Beacon Quality Blog

Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) is a core tool for reducing automotive and aerospace manufacturing risks. And yet, companies routinely waste 80% of the potential value of the FMEA process.

Particularly for manufacturers on the lower end of the maturity spectrum, FMEAs are simply a theoretical exercise for maintaining a certification or meeting customer requirements. These manufacturers may fill out an FMEA and even add a few countermeasures, but ultimately it’s just another form to file away and forget about.

Read More >

It’s an open secret that many automotive and aerospace manufacturers have unacceptably high defects and costs. And where defects are on the rise, quality costs aren’t far behind.

Read More >

In 2016, General Motors (GM) instituted a new supplier quality program called Built in Quality Supply (BIQS), representing a major departure from its previous Quality Systems Basics (QSB) program.

Read More >

Equipment downtime gets expensive fast in automotive and aerospace manufacturing, a risk many companies try to mitigate by storing spare parts onsite. A machine breaks down, haul out the parts and hopefully you’re back in business with minimal disruption.

The problem is, manufacturers get so wrapped up in hitting production targets that they don’t stop to ask why the machine went down in the first place.

The result? The equipment goes down again, whether two days, two weeks or two months later, causing additional downtime because the “corrective” action was never designed to last.

Read More >

Every day we glean insights from signals that show when a change is coming or we need to take action.

The smoke alarm goes off when you’re cooking, alerting you to turn down the burner. Your engine starts making a funny noise weeks before your car breaks down. That old injury starts to ache just before a storm front moves in.

Read More >

Roughly 7 in 10 manufacturers have implemented Lean manufacturing principles in their organizations, with 5S, Six Sigma and Kaizen representing the most popular strategies today.

One tool that supports these specific approaches and Lean manufacturing principles more generally is a layered process audit (LPA) program. LPAs draw auditors from all management layers and departments to verify mission-critical processes on a daily basis.

Let’s examine how LPAs align with Lean manufacturing principles, providing a structured approach to unlock the biggest benefits of this popular quality methodology.

Read More >

Pareto’s Law, also known as the 80/20 rule, tells us that 20% of inputs are responsible for 80% of results. Even when it’s not an even 80/20 split, the idea that a few factors drive a large proportion of outcomes applies to many business processes and everyday situations.

Like how a majority of complaints often result from a few key defects. Or how 20% of our time accounts for 80% of our productivity, with the remaining 80% spent on meaningless tasks.

In the automotive and aerospace industries, organizations can use a range of tools to leverage the 80/20 rule for bigger, faster quality improvements. Pareto management is the most obvious of these, but manufacturers should also apply the rule to performance metrics, risk management and audits.

Read More >

Compare the following process audit questions, asking which would be more effective at preventing defects:

Question A: Does the operator know how to handle non-conforming material?

Question B: Can the operator describe each step of the non-conforming material process according to the quality manual?

Clearly, Question B is more likely to identify errors that result in defective product reaching the customer—the main goal of layered process audit (LPA) requirements for General Motors (GM) and Fiat Chrysler suppliers. These high-frequency audits focus on how products are made, and are also gaining traction in industries like aerospace as a best practice for minimizing variation, defects and quality costs.

Read More >

By all accounts, the transition from ISO/TS 16949 to IATF 16949 has been a bumpy road so far. The standard encompasses a range of new requirements, including major changes to parent standard ISO 9001. Added to that, General Motors (GM) recently issued new customer-specific requirements that have significant implications for internal audits.

Many suppliers still have questions about what the new requirements are, what they should be doing to prepare and what auditors are looking to see. Time is running out, so it’s critical that organizations take action now to avoid any unnecessary delays or business interruptions due to certification issues.

Read More >