cal-20 AIAG Fieaiosen Mecajat er aeskporeminee Version 1 lesued 8/12 ABOUT AIAG Purpose Statement Founded in 1982, AIAG Is a globally recognized organization where OEMs and suppliers unite to address and resolve {issues affecting the worldwide automotive supply chain. AIAG's goals are to reduce cost and complexity through ‘colaboration: improve product quail, heath, safety, and the environment and optimize speed to market throughout the supply chain. AIAG Organization AIAG is made up of a board of directors, an executive director, executives on loan from member companies, associate directors, a ful-ime staf, and volunteers serving on’project teams, Directors, department managers, and program managers plan, direct and coordinate the association's activities under the direction of the executive director. AIAG Projects Volunteer committees focus on business processes or supporting technologies and methodologies. They conduct research and develop, publish, and provide training on standards, conventions, standard business practices, white papers, and guidelines in the areas of automatic identification, CADICAM, EDI/electronic commerce, continuous ualty improvement, health focus, materials and project management, occupational health & safety, returnable Containers and packaging systems, transportation/customs and truck & heavy equipment. “AIAG PUBLICATIONS ‘An AIAG publication reflects a consensus of those substantialy concemed with is s20pe and provisions. An ‘AIAG pubication i Intonded os a guide to ald the menufacturer, fro consumer ard the general puble. Tho ‘existence ofan AIAG publication does notin any raspact preclude anyone from manufacturing, merketing, purchasing, or using products processes, or procedures not conforming fo the publication. DISCLAIMER The Publisher doas not make any representation or warranty, express or implied in relavon fo any information ‘rom tis pubeation, and the Publisher dows not asstime any legal labor the scouracy, completeness, oF "usenuiness of any information from tis pubicabon. CAUTIONARY NOTICE [AIAG pubcetions ere subject to periodic review and ueare are cautioned to ltain the atest adtions. MAINTENANCE PROCEDURE ‘Recognizing that this AIAG publization may not cover all cicumstances, AIAG has established a mintenance ‘back of his dosument fo subi a request. Automotive industry Action Group £26200 Lahsor Roed, Suite 200 ‘Southfield, Michigan 48033 Phone: (248) 358-3570» Fax: (248) 358-3253 APPROVAL STATUS ‘The AIAG Quality Storing Commitee and designated stakeholders approved this document for publication on May 3, 2012. AIAG COPYRIGHT AND TRADEMARK NOTICE: (© 2012 Automotive Industry Action Group, excopt that conyight snot claimed as to any part of an original work prepered by a US. ‘rte govemmentoficer or amployoe as pat ofthe person's oft duis. Except as noted above, aright are reserved by AIAG and no part of these materls may be reproduced. reprinted, stored in a retrieval system, or ansmited, tn any form or by ary means, electronic, photocopying, recording, or chermse, without Os prior ‘wnllsn permission of Automotive industry Action Group. Copyright iningement isa violation of federal subject to criminal and ol ponaties. [AIAG and Automotive Industry Acton Group are registered service marks ofthe Aulomotve Industry Acton Group. Automotive Incusty Action Grou makes no clam to any Uademark fa third pat, Trademarks of third partes Included in these materiel the propery of ther respective owners, (© 2012hutomotve Industry Action Group sen 7a1-6053425049-0000i 7 CQl-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 Issued 6/12 cata ergo parorance mh mm sin = i oy im ry in)AIAG 2m a2 Effective Problem Solving ecothttrpeaentemance Version 1 Issued 6/12 CQI-10 AIAG Effective Problem Solving Guideline Letter of Endorsement Quality of produc is of paramount importance to customer satisfaction and market competitiveness. Effective Problem Solving dicetiy impacts product quality and company profitability ‘Currently, companies use their respective problem solving processes and methods to comply with customer and certification requirements. Generally, problem solving results address the immediate issue and serve to satisfy the customer fr the short term. ‘While some organizations have developed problem solving processes that ae robust and effective, all companies should pursue the opportunity to evaluate their processes and identify opportunities for improvement ‘The Affective Problem Solving Guideline represents a consensus ofthe problem solving methodology and concepts use today by ‘utomtive OBMs and the supply chain. This consensus of problem solving methedology should improve the consistency of problem solving tesuts in ll segments and etal levels of the industry. [Enhancing the fundemental structure of this consolidated problem solving process is the integration of cultural behaviors that challenge corapany management to consider problem solving asa strategic planning tool to achieve business success. ‘The impact of effective problem solving extends beyond the immediate issue. Taking the experience and lessons from an issue and implementing them throughout an orgenization for similar products and processts wil reduce the risk of recurrence and proactively improve first-time quality. In addition, eliminating recurrent problems directly impacts profitability by improving eost-oF quality measures. As competitive pressures force efficiency improvernens, the effective execution of problem solving reduces the waste of repetitive problem Solving aetion Many company problem solving processes have structured methods, nomenelatute, and verbiage that are unique and insttutionslized. We suggest that the concepts and principles ofthe Bifective Problem Solving Guideline be used as a benchmark. for comparison to identify opportunities for improvement. ‘Through this endorsement, the following OEM and Tier | manufacturers expect that suppliers or producers of automobile systems, components, or material consider how the intent and principles of the Effective Problem Solving Guideline can be applied within thei existing problem solving processes. Oy f frauefld €. uit Ypbeons ae ean ena oe Qn Poa) (Tensolite — cleat Vice President ~ Purchasing ‘TRW AutomativeCaQl-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 esued 6/12 AIAG» Tmecatyet erent patoonsoe FOREWORD Members of the Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) Problem Solving Work Group developed this Effective Problem Solving (EPS) Practitioner Guide for AIAG member companies and their supplier community to use for improving overall customer satisfaction and industry-wide competitiveness by improving quality and reducing costs. We ate all problem solvers at some level. EPS is applicable actoss the enterprise within a company, at all levels from the boardroom to the factory floor. EPS can be used to solve all types of problems, including those affecting production parts, transactional business processes, and the design of new or revised parts and processes. ‘A meeting with Key Supplicr Executives in August 2002 was held to determine the opportunity to define a common set of information associated with Problem Solving. It was agreed that this was a worthwhile effort, so over the next six months a series of team meetings were held to create the common data elements. The team consisted of Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) and Supplier Problem Solving Experts and Executives. The results of their work were presented to the AIAG Quality Steering Committee in February 2003, While the common data elements were agreed upon, it was clear that more than data is needed to solve problems. The problem statement agreed upon was this: A large amount of waste is generated in the automotive industry due to ineffective problem solving. Contributors to the waste include: ‘+ Lack of Communications ‘© Insufficient Skills ‘+ Entrenched Culture (industry and company) ‘Member companies of the Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) recognized a need to improve their product quality, reduce costs, and eliminate waste by strengthening their problem solving culture, process, skills, and supportive tools. An AIAG Problem Solving Work Group was formed to develop this Effective Problem Solving (EPS) Practitioner Guide in order to address this need. ‘The primary objectives of this edition of the document are to assist AIAG member companies to: ‘+ Provide a recommended effective problem solving process that can bbe used as a model problem solving process for companies that have not yet adopted a process of their own. + Provide a benchmark to compare existing problem solving processes and identify current gaps or deficiencies that should be addressed. i mimirmmmwMHt msm mm om, m mo om = = ma) oR aAIAG 2 ca.20 Effective Problem Solving ‘caus pero Version 1 Issues 6/12 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ‘This edition of the document was developed by the Problem Solving Work Group to address the automotive industry's need for improved problem solving capabilities. Busha, Lori Federal-Mogul Corporation Down, Michael General Motors Company Fraker, Roy Honda of America Manufacturing, Inc. Gray, Rod Saturn Electronics & Engineering, Inc. Gruska, Gregory Omnex, Ine. Hale, Gerald ‘Nissan North America Jessee, Rebecca Ford Motor Company Mrozinski, David Nissan Reid, Dan AIAG Zhou, Stanley Chrysler Group LLC Zilio, Luc Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc. [At the time the original document was published, the following individuals contributed to the development and deployment of this common process: Frederick Amdt Delphi Corporation Robert Cranford ‘TRW Automotive H, Sam Hemade Ford Motor Company Fred Johns Ford Motor Company Jecod Long General Motors Corporation ‘T, Harrison Priest Jr DaimlerChrysler Corporation Dan Roche ArvinMeritor, Ine. Lyndon Smith Freudenberg-NOK General Partnership Al Stock Robert Bosch Corporation Jeff Sutter Delphi Corporationgar-20 AIAG Version 1 Issued 6/12 ‘he cae prt patemaree TABLE OF CONTENTS ABOUT AIAG wonmnnenenmnnnonmnninmsninnnmnnnsnansn mene 1ST EDITION LETTER OF ENDORSEMENT. FOREWORD, 2ND EDITION.. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS snsnsnsninnnsnninninnnainan TABLE OF CONTENTS, wTRODUCTION APPLICABILITY. anerns id nee 1IS/1S NOT FOR PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS nnn eect aid 1 PROBLEM SOLVING ROLES... 1.1 Brecumve Camron... 1.2 Team Leaen, 1.3 TEAM... 11.4 FrquTATION.. 115 RECORD KEEPING 2 EFFECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS nnsnmnannse 2.1 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION runes setae 2.2mmare CONTAINMENT.. 2.3 DeTennane FaiuRe MODE 2.4 RooT CAUSE ANALYSIS... 2.5 CORRECTIVE ACTION. 7 2.6 IMPLEMENT PREVENTIVE ACTION ‘APPENDICES, APPENDIX A: EFFECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING REPORTING FORMAT FOR PRODUCT. APPENDIX B: PROBLEM SOLVING TOOL MATRIK.. APPENDIX C: PROBLEM SOLVING TOOL DESCRIPTION: CCAUSE-AND-EFFECT MATRIX. CONCENTRATION DIAGRAM DECISION MATRIK.. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS... ERROR-PROOFING/MISTAKE-PROOFING.. 6, PROCESS FLOW CHART C7. MULTL-VARI ANALYSIS... CB, REPLICATION / READ ACROSS 9, TAGUCHI - ROBUST DESIGN.. ggegge APPENDIX D: DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS... i om m@ nm in i i om ity in =AIAG 2m cav2o aca geapatomanes Version 1 Issued 6/12 [APPENDIX E: CONTAINMENT «on Table of Figures FicuRE 1. _Pratany Focus Fn A FORMAL PROBLEN SOLVING PROCESS Ficute 2. OveRLAPTING PHASES IN PROBLEM SOLUING on cute 3, CoMPLEXPAOBLEM Soule Flow —Hich Lev FiGuRe 4. PROBLEYAIOENTIRCATION nn Ficune 5. Cowrantent Ficune 6. PALLRE MODE ANALY. FicuRe7, oor Cause ANALYSE eis Figure 8. wey’, Figure 9. FISHBONE DIAGRAM ~ ‘Guna (owes). a FIGURE IO, CORAECTWE ACTION sn figuné 1. Preventive AcTON.. Figune 12. Suceseo Errecrve Poa. SotvnG REPORTING FORMAT Ficune 13. EFFEcvE PaoB.eM SoLuNG RePORTING FORMAT 6, 2{CONTWNLED). Figune 14, _ Errecrve Prostst Sous Rerormi FORMAT EXAMPLE Foun 15, _EFrEcrvePaooLem Solve REPORTING FORMAT PAGE 2 CONTE). FiguRe 16. CONCENTRATION Diackate Fa ewe Dook. ae Ficune 17. Vanance FORMU, are Ficune 18. Stavioano Devarion FORMULAS. Ficune 19. IneRTa Baste PoxA-YoRE Ficune 20. Enton-Proormc/MisTaxE PROOFING. Ficune 21. Lap Test Request A. ; Ficune 22. PROCES Fiow-TAROUGHS10: (STATION 1, OPERATION I). Ficute 23. MuLn-Van Pior FoR awe DaMecren Pao Fiore 28. ReAD Across / RnuIcATION WORKS. Ficune 25. loca. FUNCTON Ys. REALTY Figune 26, PARAMETER DIAGRAN. ficune 27. OfTHOGOWa ARRAY Wi OUTSIO® NOSE ARRAY. FiguRe28. —SicnaLToNOSE (S/N) Ram - Figure 28. Fuucron aren S/N REDUCTION vs, FuNTION AER MEAN ADRUSTIENT Fru 30. CONTAINMENT PROCESS con Ficone 31. Contanwenr Process (conTiwueo) Table of Tables TARE, 15/15 NOTANALSIS sono veld THOie2. Prose loeurFcation QUESHONS. 20 Taste 3. _Rezownrenoco Prostew-Sovvinc Toots ay Phase (FUE 3) st TABLES, CAUEEAND-EFFECT MATA 35 TABLES. DecitOH MATRXFOR THE PURCHASE OF A HOUSE nen) Taste 6. MATEMALS ROUTING AND OPERATION DESCRIPTION on 87 TABLET, saw: WoRescer 10 CAPTURE CONTAINMENT DAT 88ony © i CaQl-20 & Effective Problem Solving AIAG» & Version + feeued 6/12, ‘recast ea prerarcs : omy ompr fer ote. fe Oo h6mmhUmrehkhl or ian = er oe esAIAG2= a Effective Problem Solving mocamyate ak oaronnnce Version 1 issued 6/12 INTRODUCTION | When solving problems, dig at the roots instead of just hacking at the leaves. -Anthony D'Angelo Effective Problem Solving (EPS) process can be defined as a process, when applied effectively will identify the Roof Causes of problems ot incidents. The general practice of EPS is based on the premise that problems are more effectively solved by identifying, correcting and ultimately eliminating the underlying Root Cause, rather than addressing the obvious symptoms. True application of the EPS process assumes that ‘once the root cause has been identified the organization must have a Corrective Action Process that provides controls that keeps the problem from reoccurring or minimizing the possibility of it reoccurring, A key concept, when applying the EPS process is the understanding that it is unlikely that there will be complete prevention of the root cause by a single intervention. EPS is an ongoing process that needs to be effectively integrated with an organizations corrective action and continuing improvement process. The EPS process by nature is a reactive process. When the organization first approaches the implementation of EPS, it is based on the response/reaction to some current identifiable failing within a process or a specific activity. This means that the problem has already occurred and the processes initiation is a response to that occurrence. As the ‘organization improves the EPS process they will move from reactive to predictive. The ultimate goal of an effective EPS process is to apply the learning to predict failures so that preventive measures can be implemented BEFORE they can occur. This will lead to a culture for effective problem solving over time. The EPS process is specifically designed to facilitate in the organization, a means for the establishment of a systematic investigation of undesired outcomes (Failure Modes), problems or accidents (Hypothetical or actual, mistakes and errors). ‘The EPS process must emphasize the need for planning and follow- through. CAPA (Corrective dction!Preventive Action) is an integral part of the EPS process in its ability to provide a powerful means of understanding, any situation and generating a process for the solving the problems as well as generating possible solutions. ‘The use of the EPS along with CAPA can and should be used as an integral means for the updating of the FMEA, as well as linking to the standards (ISO 9000:2008, AS9L00C & ISO/TS 16949:2009) as it relates (o the use of Mistake Proofing and Problem Solving, Note: Words that appear in italic type font herein except for titles of documents are defined in the glossarym™ = E CaQl-20 Effective Problem Solving AIAG» Version isau0d 6/12 catheter peokeatmane Applicability + yust oie No lhe SME needed mm mm sm sm Mm Figure 1, Primary Focus for a Formal Problem Solving Process in Problems vary in terms of complexity. Kaoru Ishikawa reportedly stated that a large majority of quality related problems...can be solved with seven fundamental quantitative tools. These are Fishbone Diagrams, Histograms, Pareto Analysis, Flowcharts (Value Stream Maps), Scatter Plots, Run Charts and/or Control Charts However, some problems can be more complex with a number of potential causes to be discovered and addressed. These require a cros: functional team using a formal problem-solving process to address. This document is focused on the more complex problems where a team is needed. Even for problems that an individual can solve, they should use a structured problem solving process. im on Im = The detailed process for resolving any one complex product design problem, e.g. tolerance “stack up” is outside the scope of this manual. errr eee arg e came ' rer romano = eros rite | a oe ES = ‘ere = EEE | = = Figure2, Overlapping Phases in Problem Solving, = -10- imCQI-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 Issued 612 IS / 1S NOT for Problem Solving Process ‘The following is en application of one of the analysis tools which can be used in the Effective Problem Solving (EPS) process. This 1S / IS NOT analysis summarizes the scope and applicability of this EPS guidebook. Table 1. cr Suggested Standard format available Is/Is Not Analysis ri Mandated / required Recommended problem solving process with reference to applicable tools Focused on teaching individual tools Used for solving complex problems Used for solving simple concerns A guideline Detailed specific process(s) to use for customer- and company- specific issues Generic process that can be used for any type of problem Just for design and / or product related problems Provides detailed explanation of process steps Only a high level summary of the process steps Used by all employees at all levels of an organization Only specific to Engineers Intended to prevent problem recurrence Focused on containment or "firefighting" Defines team roles Provides guidance for when and how to engage the supplier and customer AIAG and Project Team consensus Compitation of what the industry does today Deliverables include minimum set of questions for all process stepsWT Da Ti Tg Data Dt sls — Effective Problem Solving Version 1 fed 6/2 CaQl-20AIAG» he cata! peak pear cal-20 Effective Problem Solving Version {Issued 6/12 1 PROBLEM SOLVING ROLES 1.1 Executive Champion 1.2 Team Leader 1.3 Team Senior management cannot legitimately delegate responsibility for quality. This guideline provides quality practitioners in organizations with an effective process for problem solving and root cause analysis. The Executive Champion (or similar title, e.g. Sponsor) is the “voice of top leadership” in the process. This is critical to successful problem solving by demonstrating management support to the team and to the organization at large. In this role, the Executive Champion is responsible for * Allocation of resources, e.g; both in quantity and appropriate function + Monitoring team progress «Removal of road blocks, + Ensuring corrective actions are timely and effective, Reference the AIAG Role of the Leader Guideline, target publication Sept. 2012 for more specific direction applicable to leaders. ‘The team leader should be the natural owner of the process involved. This role may change as the team works on the problem identification. The Quality function should be a facilitator and resource to the team, but not function as the natural owner. For example, Product Engineering should own product design problems. Manufacturing or Industrial Engineer functions should own process problems. ‘The natural owner is responsible for the approval and execution of the corrective action, The natural owner can also be a facilitator for the team. Reference the AIAG Role of the Leader Guideline, target publication Sept. 2012 for more specific direction applicable to leaders. The team is directly involved and responsible for the recurrence prevention in effectively solving the specific problem. The team includes any subject matter experts as needed and goes into the investigation “unbiased.” Do not assume the root cause or responsibility prior to gathering evidence to make a data-based decision. However, the team will need hypotheses in order to gather the needed data to prove or disprove the hypotheses. Note that the term “team” means participants from all affected functions, e.g. manufacturing, engineering, purchasing, supplier quality and/or management. To be effective, the team should be the appropriate size for the problem identified. ‘This could include customers and/or suppliers as 1B<14- CaQl-20 Effective Problem Solving Version {seus 6/12 AIAG» acest orp prema 1.4 Facilitation 4.5 Record Keeping applicable. The team should ensure roles and responsibilities are assigned to address all the necessary steps in the problem solving process. Responsibilities for containment should be designated separate from responsibilities for ‘root cause analysis so proper focus is placed on recurrence prevention ‘The facilitator role may be optional but should be used for most complex problems (see Figure 1). The facilitator should ‘© ensure that the team is represented by all the appropriate functions. + be independent, ic., no equity in the problem so they can facilitate the meetings effectively. © beaproblem-solving process subject matter expert, but not necessarily be a content expert regarding the actual problem being, worked on. . The facilitator is responsible for convening the meetings, leading effective meetings in support of the natural owner of the problem, ensuring that minutes are published on time and following action items. In the absence of a facilitator, the team will have to assign someone to perform these functions. An individual needs to be designated the responsibility for maintaining, the meeting records and minutes. They are responsible to ensute that the minutes are distributed to the appropriate people and to make corrections if necessary. It is recommended that, if the process is to be extensive and. time consuming that this position be rotated. It is also recommended that this position NOT necessarily be assigned to an administrative assistant, 7" om mor om of om 7 mm ih om Mm mm i” om om oom om ™AIAG ecatyatte oskparemarce CaQi-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 Issued 612 Complex Problem Solving Flow Diagram Inputs VOC- Voice of the Customer VO? Voice of the Process \YOE Voice of Experience Initiation of Complex Problem Solving ‘Problem Solving Statement Problem Solving Staternent FMEA scape eM Occurrence FM ‘Systemic FM “True Root Causes for: Escape occurrence systemic Verified Escape CA Verified Occurrence CA Verified systemic CA Key Findings Figure 3. ocak Ce’ Problem Problem Solving Statement tdentitiation Containment | |3 | contament Pan Process B | conisinment of Symptom Faliure mode | [3 | EsareFon 8 | Ocarence A tr ananis | |g. | Secreresro T $ 3 | true moot coves for root cause] [2 | fcave tro analysis | |B] occurence BE) sytemie Verfed Escape CA Corrective Veifed Ocurence cA ‘ation (CA) vers peri T Lessons Learned freniee PA Deployed Action (PA) Update Process Documents ‘Complex Problem Solving Flow ~ High Level “15-Ua Wale Dae aya ie Titi Ti ag —— Effective Problem Solving Version 1 Issued 612 CcaQl-20cal-20 AIAG.» Eifecive Problem Sotvng scaaat er pastpatomarce Version 1 Issued 6/12 2 EFFECTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS ‘The recommended process is designed to assist you in clearly defining, the problem, determining the actual root cause(s) of the problem, developing corrective action(s) 10 address all root causes, and institutionalizing these actions within an organization, This section will detail the process flow within each of the overall steps represented in Figure 3. Each process flow will be accompanied by key ‘questions that should be asked and answered as part of completing that step in the recommended problem solving process. ‘The questions are provided to guide problem solvers and leaders through each step to achieve the best outcome. Although there is no required problem solving reporting format, most ‘organizations do require the following minimum information: © Problem Identification © Containment © Root Cause Analysis * Corrective Action + Vetification of effectiveness-18- AIAG.» Ie cataat pet petomce Initiation of Complex Problem Solving 2.1 Problem Identification Input Output Problem Solving Statement Tnitiste |___p[ Collect Define Team Evidence Problem Figure4. Problem Identification 2.1.4 Introduction For complex problems (See Figure 1), the organization should initiate their formal corrective action process. The scope of this process starts, with the voice of the customer or of the process which signal that there is. a non-conformance. As stated earlier, the focus for guidance in this manual is for complex problems where a formal process with a cross- functional team is needed. Operators from the floor can often be used to represent the voice of the process. The customer may need to be notified early and even participate on the team in some cases. 2.1.2 Initiate Team One of the first steps for the formal problem solving process is to form a ‘cross functional team. The team should have an Executive Champion or sponsor as well as be led by the natural owning function, e.g. engineering, manufacturing. The Quality function should be a key support function for the team. Other internal functions, e.g, logisties should be involved as applicable, There are key issues when selecting and implementing the EPS Team that must be reviewed and applied. ‘The team should: © Consist of subject matter experts; (This can include the use of outside content experts, such as consultants.) * Consist ofa group of people with process and product knowledge and the authority to correct the problem and participate in the meetings; © The selected team members must be empowered by Senior ‘Management to “change the rules” and “think outside the box”; ‘© Have an appointed Team Champion. ‘Team membership could change over time, but some should remain with. the team throughout the process. There must be: im? mm © m ef mmmawm hh Ph hmmm mmm OmCcal-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 4 Ieeued 6/12 + A method in place where the stakeholder needs and requirements are defined and accounted for in the process; + An appropriate level of management is represented; * Defined objectives and goals » Access to resources, e.g. computer capabilities, white boards or some method to write/post ideas, Before a true root cause analysis can begin, the team needs to understand some of the basic concepts that are inherent in problem solving techniques. It must be understood that first and foremost the source of ‘every problem is a process. The identified problem is often seen in the ‘output of the process. In addition, the ultimate cause or causes of the problem(s) is usually one ot mote identifiable process factors not doing, what they should be doing. It is therefore critical that the team understand the relationship between the process factors and the process outputs, 2.41.3 Collect Evidence The team should then begin an investigation into the problem, The team should start by collecting evidence by going to the site where the problem was found ot where the problem was suspected of occurring. ‘The Japanese use the term “Genba"" meaning "the real place," which in business refers to the place where value is created, where the problem occurred or was found. In manufacturing, the Genba is the factory floor. The team must go there to understand the full impact of the problem, gathering data from all sources, including lessons learned. Many organizations end their intemal problem solving process once there is some evidence of the problem being a supplier fault, For example, they close the internal documentation and open a supplier corrective action tequest. Actually, there should be one investigation to identify the source of the problem. Data and evidence, e.g. samples of defective product, est reports, photos should be gathered and analyzed to determine if itis likely an internal or external problem. If extemal, only then should a supplier corrective action request be issued. To prematurely assign the investigation to a supplier, e.g. with data to suggest supplier-fault, is counterproductive to the problem solving, exercise and can affect the customer-supplier relationship, The internal investigation should remain open pending the confirmation from the supplier of supplier fault and corrective action. If the problem is confirmed to be at the supplier, the supplier's root cause analysis and corrective action can be used to close the internal investigation. If the " Also known as “Gemba” or “Genchi Genbutsu” -19-cal-20 AIAG2a Effective Problem Solving Version 1 Iscued 6/12 ‘ne cataatpo porte supplier fault cannot be established by the data and evidence, the investigation should remain internal. For some extemal problems, there needs to be close collaboration between the customer and supplier to be successful. 2.1.4 Define Problem "The mere formulation of a problem is far more often essential than its solution, which may be merely ‘a matter of mathematical or experimental skill. To raise new questions, new possibilities, 10 regard ‘ld problems from a new angle require creative imagination and marks real advances in science." Albert Einstein ‘A problem well defined is a problem half solved. This is a critical step in formal problem solving that is often overlooked or poorly executed, If poorly executed, this could render the whole exercise ineffective. When developing the problem statement the following items must be considered: © Problem: what is wrong; statement of problem; © Requirement: what should be; documented requirement o reference to; ‘+ Evidence: data demonstrating that something is wrong; objective ‘evidence observed that supports statement of problem; © Ampact: how significant is the problem from a performance and/or cost standpoint “1 keep six honest serving-men. They taught me all knew. Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.” = Rudyard Kipling -20- ‘The problem identification should result in one or more problem statements that answer these basic question Table 2. Problem Identification Questions “Who” found it and who does it affect? Individuals/customers associated with the problem? ‘The problem statement or definition; What is the object and defect? ‘What equipment is involved? Is there a trend? Date and time the problem was identified? Location of complaints (area, facilities, outcomes) and location of defect on part? oe ~~ 2 omom om © om oh om eo som me ra ce ocr) em fri ffl rryAIAG 2a carz0 Imacazayst erat pores ‘Version 1 Issued 612 Key Any previously known explanations? How did the problem occur? How was it detected? Size and frequency of problent; how many patts have the problem’ How many on each part? Is it getting worse? See the checklist below for a more complete set of appropriate questions to ask at this stage. ‘Note that the team may choose to break the problem into several issues with separate problem statements and subsequent activities. They may need to use an iterative process to solve the ultimate problem. One corrective action may be effective in solving some portion of the problem but may be insufficient alone. Tools Recommended tools at this stage include (Refer to Appendix B: Problem Solving Tool Matrix) © Five W/Two H (Key for effective starting point; see Table 2) + Check sheet © Concentration Diagram © Graphical Analysis (e.g. histogram, Multi-Vari Analysis) © IsilsNot y Questions ~ Problem Identification Cie kcead Response Information Coll ‘Who are the members ~ name | ile? Who is the Executive Champion ~ Sponsor? Who is the Team Leader! relationship tothe problam? ‘What leadership support doas team have? What needed resources have been identified? What are the skils required for this issue? ‘Who found it/ who does it affect?” ‘What individua's / customer is affected? Whats the disruption / problem (SW2HIs-IsNot)? ‘What requirements not being met? What isthe effect of not meeting the requirement? What equipment is involved? Whats the Current State Process Flow? What, if any, are the trend indicators? What extent is requirement not met (the gap)? Where Is-Is Not the problem occurring? 21+-22- cal-20 Efectve Probiem Solving AIAG. Version 1 lasved 6/12 ete peat parce " 2 B “4 16 16 v7 18 19 20 a 2 err 1 2 3 When was the issue first observed? \When is the problem occurring ~ the frequency? What is the scope / exposure ofthe problem? What is risk of not meeting requirement? What is the MSA used to measure extent of issue? What is the MSA capabity on measurement method? What isthe goal of this EPS activity? How is the goal aligned witn the problem description? What isthe timing forthe problem solving action? What isthe correlation between cause and effect? How was the problem discovered? PS Statement includes object and nonconformance? re ‘Where hes this Issue occured before (repeat)? Was the problem identified in the FMEA records? What are past probloms to help with this problam? im oom fae ee oe jee jem he ne nyAIAG.» cater pos oraraneo Ccal-20 Effective Problem Solving Version {Issued 62 2.2 Initiate Containment Problem Solving Statement 2.2.1 Introduction Input Output eee Sonera tat Containment of Symptom Dred Toeate Suspeat Contain Disposition Suspect |-»| aterat___ || symotom Materia FigureS. Containment Containment is not “problem solving.” The process should NOT stop ith containment of the problem. Containment actions are necessary to “stop the bleeding” and to protect the customer from disruptions. However, this is an important step in the process that is often poorly executed. Actions taken should be focused, temporary and extraordinary. Provisions for containment should stay in place until effectiveness of the corrective actions to be taken is verified. A containment plan is a key output of this process step. See Appendix E for detailed instructions for the containment process. Note that in a proactive culture the need for containment is minimal where the focus is on problem prevention. te Suspect Material It is critical for immediate actions to include locating, all material that could be non-conforming as a result of the problem just discovered. The containment area in Appendix E, Table 12 can be used to record the location of this material as it is identified. Time is of the essence in notifying any customer organizations of material in route or that may be in inventory at the customer location. Suspect material should be evaluated throughout the supply chain, e.g, sub-tier suppliers, customers to end users as applicable. Responsibility should be assigned for following up with customers as applicable at this stage of the process. 2.2.3 Contain Symptom At this stage of the process, it is important to contain the symptom of the problem as the root cause(s) has not yet been identified. Actions taken at this point should be planned and by design be “over and above” the normal process, be visible and temporary. Data will need to be collected and analyzed, The nonconformance rate will need to be determined in ‘order to take next steps. Actions taken at this point should remain until the correction actions are implemented and verified as effectively resolving the problem. These actions could include additional -23-cal-20 EfeciveProtlem Solving AIAG2a Version Issund 6/12 oe craters garomance verification activities, e.g, dock audits, sorting, segregation of nonconforming material, reworking, building inventory and/or premium transportation, Frequent communication with the customer may be necessary to ensure effective containment actions. 2.2.4 Disposition Suspect Material Any suspect material will need to be verified as conforming or nonconforming, Nonconforming materiel will need to be identified and segregated. Authorized personnel will need to determine if the material can be reworked or should be disposed of. Tools Recommended tools at this stage include (Refer to Appendix B: Problem Solving Too! Matrix) ‘* Measurement system analysis ‘© Containment Plan ‘+ Containment Worksheet (See Appendix E) 24+AIAG a cauz0 ‘Te cataat tr pankcetomarce Varsion 1 tsued 8/12 Key Questions - Containment No Containment Actions 1 Is an emergency action required? 2. Has the leader for the containment actions been identified Has a containment plan been developed (Including conditions for termination)? Has containment process been verified for effectiveness against containment plan? Is effectiveness being monitored and reported to Management and documented? Has there been a review with the Sponsor before proceeding and scheduled ongoing updates, e.g. containment activity / locations / measurement resulls / customer input? Identification of Concern Locations 11 Have all possible locations for suspect or nonconforming material been defined? + Customer Locations — define * Other Customer Locations ~ define + Outside processors - define ‘= Warehouse Locations - define ‘+ Shipping Areas ‘© Receiving Areas ‘+ Scrap Locations - define + Work-In-Process - define = Leb Areas - define 2. Have the potential quantity of suspect or nonconforming material been defined? 3._ Have all other products, processes, suppliers, customers been identified that could be affected? Rees eis 1 Has the customer been notified /ifnot what is the justification? 2. Is there a record of Customer notification (Email, Phone, Visit, Bulletin, ec.)? Perce ecard 1 Has the quarantine of suspect product been initiated? 2. Is gortingltework of suspect or nonconforming product needed? 3. Are there sorting / rework procedures or work instructions? 4 Is data collected and analyzed to assist in the root cause analysis? 5 Ate containment plans to continue until corrective action(s) is implemented and verified”? -25-Cal-20 Effective Problem Solving AIAG Version 1 Issued 6/12 Tecasbet erp garernct 2.3 Determine Failure Mode snout ‘Qutput Problem Solving Statement ee Escape FM FMEA Occurrence FM systemic ta Teen |_| tore Tae Sea fidence su | Litappteabe Figure 6. Failure Mode Analysis, 2.3.1_ Introduction Failure Mode Analysis has been included in this manual to further emphasize the importance of determining the correct failure mode to censure that appropriate corrective actions ate taken. Although effective problem solving can be used for any aspect of a business, failure mode analysis is more recognized in a manufacturing or design environment through the use of FMEAS, For added clarification, failure mode should not be confused with the symptom of the concern. The failure mode is the manner in which the process fails to meet requirements (including design intent), The failure mode is identified as a requirement not being met, ¢.g. door does not open when unlocked, part will not assemble, or shipment not received on time, 2.3.2 Review Evidence and FMEA ‘The problem solving team should first review the evidence collected by the team including any existing FMEA information, The team should then determine what failure modes have been identified and which are applicable. At this point the team has the opportunity of evaluating the quality and thoroughness of the FMEA, as it reveals what the FMEA team was thinking carly in the development process. Any assumptions made in the FMEA can be validated or corrected based on the new information from the problem solving team, as applicable. This keeps the FMEA a “living document.” The information in the FMEA will likely provide the team with the best information, e.g, test, controls about the escape and occurrence failure mode(s). This information will help the team determine the escape and occurrence root causes. Determining the Systemic Failure modes may require use of the other available tools, such. as the Fishbone Diagram/Cause and Effect Diagram. The EOS FMs are used during the Root Cause Analysis step. 2.3.3. Record Failure Mode Where the failure mode is not listed in the FMEA, the team may use " ~~" mom i om om oo = - i mm om om om = PeCaQl-20 Effective Problem Solving Version t Issued 12 tools such as a fishbone to generate ideas. See the Tools section below. Once determined, this information should be listed on a revision to the FMEA and applicable documents, ¢-g. Control Plan, Work Instructions. Ifthe team is having difficulties determining the faiture mode ater using the recommended tools, go back and re-evaluate the problem statement. 2.3.4 Issue SCAR if applicable ‘Tools Only after evidence shows that the failure mode is supplier-fault can a supplier corrective action request (SCAR) be issued. See the Chrysler, Ford, General Motors Potential Failure Mode and Effects Reference Manual and Advanced Product Quality Process with Control Plan Reference manuals, The supplier corrective action will be used as part of the intemal investigation corrective aciton and evaluated for effectiveness. Refer to Appendix B: Problem Solving Tool Matrix for additional tools and to Appendix C: Problem Solving Tool Descriptions for more details about the tools. * FMEA © Control Plan © Fishbone Diagram -27--28- ffente Preem Sting AIAG» ‘Version #Iesuod 6/12 Tocatapttroenzeromanco Key Questions — Determine Failure Mode ene ai MLst ton tic elt cali onda ea renting en eae er ea ENN 1 Have all possible failure modes been accessed that could resultin the defined problem? Has ‘what could go wrong that could result in the problem” been recorded? Have process and material factors or variables affecting the product been recorded? Have results of #3 above been assessed to how they relate to the requirements? Have interactions of factors and/or variables affecting the product been identified? Have results of #4 above been assessed to how they relate to the requirements? Identify and Verify Failure Modes 1 Has "what went wrong that resulted in the problem” been identiied? 2. Has the process failure mode besn identified? 3 Has the defined failure mode been verified”? 4 Does determination of failure mode record describe [how] failure mode wes verified? ee ete ee Ly iAIAG ‘ne cataetoepat peters CaQI-20 Effective Problem Solving Version t Issued 6/12 2.4 Root Cause Analysis Input ‘Output scape FM Root Cause True Root Causes for: Occurrence FM reyes Escape systemic FM Occurrence systemic “analyze Determine Contin THe ems_[*|_rotendatacs [*|__cs Figure7. Root Cause Analysis Introduction This step has been identified by AIAG members as a concer in the industry, eg. effective root cause analysis and recurrence prevention, Special focus and attention should be taken at this step of the problem solving process to correctly identify the true roor cause(s). Additionally the organization should have data to suggest that the problem is potential supplier fault prior to issuing a supplier corrective action request. Evidence of the defect and an acceptable problem identification statement should be provided to the supplier in a timely fashion so they ‘can verify the problem and begin root cause analysis. Information from suppliers indicates that this is often not the case. Assigning the investigation to a supplier without data is counterproductive 10 the problem solving exercise. 2.4.2 Analyze Failure Modes ‘The problem solving team needs the Escape, Occurrence and Systemic Failure Modes determined in the prior step along with some additional tools to help ultimately determine three types of root causes: escape, occurrence and systemic (BOS). The escape root cause addresses the question, “Why did the concern reach the customer (or next operation)?” The occurrence root cause addresses the question, “Why did the problem occur?” The systemic root cause addresses, “Why did the system or planning process fail to identity a concern?” 2.4.3 Determine Potential Root Causes Root cause analysis (RCA) consists of many problem solving tools for identifying the true cause of a concer. RCA is not a single, sharply defined method. ‘The team will use many approsiches, tools or processes. Some of the tools/methods are more analytical and some are more creative tools. The choice of tools/methods used by the team is at the discretion of the team, The end result is that any tool ot tools used must help the team first determine a number of potential root causes. The -29-~30- CQl-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 Issued 6/12 AIAG mecataott poo potomance traditional “Five Why” tool should not be limited to five or any specific number of iterations. Further, the process should be repeated with regard to the quality planning phase, product manufacturing, product and process monitoring. See Figure 8 below. Refer to Appendices B and C for tools and examples of tool usage. Part Defect Winyaid the probiem Occur? LL 1 (Planning) way? | 02 way) 03 ‘why id th protien Escape? |_[e, mee (Process) Way] On| gy Proatce wry) €2 cA Predict RE Way) €9 war ea ‘wy was there a Systemic sue? LS (Management) WHY En |p Prevent why >) 82 cA Provent RC Wir] 83 Wine) s4 wae] so |p Protect ca Protect RE Figure8. Why" Confirm True Root Cause(s) Tools After determining the potential EOS root causes, the team will confirm which of the potential root causes are the true escape, occurrence and systemic root cause(s) by fully understanding the cause-effet relationship between the causes and the nonconformance. The fishbone diagram or cause-and-effect matrix may be helpful with understanding, this relationship. Without diligence to determining the true EOS root causes, the team risks implementing numerous counter measures in the Corrective Action step to “hopefully” address the root cause. This can be a waste of time, effort and/or resource as well as be ineffective. This type of “activity trap” should be avoided by using the data and evidence that were to be collected in the earlier steps of the Effective Problem Solving process. Recommended tools at this stage include (Refer to Appendix B: Problem Solving Tool Matrix) * TRIZ Customers and the competition require faster and more effective problem se im fp ob RR mm & oF we oF oe OR OFTCaQl-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 issued 8/12 solving, ‘The need for creative thinking has never been more important, yet this is a critical skill that is often not taught or learned by adults.” ‘According to this model, to solve problems we have to overcome “psychological inertia” which occurs due to our experiences and normal pattem of thinking. As Albert Einstein observed, "we can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." Often a problem is solved from someone who does not have Knowledge of the history of the problem because they can see it from a different perspective, e.g. a “fresh set of eyes.” Einstein also said thet "imagination is more important than knowledge." TRIZ is one tool that ‘can be effectively used to overcome psychological inertia Five W ("Why™) + Creative Thinking «Fishbone Diagram The fishbone diagram can be used to brainstorm potential causes of quality problems. This tool has also been referred to a “cause and effect” diagram. This is merely a tool so that the team can begin to identify the causal relationships to the identified problem and to develop a series of specific causes and prioritize them for further study. In addition the team will need to develop a hypothesis test to evaluate each potential cause at the identified process of origin. Determination of high positive correlation of the cause and effect is important for effectively addressing problems. See Figure 9 for an example of the tool 2 AIAG is now offering “imovation” taining, some of which are based on TRIZ, the Russian Thecry of Inventive Problem-solving (see Glossary). This training provides you witha structured process for use of creative thinking tools. “31+-32- CQl-20 Effective Problem Solving AIAG Version 1 Isued 6/12 ‘Mo cata peskoatermarce cn Method Resources - egy cute ~Escataton - Soest uncest wasnaton\ sary < Documentation Trane Rod eg os 7 A creases Revouroes I Supper Puri / competency a RR 7 sactine capadety- Noise Vibration / oves Production Toots Loa (Ross Harare on ad Ss Figure 9, Fishbone Diagram — Quality (example) ‘Always to remember Deming’s Management 80/20 Rule "20% of key issues plaguing organizations are 80% rooted in management cause” + BOB (“Best of the Best") vs. WOW (“Worst of the Worst”) This is a technique for letting the “parts speak.” What can be leamed from examining examples of the best of the parts compared and ‘contrasted with the worst examples? © Concentration Diagram fe) PR] BF) fe) FAL OBR, OFA) my ORL ae i" i i fy fe oS OB ORR Oo ih feAIAG 2a om Effective Problem Solving rca or pant ouomaree ‘Version 4 Issued 612 Questions To Consider When determining the BOS Root causes using the above tools the following questions may be useful: om Impacts eee kes Was the correct process used? 2. Is standardized work being followed (shift, shiftto- shiny? 3. Are required documents posted in operators language (including the Contro! Plan)? Is the regular operator conducting the work? Is training correct and current? 4 5 6 Are quality requirements known? 7 8 Has anything changed in the process? Is the process in control? rrr Scents id Was the tooling correct, to requirements and listed ‘on Work Standard Sheet and Control Plan’? ‘Ase the correct tools andlor fixtures being used? 3 Are tool calibrations andlor Preventative Maintenance current? 4 Are tools/fntures all listed on Calibration andor Preventive Maintenance Logs? 5 Are the tools in good working condition (not worn}? 6 Has tooling been bypessed? 7 Are tools / error proof- detection devices functioning properly? 8 Was measurement uncertainty known, 0.9. gage RAR acceptable as a percent of tolerance? foe un Product/Part Related Ques! y S Impact ‘Was it the correct part? Has there been a product change (Formal or informaly? ‘Ace parts stored in the right location? ‘Are parts stored in the correct storage container? Is the part routing current? Is there a product capablity study current and on file for this part? Is there a consistent failure mode location? “33+cal-20 Etective Problem Solving AIAG Saettnosats ystem that Systen Bees mthal CCC kU Sct ae Escape RC Was the proper planning process used for the affected product (e.g. production scheduling, ‘change management, order processing, shipping)? 2 Were the proper planning tools used for the affected product? 3. Was the determined fallure mode identified in the PEMEA? 4 Was the failure mode predicted in any other form of ‘documentation or planning activity? 5 Was the risk ofthe failure mode occurring predicted property? 6 Was the risk of not detecting the failure modo predicted properly? 7 Ace there adequate process controls to prevent ‘andlor detect the failure mode? 8 Were error-proofing/detection devices considered for this falure mode during the planning stage? © Isthe skiltraining associated withthe planning ‘activities adequate for the proper development and [ Implementation ofthe process documents? 10 is the design of the product robust as it relates to the failure modes or root causes? 11. Has the system been evaluated to encompass the potential root causes on other parts, product or processes? 42 ‘Ave there current methods in place to prevent this ‘occunrence? 13. Were the components evaluated in a system FMEA to Identify any risks atthe interfaces or with the system in total? 14 Was the design verification plan reviewed? 415 Was risk associated with tolerance “stack up” of the ‘components evaluated? Key Questions - Occurrence Root Cause (ORC) Analysis Ree 11 Has the RCA evaluation and measurement methodology been defines? 2. Has the measurement system been verified as capable and acceptable? 3 Has testing to identify potential ORCs been defined? 4. Have tests been defined to study interactions between ORCs and the product variation? Have the RCs ofthe identified failure mode been logged? Has the process for determining the identification of the RCs been defined? Is the failure mode now controllable by the identified ORCs to the state of turning it On / Off? ‘Ace all potential RCs forthe failure mode addressed by preventive methods? -34- ee) ORR OBE) EE) FF) = is fF EF) z a imi im wycal-20 AIAG Effective Problem Solving acai erastowomice ‘Version Issued 42 Key Questions - Escape Root Cause (ERC) Analysis PEM een 1 Has the RCA evaluation and measurement methodology been defined? 2. Has the measurement system been verified as capable and acceptable? 3. Has testing to identify potential ERCs been defined? 4. Have tests been defined to study interactions between ERCs and the product variation? 1. Have the RCs of the identiied failure mode been logged? 2 Has the process for determining the identification of the RCs been defined? 3 Is the failure mode now controllable by the identified ERCs to the state of turning it On / OF? Key Questions - Systemic Root Cause (SRC) Analysis z CIE Has the potential oot causes evaluation mathod and measurement process been defined? Have organization procedures have been evaluated in analyzing the potential root causes? Have other similar products been investigated to discover potential system RC exists elsewhere? What was the system error? Identify and Verity SROs? Does the analysis process adequately account for the failure mode? Is there a well-defined process to determine the SRCs? Have other similar products been investigated to discover if potential SRCs exist elsewhere? =35-Ccal-20 Effective Problem Solving AIAG Version 1 Issued 612 Te xa ek peromancs 2.5 Corrective Action Input Qutput True Root Causes for: eon Verified Escape CA Escape eer) Verified Occurrence CA Occurrence Verified Systemic CA Systemic Key Findings Lessons Learned Develop Possible 1, [Select Best Lf implement ]4f very], Remove 1, Lessons Solutions Solution ection | [ettectiveness| [containment] "| Learned Figure 10. Corrective Action 2.5.1. Introduction ‘The team should ensure that the process is statistically “stable” before determining the solution. If the process is not stable, the team will likely not see improvement. Ifthe process is not stable, causes of the instability need to be understood and addressed. See AIAG Statistical Process Control Reference Manual to addtess instability. Much of the time, this alone will solve the problem. They should also understand the impact that the proposed solution will have on the problem, eg. it will solve 80% of the problem before implementation. 2.5.2 Develop Possible Solutions Information from the root cause analysis is input to developing a solution. The solution should be determined by a cross-functional team, ‘There are a number of tools that can be used depending on the complexity of the problem and the group preference. ‘The more challenging the problem, the more demand there is for in-depth analysis and synthesis of ideas into concepts that deliver the required value. No different than other organizational functions, e.g. finance, operations, quality, individuals and teams need increasingly structured approaches to deal with complex situations and problems to deliver the desired results. Incremental Idealistio improvement solution zone baled (innovation) No _—_—_—_—_—_—_—< pitie change beneft -36- "Am esos Oe oe Oe Oe Oe OS Oe Os fe) OFF OFF) o6OFFL OFF) oP)cays eat proms Cal-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 Issued 612 Different solutions exist at different ends of the scale and different methods, tools and techniques are required to realize all benefits. Both ends of this scale require structured approaches. The right side focuses ‘on innovative solutions. This is especially true in situations where: ‘© Long hidden problems are revealed and solutions are not obvious; ‘+ Problems that have been known but ignored need to be solved; + Solving was tried and failed but renewed attempts can lead to dramatic value; ¢ Previous solutions were insufficient; + Previous solutions were not worthy of implementation but renewed ‘efforts are required with results beyond expectations. ‘One method of brainstorming is the Osborn-Pamnes creative problem solving technique. This is an efficient way to generate large numbers of possible ideas then as @ group, come up with a collective agreement on which are the most important. ‘There are other approaches that would also be helpful, Where a problem is recurring, consider error-proofing methods to address the systemic issues that led to the recurrence, e.g. management resource allocation. For additional guidance in effective detection of problems, see the AIAG Measurement Systems Analysis and AIAG Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Reference manuals. The AIAG Advanced Product Quality Planning and Control Plan Reference ‘manual contains helpful checklists for a number of the quality planning steps to ensure nothing is overlooked. It also contains examples of Control Plans for differing dominant variables, e.g. person-dependent, tooling, Select Best Solution ‘The team should make sure that the problem solution is the best solution for the organization and its overall aim. The team should understand the cause and effect relationship of the problem to the proposed solution, e.g, can the problem be “turned on” and “off” with the proposed solution? Also tools like a decision matrix can be used to quantify potential solutions to help make the best decision. The selected solution should be ‘a consensus decision, considering Voice of the Customer as applicable. ‘The team should try to validate that the proposed solution has the potential to address the problem prior to implementation. This can be .ed in various ways, e.g, testing, simulations, trial runs, 1g 4 solution it is important to avoid sub-optimizing the entire system, Quality pioneer W. Edwards Deming emphasized that having “profound knowledge” to avoid optimizing one part of the system while compromising or “losing out” elsewhere in the system, According to Deming, “profound knowledge” consists of four elements: # Appreciation for a system (importance of interdependence in a -37--38- CQl-20 Effective Problem Solving Version 1 ied 6/12 AIAG» acai ore carearco system); ‘© Theory of Variation (understanding of special causes and common ‘causes of variation, knowledge of the difference between a stable system and a capable system, knowledge of various types of uncertainty in statistical data); ‘+ Theory of Knowledge (ability to predict the future with some confidence, there is no such thing as a “true value”); + Understanding of Psychology (intrinsic motivation from within the individual and extrinsic motivation that comes from outside factors). He defined a system as a “series of functions or activities (sub processes, stages or components) within an organization that work together for the aim of the organization.” ‘The aim has to be clear to everyone. The performance of any component should be judged by its contribution to the aim of the system, not for its individual achievement apart from the system. Management's job is to optimize the entire system. Sub optimization is costly and can be counter-productive to the organization. 2.5.4 Implement Action The -team will need a plan for implementing the solution with responsibilities, timing and stages defined to facilitate the execution Resources external to the team and any approvals necessary will need to be obtained. The plan should include any machines, manpower, materials and methods needed for implementation. Many customers require pre-notification of change prior to the change being implemented. Where-this is applicable, the organization should plan and obtain customer approval before implementation, There may be a customer-specified requirement and/or format for this. 2.5.5. Verify Effectiveness Effectiveness should be evidenced by data, e.g, a quantitative record. After verifying effectiveness of the solution implemented, the ‘organization has accomplished the end result desired. For example, did you realize the expected percentage of improvement that was predicted in the planning phase? Was the entire problem addressed or just portion of it? Effectiveness may have varying levels even when the program has been flawlessly executed and the plan completely implemented. The team may find that the corrective actions taken were not as effective in addressing the problem as originally forecast. The team and the organization may still be satisfied with this result. It is important to remember that the plan is going to be limited by the resources available and by time constraints, It is important that there is communication and coordination between natural owner of the problem and the function that discovered the problem, oom 7 ry cA (FE) tr cortrmosofr#ofr 6h6ftr)h|[UEn.)6UlUCUEE))©6GUFE)6OUOEE!)6 OU f—E))0OCfE) Oo SE) COUdER)CCéSEED: Th