Beacon Quality Blog

A recent Wall Street Journal article detailing how Boeing is facing up to 24 million dollars in FAA penalties over quality control going back several years across a number of locations shows how even the biggest manufacturers need to close the loop on quality control (QC). Closing the QC loop requires a two-way flow of information across functions that enable end-to-end visibility into quality across the value chain.

This can only be done when quality functions such as document control, compliance management, nonconformance/corrective and preventive actions (NC/CAPA), audit management, and others are integrated across critical business processes. It may be clear on the surface to manufacturers that moving beyond the concept of a bi-directional connection of people, processes, and data across the value chain is paramount to success in the manufacturing sector. That being said, the hard work of achieving that goal starts with understanding the benefits and the challenges of a closed loop approach to quality control.

Read More >

In a manufacturing environment, it’s common for teams to run into Murphy’s Law - the notion that “anything that can go wrong, will.” A simple day that starts with an employee calling in sick, can escalate through other events such as a workstation running out of parts, a machine shutting down for unknown reasons, or similar issues which result in missing production targets for the week.

In order to minimize risks, plants should use a Layered Process Audit (LPA) program to ensure that the most important controls to prevent defects and waste are in place.  But with so many things that can go wrong, where do you start?  

One great tool to consider is Process-FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis). Teams that are looking to start a Layered Process Audit (LPA) program often have a long standing practice of doing PFMEA to determine their areas of high risk and frequent failures. Teams can use the Risk Priority Number (RPN) calculated from PFMEA as the basis for focus areas to prioritize when developing LPA questions.

Read More >

In manufacturing, leaders innovate and grow while followers fall prey to inefficiency and waste. A recent report from the Aberdeen Group, Lean Manufacturing: Success Starts with Visibility and Alignment, describes how manufacturing leaders consistently benefit from having tools in place to track continuous improvement activities. In addition, 61% of these high performers provide management with a comprehensive, easy-to-understand view into operations. These results reinforce the truth that lean principles are only as good as the actionable data available, and it follows that organizational integration of manufacturing software solutions is key to process improvement.

Read More >

When implemented correctly, layered process audits (LPAs) go beyond satisfying customer requirements by transforming an organization’s culture into one that embraces continuous improvement. This powerful audit approach pays dividends by improving safety and quality, and delivers cost savings by greatly enhancing traditional assurance systems and making continuous improvement nearly routine.

The additional layers in LPAs ensure additional eyes are looking for issues, and the rotation of participants involved provides a powerful deterrent against those eyes “looking the other way” if even marginal concerns are identified. LPAs should include a wide spectrum of employees—from shop-floor operators to executives—conducting audits in order to verify that standardized procedures are followed consistently in the continuous pursuit of quality.

Read More >

World-class organizations live and breathe a culture of continuous improvement. When an error occurs, management systems kick in to investigate and prevent the cause. Even when problems do not occur, employees look for ways to reduce waste and improve performance. But how exactly does one create a culture of continuous improvement? A key catalyst is often a management tool called Layered Process Audits (LPAs).

When used properly, layered process audits can foster a culture of quality throughout an organization, thus leading to reduced scrap and rework, fewer customer complaints, and greater productivity. A Harvard Business Review article on sustainable performance makes a clear case for the benefits of total workforce involvement. This creates a culture of shared performance feedback and provides a greater sense of control in how things get done.

Read More >

To achieve continuous process improvement, your organization needs a proven method for uncovering the root cause of nonconformances. A root cause analysis (RCA) can incorporate a wide range of quality methods that ultimately help identify what, how, and why an event occurred so that you can take the necessary steps to ensure that it does not repeat. The RCA process includes four basic steps:

• Collecting relevant information about the nonconformance
• Charting the causal factors
• Pinpointing root causes
• Developing and recommending solutions or corrective actions to address the root cause

If your organization has embraced lean manufacturing principles, then you are likely ahead of the curve in producing what is needed, when it is needed. You have learned that lean techniques, when successfully implemented, can help your organization reduce waste and improve process efficiency.

Read More >

Does your organization use process failure modes and effects analysis (PFMEA) on a routine basis to identify potential failures in product design, manufacturing or assembly processes? If so, this practice could do double duty by also serving as an effective technique for identifying at-risk processes on which to focus your layered process audits (LPAs).

Read More >

Founded more than 100 years ago, Aston Martin has built a global brand known for producing exceptionally designed, high-quality cars through handcrafted production methods.

After more than a century of excellence, few can understand better that delivering market defining quality and craftsmanship requires superior tools, techniques, and technology. As Aston Martin looked to increase production levels and launch new models, they quickly realized many of their traditional manufacturing processes would limit growth and competitiveness. Aston Martin needed an innovative solution that would create new manufacturing efficiencies without compromising their ability to deliver a truly bespoke product to their customers, built to the highest quality standards.   

Read More >

Not too long ago, the Harvard Business Review published an article suggesting what companies should do in order to institute a culture of quality. The article is based in large part on a two-year study that CEB, Inc. conducted on the subject. The research and the article promote a number of provocative ideas:

• Social media marketing has made it easy for consumers and customers to compare products and register complaints, which drives companies to emphasise quality more than ever.
• Since the Great Recession in 2008-2009, cycle times have decreased, and output gains have increased faster than employment levels, with employees often struggling to keep up and maintain quality.
• The traditional approach to instituting quality—monetary incentives, sharing best practices, and training—does not alone produce a culture of quality.
• Employees and companies that live quality—in other words, when people are fervent about quality as a personal value, rather than a value ordered from the top down—best create a culture of quality.

Read More >