality Disruptions
Yellow Internal Quality Disruption

(defined locally)
Red Customer Quality Disruption

(eg. PRR, Pull, Spill)

FAST RESPONSE
SUMMARY
Organizations shall…
 hold a daily Fast Response meeting.
 utilize a form, like the Fast Response Tracking form to

identify:
 overall status of the significant Quality concerns
 ownership of each concern
 exit criteria required to close a concern.
 display daily Quality status.

CONTROL OF
NON-CONFORMING
PRODUCT
Identification & Containment

CONTROL OF NON-CONFORMING PRODUCT
• Establish a method to ensure product that does not
conform to specified requirements is:
 Clearly identified using consistent identification (tagging)
 Prevented from unintended use or installation (containment)
• Establish a consistent identification process using a Visual

Management method.
(Example) STOP LIGHT METHOD preferred method
- Red = Scrap
- Yellow = Suspect
- Green = Good
(Example)
SUSPECT
SCRAP DO NOT USE
OK FOR USE
TAG CONTENT TAG CONTENT TAG CONTENT
IN THIS SECTION IN THIS SECTION IN THIS SECTION
IS AT LOCAL IS AT LOCAL IS AT LOCAL
DISCRETION DISCRETION DISCRETION
PLT001 PLT002 PLT003

REQUIRED FOR SCRAP REQUIRED FOR REWORK, ANY COLOR (except red or yellow)
PRODUCT/CONTAINERS REINSPECT, SUSPECT FOR CONFORMING PRODUCT IS
(SCRAP BINS PAINTED RED DO NOT PRODUCT/ CONTAINERS ACCEPTABLE
REQUIRE A TAG)
(IF YELLOW IS NOT USED TO TAG MUST SHOW LAST
DISTINGUISH SCRAP FROM SUSPECT, OPERATION.TO ASSURE
THE RED TAG MUST HAVE PROPER REINTRODUCTION
DISPOSITION.)
• Non-conforming product shall be prevented from unintended use
or installation through containment.
• Leadership must develop, organize and maintain a system

for control of non-conforming product.
• All non-conforming and suspect product shall be segregated.
SEGREGATION AREAS:
• Segregation areas shall be foot printed or otherwise identified.
Example: - Scrap bins
- Rework Tables
- Spill containment areas
- Non-conforming material hold areas
• Containment Worksheet shall be used and completed to:
- Provide a systematic approach to containing all suspect product
- Identify all areas to be checked for nonconforming product
CONTAINMENT WORKSHEET (Example)
(Example)
DEPARTMENT: DEPARTMENT CONTAINMENT OWNER: DATE:
Laboratory G. Hall 1/6/2003

PRODUCT NAME / NUMBER: 10066044
PRODUCT NONCONFORMANCE:
Burr on flange
PRODUCT CONTAINMENT SCOPE
IDENTIFY ALL AREAS WHERE SUSPECT PRODUCT COULD BE LOCATED
POTENTIAL AREA SUSPECT PROD. VERIFICATION
LOCATION QTY. VERIFIED FOUND? QTY? RESPONSIBILITY
Receiving 500 P.S. 500 P. Smith

Laboratory 6 K.C. 6 T. Brown
WIP Storage Areas 1000 P.S. 1000 P. Smith
Outside Processing - (Plating) 1000 C.J. 1000 C. Jones
Scrap Bins 42 K.C. 42 C. Jones What if
Rework Areas 0 B.T. 0 C. Jones potential
Shipping Dock 0 K.C. 0 C. Jones quantity
Heat Treater 0 P.S. 0 C. Jones does not
At Customer 0 B.T. 0 C. Jones equal
In Transit 0 B.T. 0 C. Jones total
Service Parts Operations 0 P.S. 0 C. Jones
found?
TOTAL FOUND 2548 2548 C. Jones
SEGREGATE SUSPECT PRODUCT TO (location, as feasible): 2548 pcs to Containment Area

SORT METHOD (eg. visual, gage, mating part): Visual for burrs
SORT CRITERIA (clear pass / fail standards): Max Burr per standard
I.D. METHOD CONFORMING (eg. mark, tag, sign): White paint dot near defect area
I.D. METHOD NONCONFORMING (eg. mark, tag, sign): Mark defect with red paint.
When do you call the customer?

• Containment shall verify breakpoint:
- using 100% Inspection
- for a duration specified by site leadership
• For product containment issues, containers shall be identified:

- Red = Non-conforming product
- Yellow = Suspect product
- Green = After breakpoint conforming product
• All Control Plan inspections and tests shall be performed. Therefore,

product removed from the approved process flow shall be reintroduced
into the process stream at or prior to the point of removal.
NOTE: When it is not possible to reintroduce at or prior to removal: a

approved rework procedure shall be used to assure
conformance.
• Process & authority for releasing product out of rework, repair and
containment areas shall be defined.
• Product containment issues shall be reviewed by Leadership.
CONTROL OF NON-CONFORMING PRODUCT
SUMMARY
Non-conforming product shall be:
 clearly identified using consistent identification (tagging).

 contained through the use of a Containment Worksheet.
 segregated in well identified areas.
 released using a defined process and authority.
 reintroduced into the process stream at or prior to the
point of removal.
Product containment issues shall be reviewed by Leadership.

STANDARDIZED OPERATIONS
(METHODS & SEQUENCE)
“Standardization is the road to

continual improvement.”
W.E. Deming, July 15, 1992

PROVIDES A FOUNDATION FOR:
• a lean organization.
• identifying value added tasks.
• an efficient production sequence.
• continuous improvement.
• reduced variation within a process.
• waste reduction, problem solving and quality control.
• auditing operator conformance to work instructions
(Layered Audit*).
• ensuring operators are consistently performing the same
tasks and procedures.

(Example) WORKSHEET & LAYOUT
WORK OPERATOR
ELEMENTS MOVEMENT
OPERATION
CYCLE TIME

WORKSHEET & LAYOUT
WORK BENEFITS WHEN DISPLAYED:
ELEMENTS
OPERATOR
• Operations performed same way every time. MOVEMENT
• Reduces the risk of omitting components.
• Quality checks and frequency are indicated.
• Process improvements easily identified.
• Training is simplified and consistent.

• Reminds operator of correct sequence.
• Alerts operator to safety concerns.
• Assures operator is following approved
process (Layered Audits).
• Assures leadership operation is running as approved.

OPERATION
• Operator knows if equipment is showing signs of wear.
CYCLE TIME
• Machine and operator hand work and walk time separated.
• Quality checks are included.
• Multi-disciplinary team(s) shall identify and list all operations to
implement standardized work.
Examples of how to prioritize:
- Customer Quality Concerns
- Necessity for a Defined sequence or method of work
- Off-line Rework
- High RPN
- Employee Flow-through
• Multi Disciplinary teams shall develop standardized work instructions
which shall be posted at the operation.
• Impacted and new employees shall be trained in the use of
Standardized Work (Standard Operator Training*).
• Any operation that shipped a non-conformance due to a failure to
adhere to Standardized Work Instructions shall be verified
through Layered Audits*.
• Multi-disciplinary team(s) shall continuously develop and improve

standardized work instructions.
(Example)
Standardized Operations Worksheet And Layout
OPERATION:
FROM:___________________________ QUANTITY PER SHIFT:______________ CUSTOMER CYCLE TIME:________________
TO: _____________________________ SHIFT:________ OPERATOR CYCLE TIME:_______________
STEP ELEMENT TIME STANDARD IN- QUALITY CRITICAL
NO. WORK ELEMENT HAND WORK MACHINE WALK PROCESS STOCK Q CHECK
C OPERATION
SAFETY
Standardized Operations Worksheets

and Layout shall include:
- Work Elements
- Operator Movement
- Operation Cycle Time
WORKSTATION AREA DRAWN TO SCALE
TOTAL

(Example)

(Example)
Operation Name: Line : 1 Shift:
He a d ABCDE/RUNNER/ABCDE B est PL6
ALL eop le P ractice
Are a :
He a d Asse mbly
Pa rt Production Proce dure A d d ress: A A -0

Ite m
# Ele me nts
1 Unload 'ABCDE/Runner/ABCDE'
2 Place cluster on rack
3 Tape runner with blue tape and masking tape
4 Transfer 'ABCDE/Runner' to 'ABCDE/Runner/ABCDE' fixture on assembly machine
5 Load 'Runner' onto assembly machine
6 Start machine cycle for 'ABCDE/Runner' and 'Runner'
7 Get 'ABCDE' from WIP table
8 Load 'ABCDE' onto assembly machine
9 Get 'ABCDE' from WIP table
10 Load 'ABCDE' onto assembly machine
11 Start machine cycle for 'ABCDE/Runner/ABCDE' and 'ABCDE/Runner'
12 Get 'Runner' from cart
TOTAL MANUAL TIME: 45.78 sec
Sta nda rd Da ily Routine ( Minute s pe r Shift)
Shift
Ite m Ele me nts First Se cond Third
A Load/Unload machine AA-007 389 389 N/A
B Record production dowtime/scrap 5 5 N/A
C Cart handling for 'Runners' 9 9 N/A
Tota l Minute s Use d: 403 403 0

Tota l Utiliza tion: 79% 79% 0%

STANDARDIZED OPERATIONS SUMMARY
 develop and implement standardized work instructions using multi-

disciplinary teams.
 post standardized work instructions at all operation
 train impacted and new employees in use of standardized work
instructions (Standardized Operator Training*).
 insure that standardized worksheets include Work Elements,
Operator movements and Operation cycle time.
 continuously develop and improve standardized work instructions
based on ongoing quality performance.

STANDARDIZED OPERATOR
TRAINING
Was Operator training verified

and documented?

STANDARDIZED OPERATOR TRAINING
Standardized Operator Training shall be used to:
• define the minimum training content for each operation.
• identify who in the organization will conduct training.
• establish required documentation and tracking methods.
• Trainers shall monitor new operators’ activities and retrain if

necessary to assure Standardized Work Instructions are being
followed.
• Trainers shall instruct operators using the standard operation -

training record. (Example)
• The trainer shall notify downstream operations of potential

defects.

Operation Name and # ___________________
Standardized Operation - Training Record (Example)
Application: The following shall be completed with any new operator (for any given operation).
Review Complete
Safety/ Equipment Operation
Review operator job instructions/ Discuss critical points
Explain and demonstrate Standardized Work Instructions
Quality records to be filled out (eg. Check sheets)
Part (product) function
Demonstrate the operation and answer questions
Demonstrate gaging and answer questions
Have new employee run operation and answer questions
Teach past problems (eg. FMEA, Top Problems List)
Verify first units produced, coach as needed
Return within the shift, verify std work & product quality again
Return in approx. 1 day, verify std work & product quality again
Notify downstream operations of potential defects
Employee Signature _______________ Trainer Signature _______________

Standardized Operation - Training Record
Training Sign - Off Sheet
(Example) Workcell
Mold / Station #
Associate Name: Shift: Date:
Associate Trainer
Training Criteria Comments
Initials Initials
SAFETY
Fire Exits / Extinguisher Location
Safety Glass Policy
Personal Protective Equipment
MSDS Location
QUALITY
Gate trimming Technique
Visual Defects
Scrap Procedure
PAPERWORK
Production reporting
Scrap Reporting
Bar Code Scanning / Label Verification
OPERATIONS
Operator 1 Work Instructions - Min. 16 Hrs.
Operator 3 Work Instructions - Min. 16 Hrs.
Packaging Requirements (Regular / Service)
WORKCELL ORGANIZATION
5S Responsibilities
Supply Cabinet Location / Contents
Work Cell Board Review
Employee Signature Trainer Signature
Date: Date:
Form Ref: Rev.# Date:

REQUIREMENTS (continued):
• The trainer shall verify quality at a frequency determined necessary

to assure all standards are met. At a minimum the trainer shall
return within the shift and again within approximately one day.
• Operator training shall be tracked on “Trained Operator

Tracking Sheets”. (Example)
• Operator Tracking Sheets shall be posted at each

operation and verified through Layered Audits.
• Scheduling of refresher training for assigned operators is at

local site discretion.
• Supplemental employees shall not perform the job unless they

have been trained within the last three months.

LATEST Job Instructions Rev. Date
TRAINED OPERATOR TRACKING SOP- 3510 1/1/2004

QAL-23 9/23/2004
Operation Name/# CNC OPERATORS SOP- 3510 10/13/2004
LATEST TRAINING DATE AND TRAINER INITIALS

SOP-3510 QAL-23 SOP-3510
DEPT. ASSIGNED EMPLOYEE
Burns, J. 1/02/04 J.M. 9/23/04 K.T. 10/14/04 J.M
Smith, K. 1/02/04 J.M. 9/23/04 K.T.
Underwood, L. 1/02/04 J.M. 9/23/04 K.T. 10/14/04 J.M
Whithers, A. 1/02/04 J.M. 9/23/04 K.T. 10/14/04 J.M
SUPPLEMENTAL EMPLOYEE
Brown, L 1/02/04 J.M. 9/23/04 K.T.
Troy, P. 1/02/04 J.M. 9/23/04 K.T. 10/14/04 J.M

TRAINING / FLEXIBILITY CHART (Example)
Job % of
Author:
Number group that
# of 3/4
Group: reached
circle jobs Check
jobs /
Job Name
per person here if
person
to meet target is
target
rotation plan met
Issue (% of
Date boxes
Team # Name (Write Position if not T/M) Req'd Actual checked)
# of people at 3/4 circle per job to Plan Know s Steps - In Training

meet coverage requirements Actual Can perform w ithout supervision
Check here if target is met Can teach
% of group that reached coverage target Can teach and do repairs
%
(% of boxes checked)

STANDARDIZED OPERATOR TRAINING
SUMMARY
 ensure operator training is being tracked on “Trained Operator

Tracking Sheets”.
 post operator Tracking Sheets at each operation.
 notify downstream operations of new operators.
 train Supplemental employees who have not performed the job

within the last three months.

RISK REDUCTION PROCESS
PROACTIVE
RPN REDUCTION PROCESS:
Reducing the risk of a
POTENTIAL QUALITY FAILURE
REACTIVE
ERROR PROOFING PAST
QUALITY FAILURES

PROCESS FAILURE MODE & EFFECTS
ANALYSIS
(PFMEA)
DEFINITION
• An analytical technique for each process step that identifies:

– ways a process may fail to meet requirements.
– consequences to the internal / external customer (severity).
– frequency the failure will/could happen (occurrence).
– effectiveness of current controls (prevention & detection).
– ranking of causes and effects (risk priority number).
• A structured procedure for identifying and eliminating process

related failure modes.

PROCESS FAILURE MODE & EFFECTS ANALYSIS
(Example)
What How does POTENTIAL
POTENTIAL How likely are
can go it affect FAILURE
FAILURE
MODEMODE
AND AND
EFFECTS
EFFECTS
ANALYS
ANALYS
ISIS we to notice if
wrong? customer? (PROCES
(PROCES
S FMEA)
S FMEA) this happens?
REV'D DATE :
15xxxxx MODEL YEAR / CARLINE : FMEA DATE : B/P Level: 001, 7-NOV-02
PRODUCTION PLANT : FMEA CONDUCTED BY :
C ACTION RESULTS
POTENTIAL CURRENT CONTROLS RESPONSIBILI
PROCES POTENTIAL L O D R
PROCESS POTENTIAL CAUSE(S)/ RECOMMENDED TY & TARGET
S NAME/ EFFECT(S) OF S A C E P S O D R
FUNCTION FAILURE MODE MECHANISM(S) ACTION(S) COMPLETION ACTIONS
NUMBER FAILURE E S C T N E C E P
S
OF FAILURE PREVENTION DETECTION DATE TAKEN
V V C T N
10 Correct Incorrect Misbuild 7 Manual: 7 No No 10 490 Sensor to Shad, B. 3/1/02 7 7 4 112

Part - part incorrectly prevention detection detect
pilot installed selected bearing
bearing type
20 Correct Incorrect unable to 7 Machine 3 No In-line 6 126 New Laser NA 7 3 2 42

sub- or install Vision ID prevention Audits Station.
assy reversed Incorrect
sub-
assembly
How often does this How high is

cause happen? the risk?
(AIAG PFMEA Third Edition)

SEVERITY RANKINGS
Criteria: Severity of Effect Criteria: Severity of Effect
This ranking results when a potential failure mode results in a This ranking results when a potential failure mode
final customer and/or a manufacturing/assembly plant defect. results in a final customer and/or a
The final customer should always be considered first. If both manufacturing/assembly plant defect. The final
occur, use the higher of the two severities. customer should always be considered first. If both
Effect (Customer Effect) occur, use the higher of the two severities. Ranking
(Manufacturing/Assembly Effect)
Hazardous Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode affects Or may endanger operator (machine or assembly) 10
without warning safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with without warning.
government regulation without warning.
Hazardous Very high severity ranking when a potential failure mode affects Or may endanger operator (machine or assembly) with 9
with warning safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with warning.
government regulation with warning.
Very High Vehicle/item inoperable (loss of primary function). Or 100% of product may have to be scrapped, or 8
vehicle/item repaired in repair department with a
repair time greater than one hour.
High Vehicle/item operable but at a reduced level of performance. Or product may have to be sorted and a portion (less 7
Customer very dissatisfied. than 100%) scrapped, or vehicle/item repaired in
repair department with a repair time between a half-
hour and an hour.
Moderate Vehicle/item operable but Comfort/Convenience item(s) Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product may have 6
inoperable. Customer Dissatisfied. to be scrapped with no sorting, or a vehicle/item
repaired in repair department with a repair time less
than a half-hour.
Low Vehicle/Item operable but Comfort/Convenience item(s) operable Or 100% of product may have to be reworked, or 5
but at a reduced level of performance. vehicle/item repaired off-line but does not go to repair
department.
Very Low Fit and Finish/Squeak and Rattle item does not conform. Defect Or the product may have to be sorted, with no scrap, 4
noticed by most customers (greater than 75%). and a portion (less than 100%) reworked.
Minor Fit and Finish/Squeak and Rattle item does not conform. Defect Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product may have 3
noticed by 50% of customers. to be reworked, with no scrap, on-line but out-of-
station.
Very Minor Fit and Finish/Squeak and Rattle item does not conform. Defect Or a portion (less than 100%) of the product may have 2
noticed by discriminating customers (less than 25%. to be reworked with no scrap, on-line but in-station.
None No discernible effect. Or slight inconvenience to operation or operator, or no 1
effect.

OCCURRENCE RANKING
Probability Likely Failure Rates PpK Ranking

Very High: Persistent Failures > 100 per Thousand Pieces < 0.55 10
50 per Thousand Pieces > 0.55 9
High: Frequent Failures 20 per Thousand Pieces > 0.78 8
Moderate: Occasional Failures 5 per Thousand Pieces > 0.94 6
Low: Relatively Few Failures 0.5 per Thousand Pieces > 1.20 3
0.1 per Thousand Pieces > 1.30 2
Remote: Failure is Unlikely < 0.01 per Thousand Pieces > 1.67 1

DETECTION RANKINGS
Inspection
Proofed
Gauged
Manual
Rating
Detection Criteria Suggested range of detection methods
Error
Almost Absolute certainty of
10 Cannot detect or is not checked.
Impossible non-detection. X
Very Controls will
9 Control achieved with Indirect or random checks only.
Remote probably not detect. X
Controls have poor
8 Remote Control is achieved with visual inspection only.
chance of detection. X
Controls have poor
7 Very Low Control is achieved with double visual inspection only.
chance of detection. X
6 Low Controls may detect. X X Control is achieved with charting methods, such as SPC.
Control is based on variable gauging after parts have left
5 Moderate Controls may detect. the station, or go/no-go gauging performed on 100% of the
X parts after parts have left the station.
Controls have a Error detection in subsequent operations, OR gauging
Moderately
4 good chance to performed on set-up and first piece check (for set-up
High
detect. X X causes only).
Controls have a Error detection in station, OR error detection in subsequent
3 High good chance to operations by multiple layers of acceptance: Supply,
detect. X X select, install, verify. Cannot accept discrepant part.
Controls almost Error detection in-station (automatic gauging with
2 Very High
certain to detect. X automatic stop feature). Cannot pass discrepant part.
Controls certain to Discrepant parts cannot be made because item has been
1 Certain
detect. X error proofed by process/product design.

RISK PRIORITY NUMBER (RPN)
• Risk Priority Number (RPN) is the result of Severity, Occurrence and

Detection rankings.
Severity x Occurrence x Detection = RPN

(Example)

• PFMEA’s shall be completed for all manufacturing processes and
support functions as required by the Quality Management System.
Support functions include: (receiving inspection, material

handling, labeling and shipping, etc…)
• PFMEA’s shall:
 conform to current AIAG guidelines and customer requirements.
 be updated on a regular basis (living documents).
 exist for all product lines / part numbers.
 include all processes and process steps.
 be utilized for Continual Improvement.
 have accurate Severity/Occurrence/Detection ratings.

• Multi-disciplinary teams shall perform periodic PFMEA Reviews.
• The frequency and/or number of PFMEA reviews shall be determined

by
supplier leadership based on:
 customer expectations (PR/Rs, DDW, Launch activities, etc…)
 process capability (FTQ, SPC, etc…)
 changes to the process (Error proofing, Tier 2 changes, etc…)
• Criteria to prioritize which PFMEA to review include:
 product from an acquisition, tool move or change in supplier.
 PFMEA developed without adequate cross-functional involvement.
 PFMEA for part(s) with history of PR/R, Customer complaints,
Warranty or FTQ issues.
 Occurrence ratings (FTQ, scrap, etc…) have changed significantly.
 PFMEA with oldest revision dates.
• PFMEA Review shall include the following at a minimum:
 verification that all operations/processes are included and
accurate (Paint, Heat Treat, Labeling, etc…).
 all process controls are included.
 Detection ratings are accurate .
 Occurrence ratings are analyzed using data (SPC, FTQ, Quality
Gate, C.A.R.E.*, Scrap, Layered Audit* results, etc…).
 verification that the PFMEA meets customer requirements and
expectations (AIAG, PPAP, Launch, DDW, etc…).
• Upon completion of the review, a list of the highest (RPN) Risk

Reduction opportunities is established or revised based on the new
data.
• An action plan or equivalent shall be utilized by the multi-disciplinary

team to track progress in reducing the RPN ratings.
RPN TRACKING CHART
(Proactive) (Example)
RPN Completion Revised

No. OP No. Function & Failure Mode Value Who Recommended Actions Date RPN
SENSOR TO DETECT
1 10 INCORRECT BEARING INSTALLED 490 B. SHAD BEARING TYPE 12/1/2004 112
INCORRECT OR REVERSED
2 20 SUBASSEMBLY 126 N. ADAMS INSTALL LASER STATION 12/31/2004 42
INSTALL POST ON ASSEMBLY

3 50 HOLE MISSING 168 S. BROWN FIXTURE 12/23/2004 42
4 60 INCORRECT LABEL 112 V. WAGNER IMPLEMENT SCANNER 1/30/2005 21
The number of RPN on the list is dependent on complexity of parts and

process, size of plant, customer feedback, etc…

(Example: GM form1927-21)
PFMEA RPN REDUCTION SUMMARY - Part Number: Supplier Name
OPERATION SUMMARY MONTHLY COMPARISONS OF OPERATION TOTALS
OPERATION COMBINED TOTAL NUMBER # OF CAUSES HIGHEST INDIVIDUAL OPERATION Month Year Month Year
BASELINE
NUMBER RPN OF CAUSES > 40 RPN NUMBER RPN RPN
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0
RPN Reduction Plan - Top Ten
Oper. / RPN Total Number of Causes Range Summary 10

Item
Function & Failure Mode Recommended Action(s) Compl. Date Responsibility

STA. # Value 40
0-
1
1 0.9
2 0.8
0.7
3 0.6
4 0.5
0.4
5 0.3
0.2
6 0.1
7 0
Mont h, Ye a r Mont h, Ye a r Mont h, Ye a r Mont h, Ye a r
8
Mo n t h
9
10
(This is for reference only; check for latest revision)

REACTIVE RISK REDUCTION:
ERROR PROOFING PAST QUALITY FAILURES
• Multi-disciplinary team(s) shall be utilized to develop a list of the
past internal and external quality failures.
• Team(s) identify true PFMEA Occurrence and Detection Rating for

each RPN.
• Team(s) shall develop an action plan to Error Proof the failures.

 Recommended Actions are improvements that will prevent or
reduce the Failure Mode.
 When Error Proofing is not feasible, a plan to improve detection
shall be established.
 A team member shall be assigned responsibility for implementing
the recommended action.
 Reasonable target completion dates shall be established.
REACTIVE RISK REDUCTION:
ERROR PROOFING PAST QUALITY FAILURES
• Error proofing shall be verified per the Error Proofing Verification*

process.
• When corrective actions have been implemented, teams shall
validate the new Occurrence and Detection rankings and resultant
RPN.
• Teams shall update PFMEA’s with all corrective action measures.

RISK REDUCTION
SITE LEADERSHIP:
• should review the need for PFMEA training at least once per year.
• shall support RPN reduction activities and provide necessary

resources.
• shall review the RPN reduction tracking charts.
• shall ensure that formal multi-disciplinary teams are

utilized in the preparation and ongoing review of PFMEA’s.

RISK REDUCTION SUMMARY
PROACTIVE
 Leadership shall support RPN reduction activities and provide

necessary resources.
 PFMEA’s shall undergo a complete review.
 A list of the highest (RPN) Risk Reduction opportunities shall be

established.
 An action plan or equivalent shall be utilized by the multi-disciplinary

team to track progress in reducing the RPN ratings.
REACTIVE
 A list of the past internal and external quality failures shall be
established.
 Team(s) shallREV.develop
QSB WORKSHOP 112404 an action
47 plan to Error Proof the failures.
ERROR PROOFING
VERIFICATION
Was error proofing verified?

THINGS DONE RIGHT 99.9%
OF THE TIME

THINGS DONE RIGHT 99.9% OF
THE TIME IN THE UNITED STATES
MEANS . . .
• One hour of unsafe drinking water per month
• Two unsafe landings at O’Hare Airport each day
• 16,000 lost pieces of mail per hour
• 20,000 incorrect drug prescriptions per year
• 500 incorrect surgical operations per week
• 50 newborn babies dropped each day by doctors
• 22,000 checks per hour deducted from wrong accounts
• 32,000 missed heartbeats per person each year

WITH ERROR PROOFING DEVICE FUNCTIONING
Failure mode: Burr Cause: dull tool
Severity: Defect caught at GM Assembly Line (scrap): 5

Occurrence: Supplier process PpK > 1.10 4
Detection: Error Proofing in process 3
RPN = 5 x 4 x 3 = 60
ERROR PROOFING DEVICE FAILS
Failure mode: Burr Cause: dull tool
Severity: Defect caught at GM Assembly Line (scrap): 5

Occurrence: Supplier process PpK > 1.10 4
Detection: Error Proofing device not functioning 10
RPN = 5 x 4 x 10 = 200
ERROR PROOFING VERIFICATION
All error proofing/detection devices with the potential to fail, wear,

misalign, or otherwise become out-of-adjustment shall be verified at a
minimum of once per day.
Note: This is not mastering a gage, (e.g. Setting gage to zero)

It is sending known good & bad parts through to confirm the
device is operating correctly.
.
DEFINITIONS:
Error Proofing Device – (CAN NOT MAKE) - Devices which prevent

the manufacture or assembly of non-conforming product.
Error Detection Device – (CAN NOT PASS or CAN NOT ACCEPT)

Devices which prevent the transfer of non-conforming product
(e.g. 100% in-line inspection equipment).
• Master Document of Error Proofing devices, with
ERROR PROOFING DEVICES SHALL BE
identification number and location
VERIFIED AND THEIR RESPECTIVE
• Verification frequency
LOCATIONS DOCUMENTED • Identify masters (Good/Bad) and defect being checked
• Clearly defined reaction plan if device fails to detect

REACTION PLANS SHALL BE DEVELOPED
• When/if shut down when device fails to detect bad part?
TO FOLLOW WHEN THE ERROR PROOFING • Containment plan? (100% Inspection, etc.)
DEVICES FAIL VERIFICATION • Are suspect parts rerun thru Error Proofing device?
• How/when is Error Proofing device repaired?
• Lot size of parts run between Error Proofing verification

ERROR PROOFING DEVICES SHALL BE • History of process to determine verification frequency
VERIFIED ONCE per DAY • How robust is the process?
• How easy is it to contain suspect product?
• Develop Log of Error Proof Verification failures

VERIFICATION RESULTS SHALL BE with reaction plan to non-conformities
RECORDED WITH IMMEDIATE RESPONSES • Develop form to notify of non-conformities and escalate
TO FAILURES reaction to non-conformities
• Document as Lessons Learned
VERIFICATION RESULTS SHALL BE • Method for getting information to management

REVIEWED BY SITE LEADERSHIP • Determine how information is to be displayed

(Example) SHIFT:
ERROR PROOFING VERIFICATION CHECKLIST DATE:

SNAP RING PRESENCE
op# THESE ITEMS ARE TO BE CHECKED DAILY Code YES NO

OP 30 4 OPERATE L&R SNAP RING INSTALLATION TOOL WITHOUT SNAP RING - IS PART REJECTED ? 4
OP 30 5 DID RED LIGHT ON LIGHT TREE TURN ON ? (L&R) 5
OP 30 6 DID REJECTED PART STAY IN STATION ? (L&R) 6
OP 30 7 DID ANDON ALARM SOUND? (L&R) 7
OP 40 8 OPERATE SMALL SNAP RING INSTALLATION TOOL WITHOUT SNAP RING - DID GAGE REJECT PART ? 8
9 DID RED LIGHT ON LIGHT TREE TURN ON ? (SMALL SNAP RING)? 9
10 DID REJECTED PART STAY IN STATION? (SMALL SNAP RING) 10
11 DID ANDON ALARM SOUND ? (SMALL SNAP RING)? 11
12 DOES PART STILL STAY IN STATION WHEN HAND VERIFICATION TOOL DISPLAYS A RED REJECT LIGHT? 182
13 IS SMALL SNAP RING VISUAL IN PLACE ? 15
14 IF SMALL SNAP RING TOOL IS DOWN, IS THE BACK-UP GAGE USED? 12
15 DOES BACK-UP GAGE REJECT PART IF NO SNAP RING IS PRESENT? 13
16 DOES THE LIGHT TURN RED? (SMALL SNAP RING BACK-UP)? 14
YES NO
SUPERVISOR:
TOTAL # OF X'S IN EACH COLUMN
AUDITOR:
ANY ITEM SHADED NOT WORKING PROPERLY, THE SUPERVISOR MUST BE NOTIFIED
IMMEDIATELY.
ANY ITEM OUT OF COMPLIANCE SHOULD BE REVIEWED WITH SUPERVISOR OR A COPY
OF THE AUDIT GIVEN TO SUPERVISOR.

(Example)
DEPT.____________ ERROR PROOFING VERIFICATION RESULTS
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
% IN COMPLIANCE:
# OF ITEMS ON CHECKLIST:
# OF VERIFICATIONS
TOTAL # OF ITEMS VERIFIED:
# OF ITEMS IN COMPLIANCE:
ITEMS NOT IN COMPLIANCE NUMBER OF ITEMS NOT IN COMPLIANCE

SUMMARY
 Error proofing devices shall be verified at least once per day.
 Error Proofing device locations shall be documented.
 Reaction Plans to failures shall be developed.
 Verification results shall be recorded.
 Leadership shall review verification results.

LAYERED AUDITS
Were Leadership Layered

Audits Performed?

Layered Audits provide a system to:
- verify compliance to the documented process.
- instill discipline.
- improve communication.
- improve overall quality.
Layered Audits must be owned by manufacturing leadership. Quality

and other functions will participate and support the Layered Audit
system.
• At a minimum of once per shift, Layered Audits shall be conducted

on high risk items throughout the manufacturing, assembly,and
associated processes.
• Frequency of Layered Audits is based on production volume and

the level of risk of the process and associated procedures.
• Layered Audits supplement ongoing control plan and job

instruction checks.
• A check list of high risk items to be verified during Layered Audits
shall be established.
• Elements should be considered in developing the check list.
 Gages functioning and calibration confirmation
 Stacking / packing techniques
 Visual aids presence and content
 Process parameter setting
 Job instructions
 Correct product identification
 Torque monitoring (if applicable)
 Documentation / record completion
 Customer feedback
• Review results from internal audits (process, safety, housekeeping,
management walk through, etc…) and include repetitive non-

conformances on the Layered Audit checklist.
LAYERED AUDIT CHECKLIST
(Example)
Op # 30 Assembly MON TUES WED THUR FRI SAT
Are the builders checking rotation and marking parts (touch point)?
Have the parts been inspected for presence of 8 holes and identified with
orange marker?
MON TUES WED THUR FRI SAT
Are the operator verification sheets completed daily by all shifts ?

Are the tagging procedures being followed?
Are there any Temporary Alert Notices posted that have expired?
Total Non-conforming Items MON TUES WED THUR FRI SAT
LIST ANY QUALITY OR MANUFACTURING CONCERNS ON ALL OPERATIONS.

• Layered Audits shall verify appropriate quality documentation.
• Layered Audits results shall be recorded.
• Non-conformities shall be addressed immediately
 Reaction plan(s) for non-conformities detected during

Layered Audits shall be documented and available for use.
 Corrective actions shall be documented.
• When appropriate the Layered Audit non-conformance shall be added

to the Fast Response* Tracking Form and/or the C.A.R.E.* checklist.
• Audit results shall be summarized and reviewed by the

manufacturing site leadership.
• Layered Audit results shall be added to the Lessons Learned*

database when appropriate.
• Layered Audit frequency:
- High risk items shall be verified a minimum of once per shift.
- The manufacturing supervisor shall verify (daily) quality
documentation is completed by the operators.
- The manufacturing area manager shall verify (weekly) that
supervisor verification is being completed.
- Site leadership shall conduct periodic process verification

assessments (monthly/quarterly).
Operator
Supervisor
M T W T F M T W T F M T W T F
Manager
Site Leader

LAYERED AUDIT STRUCTURE (Example)
SHIFT DAILY WEEKLY M ONTHLY QUARTERLY
PART / PRODUCT
Er r or Pr oofing V e r ification
Fir s t Pie ce Ins pe ction
Las t Pie ce Ins pe ction
Standar d Wor k Ins tr uction Pr e s e nt
Ope r ator Tr aining Tr ack ing She e t
Safe ty Is s ue s
PROCESS
Se t-up
SPC Com pliance
Tooling Appr oval (Sign-off)
Quality Gate Data
SYSTEM
Pr e ve ntative M aintainance
Calibr ation
Lot Tr ace ability
Hous e k e e ping
V OICE OF THE CUSTOM ER

6-Pane l Pos te d
Action Plans Update d & on-tim e
PR/R's Pos te d
Cus tom e r De live r y Pe r for m ance
C.A.R.E.

(Example)
DEPARTMENT LAYERED AUDIT RESULTS
ITEMS NOT IN COMPLIANCE
ITEM NUMBER OF OCCURRENCES

DEPT.____________ (Example) LAYERED AUDITS RESULTS
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
% IN COMPLIANCE:
# OF ITEMS ON ASSESSMENT:
# OF ASSESSMENTS
TOTAL # OF ITEMS ASSESSED:
# OF ITEMS IN COMPLIANCE:
The following are other best practices suggested for performance tracking:
 the number audits scheduled versus number performed.
 the number of audits performed on time or late.
 the number of corrective actions opened due to non-conformances found.
 the number of open versus closed corrective actions.
LAYERED AUDITS SUMMARY
 designate manufacturing to own and conduct Layered
Audits.
 develop a check list of high risk items to be verified during
audit process.
 establish frequency of audits, (High risk items to be

audited at a minimum of once per shift).
 verify appropriate quality documentation.
 track and review the results of Layered Audits.

C.A.R.E.
CUSTOMER ACCEPTANCE REVIEW & EVALUATION

“PROTECTING THE CUSTOMER”
Quality Verification

C.A.R.E.
CUSTOMER ACCEPTANCE REVIEW & EVALUATION
• Protects your customer from non-conforming product, discrepancies

and labeling errors.
• Verifies that process controls are effective.
• Provides information for rapid corrective action.
• Supplements the approved control plan.
• Applies to customer satisfaction items that are part related.
• The Plant Manager & Quality Manager should facilitate activities.
• C.A.R.E. activities should remain until irreversible corrective action is
in place and verified.

1.) Customer Satisfaction items shall be identified.
Customer Satisfaction Items can include:
- Pass-through items
- Customer/Assembly Plant Feedback
- Warranty Issues
- Customer used features
- Past PR/R issues
- High RPN Failure modes
- Labeling
- Supplier Management Concerns
(such as Tier II changes, tool moves)

2.) 100% Inspection shall be performed when possible.
When 100% inspection is not possible/feasible, customer satisfaction
items will be subject to increased audit frequency.
Additional tools that can be utilized to address the need to Protect

your Customer are:
• GP12 Methodology
• Quality Gates
• Dock Audits
• Part specific layered audits
When practical Customer satisfaction items, part(s) and/or lot will

be marked, touched, gauged or scanned.

3.) When nonconforming parts are found:
• Escalate non-conformance per reaction plan.
• Rework and inspect in the normal process flow (when practical)

rather than off-line to ensure specified requirements are met.
• Offline rework should be approved and included in the part control

plan.
• Rework requires standardized work instructions and inspection.
• Reworked material must be sent back through C.A.R.E.
• Report nonconforming data to Fast Response* Meeting.
• Add the root cause corrective action to the Layered Audit*.

Closing steps:
Customer satisfaction items will be reviewed periodically as appropriate.
Trend analysis should be performed to enable continual improvement.
C.A.R.E.
SUMMARY
 identify Customer Satisfaction Items.
 implement 100% inspection or alternative inspection.
 maintain C.A.R.E. activity until irreversible corrective
action is implemented.
 establish reaction plan to non-conformances.
 review C.A.R.E. results.

LESSONS LEARNED
Capitalize on success…
minimize mistakes

LESSONS LEARNED
A Lessons Learned system:
• establishes a process for capturing information that will

support continual improvement to all operations/processes.
• prevents repeated mistakes allowing an organization to

capitalize on its successes.
• applies to all functions and responsibilities, therefore,

everyone in the organization should participate.
All documentation that will support continuous improvement

shall be entered into a Lessons Learned database.
A disciplined approach to problem prevention using Lessons

Learned shall be established.
Lessons Learned may be identified by anyone. Most activities within
an organization result in prevention of future problems or improving
performance. These activities build Lessons Learned.
Examples of activities to Identify Lessons Learned:
• GM Read Across Matrix

• Monthly “Q”-Charts
• Layered Audits
• Error Proofing Verification
• Internal Quality Issues
• C.A.R.E.
• APQP Process
• Continuous Improvement Teams
• Problem Solving (PR/Rs, Risk Reduction)
• Management Reviews
• Suggestion Programs

(example)
READ ACROSS MATRIX (Ref. GM 1927-69,PRR Read Across)
SYMBOL & STATUS KEY:
SUPPLIER: PQE/SQE: O Original Product line and location

Name: Name: X Product line and/or location with similar process
Location: Phone: R Repeat Issues
Duns: GM location / Provider N/A Not Applicable
Contact Name: Contact Phone: Completed & 3rd Party/GM verified
Contact Phone: E-mail: Completed & Supplier verified only
E-mail: Not Completed
Eight Week Period: Due Date:
A.P.Q.P. Duns #1/ Location Duns #2/ Location
Classification
Product /
Process
Part Name & GM Assy. N/C or CS
Number Plant
Customer Concern Defect on Part 5 Why Analysis
CPV Status 1
PRR Number / Issue Corporate
Champion Symbols
Containment
Technical Root Cause Identified
Corrective Action
Predict Corrective Action
Prevent Corrective Action
Protect Corrective Action
Key Findings Corrective Action
Part Name & GM Assy. N/C or CS

Number Plant
Customer Concern Defect on Part 5 Why Analysis
CPV Status 2
PRR Number / Issue Corporate
Champion Symbols
Containment
Technical Root Cause Identified
Corrective Action
Predict Corrective Action

Prevent Corrective Action
Protect Corrective Action
Key Findings Corrective Action
(This is for reference only; check for latest revision)

Lessons Learned shall be documented. Documentation may include:
• Lessons Learned Form
• APQP Checklist,
• PFMEA ,
• Computer Form or Website, etc…
Lessons Learned must be communicated and kept available to all

current
and potential users. Communication can be performed by:
• posting the lessons learned form,
• including on a lessons learned website,
• utilizing a company newspaper or closed circuit tv,
• distribution of pocket cards, etc…
Leadership should review the Lessons Learned process to assure

Implementation.

LESSONS LEARNED SUMMARY
 empower everyone in the organization to participate in

Lessons Learned process.
 establish a process for capturing Lessons Learned.
 establish and institutionalize a system to document Lessons

Learned.
 establish a disciplined approach to problem prevention using
Lessons Learned.
 review the Lessons Learned process to assure
implementation.

KEY STRATEGIES
• Fast Response
• Control of Non-Conforming
Product (Identification)
No Major Disruptions
• Standardized Work
No PRR’S
• Standard Operator Training
+ 0 PPM’S
• Risk (RPN) Reduction
= World Class Quality
• Error Proofing Verification
• Layered Audits
• C.A.R.E.
• Lessons Learned

Now that we have discussed QSB…
Educators Tell Us We Learn & Understand
• 10% of what we hear
• 15% of what we see
• 20% of what we both see & hear
• 40% of what we discuss with others
• 80% of what we experience directly or practice
• 90% of what we attempt to teach others

WORKSHOP

WORKSHOP AGENDA NOTES
Workshop time is valuable. Please refrain from spending group time
to work on other issues.
If the group needs outside resources (HR, IE, etc…,), contact those
who can help. Contact the Workshop Trainer or Supplier Champion.
Results will be delivered to the Top Management of the company

during the second day of training. Use this as an opportunity to
enhance the procedures already in place and meet all the
requirements for each strategy by presenting each team’s ideas.
The presentations are starting points and will need more

development by employees and management as they are
implemented.
Results that cannot be achieved by the closing meeting, must be

included in the QSB Action Plan.

DIVIDING INTO WORKSHOP TEAMS
Form teams of three to five people when possible. If there are not
enough people to form nine teams, assign two or three strategies to
each team. The following are suggestions on how to pair strategies
and assign personnel:
RISK REDUCTION Manufacturing Engineers,

ERROR PROOFING VERIFICATION Maintenance, Operators,
LESSONS LEARNED Supervisors, Auditors
OPERATOR TRAINING Supervisors, Operators,

STANDARDIZED WORK Training or Human Resources,
NONCONFORMING PRODUCT Manufacturing Engineering,
Quality Engineer
LAYERED AUDIT Operations Manager,

C.A.R.E. Quality Manager,
FAST RESPONSE Operators

WORKSHOP TEAM DELIVERABLES
Review the presentation and determine if all SHALLS are presently being met by
your systems.
– Is there a form? How is the requirement being documented?
– How is the requirement being tracked and analyzed?
– Is management reviewing the results?
– How are results communicated to the workforce? Are results posted? Are
results discussed in employee team meetings?
– Has the requirement been included in a QS 9000 procedure?
Develop suggestions for forms, tracking methods, management review timing

and communication responsibilities.
Develop a ‘To-do List’ or use the ‘Action Plan’ form to begin listing actions
required to implement strategy.
As a group decide how and who will present the team’s ideas.
WORKSHOP PRESENTATION AGENDA
•Introduce each team member.
•State the strategy to be presented.
•BRIEFLY describe the requirements and their status: being

met in all cases, partially met in some areas, not being met, etc...
•Present your suggestions: forms, tracking methods, etc…
•Present your ‘To-do List’ or ‘Action Items’.
•Ask for questions and comments.
NOTE: The presentation for each strategy should take approximately 10 minutes.


QSB 1124041

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

QSB 1124041

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FAST RESPONSE

This presentation was developed by General Motors Corporation Worldwide Purchasing.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

At the Fast Response meeting, leadership shall:

Owners shall be responsible for assuring all problem solving

• Report out to Leadership is scheduled on the Fast Response

• The Fast Response Tracking form should be part of a visual

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

Y 1 Material contaminated 1/10/2004 333933 McGrath 4/29/2004 G G Y G Y

G 2 Burrs 2/15/2004 98002222 Smith CLOSED G G N/A N/A G 3/11/2004

R 3 Part mislocated on assembly 3/21/2004 950560607 McGrath 4/29/2004 G G R G G

Y 4 Mixed parts 3/21/2004 34523339 McIntosh 4/29/2004 G G Y G G

Paint dots f ound on loose & mis-

R 6 Loose 7mm bolt on f ront cover 4/17/2004 98002222 Davis 4/18/2004 R R R R R

EXIT CRITERIA STATUS KEY

R Required but not initiated

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

Green No Quality Disruptions

Yellow Internal Quality Disruption

Red Customer Quality Disruption

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

 hold a daily Fast Response meeting.

 utilize a form, like the Fast Response Tracking form to

 display daily Quality status.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

 Clearly identified using consistent identification (tagging)

 Prevented from unintended use or installation (containment)

• Establish a consistent identification process using a Visual

(Example) STOP LIGHT METHOD preferred method

TAG CONTENT TAG CONTENT TAG CONTENT

IN THIS SECTION IN THIS SECTION IN THIS SECTION

IS AT LOCAL IS AT LOCAL IS AT LOCAL

DISCRETION DISCRETION DISCRETION

PLT001 PLT002 PLT003

• Leadership must develop, organize and maintain a system

• All non-conforming and suspect product shall be segregated.

DEPARTMENT: DEPARTMENT CONTAINMENT OWNER: DATE:

Laboratory G. Hall 1/6/2003

Receiving 500 P.S. 500 P. Smith

SEGREGATE SUSPECT PRODUCT TO (location, as feasible): 2548 pcs to Containment Area

When do you call the customer?

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

• For product containment issues, containers shall be identified:

• All Control Plan inspections and tests shall be performed. Therefore,

NOTE: When it is not possible to reintroduce at or prior to removal: a

Non-conforming product shall be:

 clearly identified using consistent identification (tagging).

Product containment issues shall be reviewed by Leadership.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

“Standardization is the road to

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

• Training is simplified and consistent.

• Assures leadership operation is running as approved.

• Multi-disciplinary team(s) shall continuously develop and improve

Standardized Operations Worksheets

WORKSTATION AREA DRAWN TO SCALE

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

General Motors Corporation. All rights reserved.

Pa rt Production Proce dure A d d ress: A A -0

Employee Signature _ Trainer Signature _