Featured Product
This Week in Quality Digest Live
Management Features
Ryan E. Day
Plasan chooses the FARO QuantumS ScanArm to inspect for big launches and big parts
Gleb Tsipursky
Strategies to assess and defeat mental blind spots and avoid disasters
Pawel Korzynski
Organizations can persuade employees to post more company-related content willingly
Chad Kymal
Future systems start with documentation hierarchies but focus on electronic process documentation
Julie Winkle Giulioni
Take back your power to move business plans forward

More Features

Management News
Awards to be presented March 24, 2020, at the Quest for Excellence Conference, in National Harbor, MD
Workers more at ease about job security. Millennials more confident regarding wages.
46% of creative workers want video games in the office
A guide for practitioners and managers
Provides eight operating modes and five alarms
April 25, 2019 workshop focused on hoshin kanri and critical leadership skills related to strategy deployment and A3 thinking
Process concerns technology feasibility, commercial potential, and transition to marketplace
Identifying the 252 needs for workforce development to meet our future is a complex, wicked, and urgent problem
How established companies turn the tables on digital disruptors

More News

Richard Ruiz

Management

Does LPA Administration Get in the Way of Quality?

Seven ways automation can focus layered process audits on quality improvement rather than administrative workload

Published: Thursday, November 14, 2019 - 12:02

According to the Deloitte Automotive Quality 2020 report, auto manufacturers spend an average of 116 days annually on quality management system (QMS) compliance.

Layered process audits (LPAs), which can number more than a thousand audits per year, can take up many of those hours for companies that perform these short, frequent checks.

Executed correctly, LPAs can help sharply reduce defects and quality costs relatively quickly, but these high-frequency audits can also bury companies in administrative work if they’re not prepared.

This article examines classic problems standing in the way of quality, and how to fix them to make bigger and faster improvements.

Scheduling inefficiencies

Making and sticking to a schedule is fundamental to LPAs success, but the reality of scheduling daily, shift-level audits of critical to quality processes can quickly become overwhelming. Scheduling around paid time off and planned downtime is more complex and time-consuming, as is notifying auditors of their responsibilities.

An automated LPA platform provides an advantage for companies that opt for automation, allowing them to create an annual audit schedule integrated with Outlook in a matter of minutes.

Low audit compliance

Low audit-completion rates are a thorny problem for many companies, preventing quality improvement by:
• Allowing problems to slip through the cracks
• Limiting the amount of data companies collect
• Sending the message that LPAs don’t matter

Adding alerts to calendar invites can help remind people not to skip audits, but low audit-completion rates often represent an accountability problem. If skipping audits is standard practice, why should anyone participate? The fix is simple: People should have to answer to management for missed audits. If management won’t hold them accountable, you’ll need to go back and get leadership buy-in for LPAs.

Poor data quality

Data quality is another common challenge for companies that conduct LPAs. The two main problems are pencil-whipping and questions that don’t add value.

Pencil-whipping occurs when people just check the box to complete audits quickly. One way to identify when this happens is by timing audits. If someone completes audits in under a minute, it’s unlikely he was looking very closely.

The other problem gets back to LPA questions themselves. Many companies rely on generic questions used throughout the plant, but getting quality data requires questions specific to the process or work area.

Lack of coaching and feedback

Using audits to cast blame means missing critical opportunities for coaching and feedback. One manufacturer we heard from even suggested calling LPAs layered process coaching, given the kinds of interactions they facilitate.

At their core, audits bring leaders face to face with plant-floor issues, and also give operators the chance to be heard. To get these benefits, you must show respect by:
• Making eye contact with the person you’re auditing
• Demonstrating genuine interest in understanding the process
• Soliciting feedback and suggestions
• Asking why rather than criticizing workers when you find a nonconformance
• Giving praise when people do things right

Not addressing nonconformances

If you don’t have a closed-loop process for following up on nonconformances, your audit program is dead in the water. Not only are you risking quality escapes, you’re also inadvertently telling your team you don’t really care about audit findings—which means you can never build a culture of quality.

Fixing this problem requires a standardized process to:
• Notify supervisors of nonconformances requiring corrective action
• Create a corrective action plan outlining responsible parties and timelines
• Circle back on problems to hold people accountable for action items
• Regularly review audit results with management and address overdue items

An automated audit platform streamlines this process, especially when it’s linked into corrective action tracking.

Reporting lag time

Reporting is another crucial area where an inefficient process can get in the way of results. It’s particularly difficult when manufacturers rely on manual or spreadsheet-based tracking, which creates a delay between when audits are conducted, and findings are analyzed. Someone must input the data and analyze them by hand, a process that uses valuable time while problems continue unabated.

Automation can be a driver of change here, allowing companies to identify problems in real time, so they can take action immediately to head off potential quality issues. Freeing up this time also means people can focus on strategic quality projects in place of data entry.

Lack of verification

The final piece of ensuring that your audit process isn’t blocking quality is verification of corrective actions and revisiting missed audit items.

For many organizations, it’s hard enough dealing with the backlog of corrective actions, let alone going back to see whether they’re actually working. Getting it right can be as simple as adding a new question to LPAs that gets randomly rotated in, allowing you to make sure you’re holding the gains.

The traditional approach to LPAs involving paper checklists and Excel-spreadsheets data entry creates inefficiencies that ultimately get away from quality. LPAs automation can address these inefficiencies and take the focus off of administrative work so teams can focus on their true job—improving quality and keeping customers happy.

First published Oct. 8, 2019, on the Beacon Quality blog.

Discuss

About The Author

Richard Ruiz’s picture

Richard Ruiz

Richard Ruiz, Director of Technical Sales for Beacon Quality, helps manufacturers achieve their goals through automation and data analysis. Using best practices gleaned from consulting with hundreds of global top tier organizations across verticals, Richard enjoys listening, learning, and sharing ways to improve quality, safety, and environmental initiatives. Richard comes to Ease, Inc. as an industry recognized software solution developer working with many Fortune 100 companies and governmental agencies.