Use the "IS/IS NOT" tool to structure team thinking about the definition of the issue you want

to investigate. Use it especially

when you suspect there is only partial knowledge of the situation. Rephrase the questions should you feel they do not apply.

D2A Competition

D2B IS IS NOT Go Find Who

Who is competing? Who is not competing?

Who benefitting? Who is not benefitting?

Who

Who is aware competition? Who is not?

What form of advertising used? What form of advertising is not used?

What is the spectator average? What is not the spectator average?

What

Where is the competition held? Where is it not held?

Where
When
How Many
How Often

Combine the information collected above to explain the problem in the field below. Include inforamtion regarding, who, What,Why,
Where,When, How many and How often is the problem appearing.
D2C Problem Definition
 D2D - Supplier Complaint / Concern Crib Sheet
No Action Notes Yes No N/A
Initial Evaluation
1 Evaluate initial severity of the concern Before FMEA severity ranking
2 Date of concern Log
3 Create formal Concern description Using cross functional team if necessary
Specify i.e. dimensional, metallurgical, fit for
4 Nature of defect
function, cosmetic
5 Sub supplier / raw material supplier
6 Supplier
Internal (Goods inspection, production,
7 Where the concern was discovered - place of
dispatch)
detection
8 Customer
9 Field
10 In transit
11 Disruption to Shop floor Internal I.e. production affected - Log costs
12 Disruption to Customer Log costs
13 What is the components VEHICLE application?
14 What is the components ASSEMBLY application i.e. manual or automatic?
15 What is the PFMEA severity ranking?
Evaluate the severity in terms of escalation i.e.
16 Escalation / communication
raise in daily meeting, call meeting
17 Supplier notified? Has the supplier been notified of the issue?
Depending on severity i.e.. hourly, daily weekly
18 Regular reviews with the supplier
etc
Investigation
19 Metrology If not request - Analysis results
20 Laboratory report If not request - Analysis results
21 Photograph (consider videos, CAD layout etc) If not request - Analysis photo's
22 Product Validation / Homologation / testing required i.e. parts are being used
23 Other (specify) If not request - Analysis results
24 Are the parts away from drawing? Yes / No
25 Has a copy of the batch card been retained? For traceability purposes
26 Can the parts be used under deviation / concession? if Yes - Record deviation reference number
Must be within this time period regardless of
27 Initial response 24 Hour response (see containment)
content
28 Repeat concern? Yes / No - The effect maybe repeated
Containment
29 Stock sort initiated / instigated? Where appropriate
30 Approval to stock sort? 3rd party, internal, customer
31 Stock sort responsibility 3rd party, supplier, internal, customer
32 Agreement with supplier / customer to stock sort Keep documentation to prove
Is there a clear precise method for inspection of non
33 Use of visual aids etc…
conforming / non functional parts?
34 Containment details Internal - Breakpoint marking etc
35 Supplier Containment Details Supplier - Breakpoint marking etc
36 Customer containment details Customer
37 Sub supplier / raw material supplier
38 Supplier
Internal (Goods inspection, production,
39
Where affected parts have been found dispatch)
 Where affected parts have been found
40 Customer
41 Field
42 In transit
43 Qty of parts concerned (window of suspect product) Accurate number required
44 Clean Stock identified identify clean stock i.e. paint dot
45 Part identification for breakpoint How are parts being identified i.e. paint dot?
46 Safe Launch Has safe launch been considered?

Has product/dock audit inspection been implemented At the prescribed frequency i.e. next 5
47
to cover all future deliveries for a defined period? deliveries

Concern Details
48 Raised on concern management data base Specify concern or complaint number
49 Customer line stoppage caused Immediate action taken to keep line running
Agreed with supplier/customer (Document
50 PPM's incurred
PPM figure)
51 Part disposition & current location / segregation Where parts scrapped
52 Repeat concern? Yes / No - The effect maybe repeated
Root Cause Analysis
53 Parts returned for analysis? If required
Any immediate corrective actions identified by the
54 If applicable
supplier/customer (interim)
55 fishbone / Ishakawa Diagram
56 5 why Analysis
57 Is-is not
Has the correct tools been used
58 Fault tree Analysis
59 Pareto Analysis
60 Cause Mapping
61 Has the underlying 'true' cause been established There maybe other causes than the true one
62 Is the root cause analysis acceptable Quality Dept/customer
Corrective Action

8D received / sent? Interim acceptable if

63 5 Day response
supplier has not received samples for analysis

64 Short term actions / solutions acceptable Analyse / Review

65 Long term actions / solutions acceptable Analyse / Review
66 Is the corrective action 'Preventative' Actions to prevent reoccurrence
67 Is the corrective action acceptable / robust Analyse / Review
68 Poke Yoke implemented Poke yoke considered or used
Objective evidence required videos, photo's,
69 Evidence of corrective actions
CAD layouts etc...
Consider corrective/preventative action's for
70 Actions considered for other processes or products other processes or parts (read across / make
solution standard)
All process documentation changed to reflect PFMEA, control plan, work instructions, flow
71
preventative action charts, SPC charts etc….
Closure
72 Monitor period 90 days with no reoccurrence
73 8D revisited Audit 8D for root cause and corrective actions

74 Process FMEA updated And further docs I.e. control plan & instructions
75 Closed on database Inform all involved of closure
76 Costs sent to Quality/Finance Dept All costs captured?
 Approval / Sign-off Signature Date
Quality Concern Engineer

Quality Manager
 D3 - CONTAINMENT WORK SHEET
PART No CONCERN DESCRIPTION
G8D / CONCERN No

AREA WHERE DEFECT PART/S INSPECTION RESULT RESP. FOR

POSSIBLE QTY ACTUAL QTY SIGNATURE DATE
COULD BE FOUND O.K. QTY N.O.K. QTY VERIFICATION
EXTERNALLY

Customer Plant - 0

Customer Plant - 0

In Transit 0

Sub-Total 0 0
INTERNALLY (Cirteq)

Warehouse 0

Final Inspection 0

Packing 0

Annealing 0

Coil Crop and Wafio 0

High Speed Press Shop 0

Shaped Wire 0

Specials and MRP 0

Laboratory / Quality 0

Finishing 0

Heat Treatment 0

Sub-Total 0 0
D4 Ishikawa Root Cause ( Why Happened )
Root Cause

People Machine Environment

Work Areas
Training inadequate
Computers
Congested/too many
Not enough computers operators/not enough room

Not following
procedure

Highlighted incorrect line

on AX system

Interupted during
packing operation to
pack alternate parts
number

Incorrectly labelled
parts

Incorrect information
typed into system by
Easy label & AX packer
system
Batch number does not match
part number
Audit by Two label printing
packer/picker not methods used
Measurement conducted Method Material / Info Picking list incorrect
D4 Ishikawa Root Cause ( Undetected )
Root Cause

People Machine Environment

Measurement Method Material / Info

 D4 5 Why Root Cause Investigation
Supporting
Non Conformity 5 Why Analysis Root cause Corrective Action (s) Owner Target Date Actual Date
Evidence

Use this section to determine why the defect occurred (potential risks)
Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?

Use this section to determine why the defect was not detected
Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?

Use this section to determine the systemic root cause

Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ? Why ?

Lessons Learned:
-
-
-
-

Sheet :D4 5 Why File:file:///conversion/tmp/activity_task_scratch/693822576.xls F171-A

 Action plan and record

Concern: Champion: Start date: Close date: Last updated:

Progress %
Reference Concern Action to be taken Responsibility Planned date Actual Date Comments

100%
10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%