alan daniels moscow, russia may 23, 2013 apqp/ppap standard advance product quality planning (apqp)...
Post on 12-Jun-2018
246 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Alan Daniels Moscow, Russia May 23, 2013
1
– Team Leadership – Strategy, Focus, Projects – Standard Status – ISO Liaison – 9100 Series Revision Plan – Standard Proposal – APQP/PPAP - Debbie – 9101E Ballot Results - Masa – 9100 Usage Survey - Alain
2
IAQG Strategic Focus
Relationship Growth Strategy • Civil Authorities - Production • Space • Defense • Maintenance, Repair & Overhaul • Trade Associations
Improvement Strategy
• Requirements
• People Capability
• Product & Supply Chain Improvement
• Performance
IAQG Operating Management System IAQG Other Party Management Team
Integration Team
3
4
5
Current State • Independent release
of standards
• Most OEM’s deploy 9100
• Limited supply chain eligible and required to deploy 9100
• Standards supported for deployment presentations
• Few measures in place
Strategic Focus Project manage future
integrated standard releases Collaborate with Strategy
Streams IAQG 5 year strategy -
Lead 90% certification Ensure standards are current
and relevant Develop and maintain
document support materials and improve communications
Engage in ISO activities and obtain liaison voting status
Develop future QMS concepts and measures
Future State • Integrated release of
future standards
• All IAQG member companies use the 9100 series
• All eligible supply chain use 9100 series
• Standard support is easy to use
• Measures drive improvements
IAQG Standards
6
Oversight of Certification Scheme 9104-1 (organization) 9104-2 (surveillance/certs) 9104-3 (auditors)
Maintenance of stds issued by IA
QG
(IA
QG 103)
IAQG OWNERS Data Type DATA B
est practices
Prod
uct &
Su
pply
Cha
in
Stra
tegy
St
ream
People Capability documents (PCAP001) & structure (skills matrix) Peop
le
Cap
abili
ty
Stra
tegy
St
ream
Supply Chain Management Handbook (SCMH)
Sales & Scheduling
Requirement Flow down
Design & Developm’t
Plant, skills &
planning
Manufact. &
Inspection
Supplier Mgt.
Control of N/C mat’l
C/A & P/A
Order Mgt & logistics
Customer Support
Sourcing selection
Business Processes
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
9103 Key Char
9102 FAI
9107 DDA
9114 Direct ship
9131 N/C Doc
9132 Marking
9133 Sup.Qual.
9134 Sup risk
9162 Self Ver
9115 Software
9137 AQAP align.
ICO
P C
ertification Scheme
9120 (Distributors)
9100 (General)
9110 (Maintenance) 9101 Audit
Process
Quality Management System
REQ
UIR
EMEN
TS
Stra
tegy
Str
eam
7
• 22 Standards in Portfolio – 14 Active Changes – 4 Review Standards in the ballot or publish
phase – 4 Development Standards in active team
development – 3 New Projects Standards in development – 4 Study Standards planning a revision or
past due for reaffirmation – 1 Questionnaire Proposal phase to assess support
for the development of a standard – 7 Sustain Standards that are published and in
sustain & maintenance phase
8
Complete the ballot and publication process for 10 standards, and initiate the revision process for the 4 behind schedule
• Standards in Review (active ballots) 9101 “Quality Management Systems Audit Requirements for
Aviation, Space, and Defense Organizations” • Ballot draft developed, comments incorporated and second ballot has
been completed and passed – Changes presentation available
9114 “Direct Ship Guidance for Aerospace Companies” • Ballot draft developed, comments incorporated and ballot has been
initiated. Ballot results in May.
9116 “Notification of Change” • Ballot draft developed, comments incorporated and ballot has been
initiated. Ballot results in May.
9104-2 “Requirements for Oversight of Aerospace Quality Management” • Ballot draft developed, comments incorporated and ballot has been
initiated.
9
• IAQG standards in Development (revisions) 9100 “Quality Management Systems - Requirements for
Aviation, Space and Defense Organizations” • Developed design specification, schedule, integrated schedule, etc.
9104-3 “Requirements for Aerospace Auditor Competency and Training Courses” • Team member transition resulted in a delay – New resources added and
progressing.
9107 “Direct Delivery Authorization Guidance for Aerospace Companies” • Revision is in work. Will work after 9114 is complete. Judy Lasley to be
engaged.
9102 “Aerospace First Article Inspection Requirement” • Draft complete and steps towards ballot initiated - IAQG Editor
10
• IAQG standards in Development (new) 9117 “Delegated Product Release Verification (DPRV)”
• Active and meeting regularly working on the new standard.
9136 “Root Cause Analysis and Problem Solving” • Ballot draft complete – Ballot process to begin in the next few
weeks.
9138 “Statistical Product Acceptance” • Standard number issued and meetings have begun on revision.
91XX “Advance Product Quality Planning” (APQP) / “Production Part Approval Process” (PPAP) • SWG approved - Council vote in Moscow.
11
• IAQG standards in Study or Noncompliant 9132 “Data Matrix Quality Requirements for Parts Marking”
• Noncompliant to review requirement – No IDR
9133 “Qualification Procedure for Aerospace Standard Parts” • Noncompliant to review requirement - Working draft complete and SDRs
are reviewing.
9134 “Supply Chain Risk Management Guideline” • Noncompliant to review requirement - Recommendation is to cancel
standard.
9162 “Aerospace Operator Self-Verification Programs” • Noncompliant to review requirement – Project plate to be complete.
IDR recommends it be revised.
12
Measure Description Status Comments
Performance to budget allocation Forecast to actual Performing within budget.
Compliance to 5 Year Standard Assessment requirement
IDR compliance 9132, 9133, 9134 and 9162 all behind schedule (TBD, Feldsmann, Stock, Gordon)
Publish an updated Standard Register twice a year
Revision schedule Updated in April and is being published (Daniels)
Deploy and collect data for the 9100 Usage & Flow Down Survey
Sector data on 9100 usage
Data delayed 2012 results but is now complete, 2013 initiated
Track the identification and performance of Standard IDRs and SDRs
IDRs and SDRs assigned
SDR needed for 9120 (EAQG) IDR needed for 9132 (?) SDR needed for 9132 (EAQG) IDR Needed for 9103 (?) SDR needed for 9162 (EAQG) SDRs needed for 9138 (EAQG, APAQG)
9100 manage the initiative, project and revision process
Revision schedule Ahead of schedule, deliverables met (Daniels)
9101 manage the initiative, project and revision process
Revision schedule 2nd ballot complete. (Kawamoto)
Provide proactive ISO Liaison support to the ISO 9001 revision
Coordination IAQG comments accepted, early preview enabled (Daniels)
On Track / Target Behind Schedule Issues Identified 13
14
Presenter: Alan Daniels (Boeing) Subject: Cancellation of the 9134 “Supply Chain Risk
Management Guideline”. Currently noncompliant to review requirement . This standards is more guidance type material and the topic is currently covered in the SCMH. IDR, SDR and Reqs Team endorse request.
Does the Council accept the proposal to:
Cancel the 9134 standard “Supply Chain Risk Management Guideline” standard.
A vote in favor means: Cancellation process begins.
Not voting in favor means:
No cancellation and revision will need to be initiated.
Council Decision:
15
9100 Series Revision High Level Plan
• The 9100 is based on ISO 9001 and is thus affected by the ISO TC176 revision activity
• Several other IAQG standards are based on the IAQG 9100 standard, and will require revision in parallel with the 9100 standard revision activity
• The IAQG 9100-series standards are planned for publication in 2016
9100 Series Revision
16
EAQG Leader: Brigitte CLAMENS
(Zodiac Aerospace)
Members: Roberto CIASCHI (ESA) Stuart ANTHONY (RR)
AAQG Leader: Buddy CRESSIONNIE
(Lockheed Martin)
Members:
James CLIFFORD (UTC) Mark COVERT (Honeywell)
APAQG Leader: Masahiro KAWAMOTO
(MHI)
Members: Chen ZHONGYUAN (AVIC) Tatsuya SHIRAI (KHI)
IAQG Leader: Alan DANIELS (Boeing)
IAQG Standards Representatives 9101 : Masahiro KAWAMOTO (MHI)
9110 : Agathe MOLL (Airbus)
9120 : Dale GORDON (Aerojet)
9115 : Raymond WRIGHT (Raytheon)
9137 : Juan Ignacio MARTIN (Airbus Military)
IAQG 9100 Series Team
17
18
Companies certified to revised standards
Nagoya 10/2012
Moscow 05/2013
Montreal 10/2013
Preparing
San Antonio 05/2012
Ballots reviews and comments Publications
9100 revision START
For more information, see detailed schedule
END TBD
First Draft Ballot Draft
Brussels 04/2014
TBD 10/2014
2014
TBD 04/2015
TBD 10/2015
2015
TBD 04/2016
TBD 10/22016
2016 2012 2013
TBD 04/2017
TBD 10/2017
2017
Ready for Publish
9100 Series Revision Master Schedule
Coord. Draft
Plan & Stakeholders feedback
Transition Period
Internal Dependencies Standards & Training as needed for publication - Required for 9100 publication
- 9100 Transition Plan - 9101 Update (as required) - 9100 Training (as required)
External dependencies ISO 9001 publications • CD : May 2013 • DIS : Feb. 2014 • FDIS : Feb. 2015 • Publish Sept. 2015
9110 & 9120 Series Revisions
9115, 9137 Cancel 6 mo. after 9100 is ready for
publication
Training Decision
Auditors training (as needed)
Development (OPMT) Recommended Schedule
to satisfy need date
Required for publication
9101 Audit – Revisions (as needed) 9104-1, -2, -3 – Revisions (as needed)
Required for publication
Stakeholder IAQG Leader 9100 Team Liaison External • Certif Bodies /Aero Auditors Tim LEE Alan / Masa • 9100 Certified Organizations Brian BLOUNT Brian GEER • Airline and aviation operators Alain GROS Isabelle VOUGAZ • Distributors Dale GORDON Dale GORDON • Deliverable software orgs Raymond WRIGHT Raymond WRIGHT
Internal • IAQG & sector member companies Alan/Buddy/Brigitte/Masa 9100 Leader, Sector Leaders • IAQG Strategy Streams/Teams
• Requirements Alan DANIELS Alan DANIELS • People Capability Jesse MANGUEL Stuart ANTHONY • Product & SC Improvement Bernard LAURAS Jim CLIFFORD • Performance Improvement Christian BUCK Mark COVERT • OPMT & Certification Bodies Tim LEE Alan/Masa • Integration Jim CLIFFORD Jim CLIFFORD Civil Aviation
• IAQG Relationship Growth • MRO orgs Alain GROS Flavio IZZO • Authorities Edward/Alain Alan DANIELS • Defense / NATO Mike HAYWARD Juan Ignacio MARTIN • Space Roberto CIASCHI Roberto CIASCHI • Trade Associations (EAQG) Alain BONNARD Brigitte CLAMENS
Stakeholders and Liaisons
19
Determine Methods to Request Stakeholder Input
Stakeholder Contact Method Data Collection Tool External • Certification Bodies/Aerospace Auditors Email Leader 9100 Revision Survey • 9100 Certified Organizations Email Leader 9100 Revision Survey • Airline and aviation operators Email Leaders 9100 Revision Survey • Distributors Email Leader 9100 Revision Survey • Deliverable software organizations Email Leader 9100 Revision Survey
Internal • IAQG & sector member companies Email Leaders Comments template • IAQG Strategy Streams/Teams
• Requirements Email, Presentation Comments template • People Capability Email, Presentation Comments template • Product & SC Improvement Email, Presentation Comments template • Performance Improvement Email, Presentation Comments template • OPMT & Certification Bodies Email, Presentation Comments template • Integration Email Leader Comments template
• IAQG Relationship Growth • Maintenance, repair, and overhaul Email Leader Comments template • Authorities Email Leader Comments template • Defense / NATO Email Leader Comments template • Space Email Leader Comments template • Trade Associations Email Leader Comments template 20
• External Stakeholders • Due date for inputs on “Web survey”
28 February 2013 July 31, 2013
• Internal Stakeholders • Due date for inputs on “Comments template”
31 July 2013
21
What is your Sector or Geographical Area?
Americas
Europe
Asia-Pacific
What is the size of your organization?
Small <50 employees
Medium 50-500 employees Large 501-5000 employees Extra Large >5000 employees
How does your customer flow down 9100/9110/9120 standard certification
requirement for your organization?
Mandatory
Recommended
22
Data Mining: 458 Responses Web Survey Demographics
How valuable is certification to 9100/9110/9120 in the management of your organization?
Extremely Valuable
Fairly Valuable
Valuable
Somewhat Valuable
No Value
How valuable is receiving ISO 9001 certification as part of your 9100 series (9100, 9110 and 9120)
certification?
Extremely Valuable
Fairly Valuable
Valuable
Somewhat Valuable
No Value
82% viewed receiving ISO 9001
certification was valuable as part of
9100 series certification.
91% rated 9100 series certification
to be valuable in the management of
their organization.
23
Data Mining: 458 Responses Web Survey Responses
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Overall 9100 standards clarity
Project Management – Clause 7.1.1
Risk Management -‐ Clause 7.1.2
ConfiguraHon Management – Clause 7.1.3
Work Transfer – Clause 7.1.4
Special Requirements/CriHcal Items
ProducHon Process VerificaHon
Customer Focus/SaHsfacHon – Product Conformity and On Time Delivery Focus
Yes
No
N/A -‐ Not Applicable
Are the new requirements added to the 9100/9110/9120 series clear?
83% thought new requirements were clear
24
Data Mining: 458 Responses Web Survey Responses
Opportunities
Implementing the 9100/9110/9120:2009 requirements has benefits for my organization
that outweight the cost.
Yes
No
The 9100/9110/9120 Deployment Support Material located on the IAQG website (http://
www.iaqg.org/) is helpful.
Yes
No
Over 73% of respondents believe
that 9100 series requirements has
benefits that outweigh the costs.
Need to better communicate deployment
support materials.
Those that knew of materials found them
helpful.
25
Data Mining: 458 Responses Web Survey Responses
Questions
26
APQP/PPAP - 101 Questionnaire Standard Proposal Alan Daniels Moscow, Russia May 23, 2013
27
IAQG APQP/PPAP Standard Advance Product Quality Planning (APQP)
Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) Summary • APQP is a phased planning process applied to product
introductions. - Includes specific deliverables to ensure on-time, on-
quality, on-cost objectives are met • PPAP is an output of the APQP process
- Requires Suppliers to demonstrate that they have established a production process that will consistently produce product meeting customers requirements
• Applies existing tools to ensure products are produced under controlled conditions with minimal variation
IAQG APQP/PPAP Standard Advance Product Quality Planning (APQP)
Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
Proposal • Establish a common approach thru an aerospace variant
of existing APQP & PPAP materials • IAQG APQP/PPAP Standard to include a collection of
standardized methods for ensuring consistency and quality of APQP & PPAP requirements
Question EAQG APAQG AAQG IAQG
Number of answers 33 6 15 54
ln your opinion how much value would this initiative provide to the industry if it was implemented?
19 High 3 Medium 1 Low 10 No answers
0 High 4 Medium 2 Low 0 No answers
3 High 7 Medium 3 Low 2 No answers
22 High 14 Medium 6 Low 12 No answers
Would this initiative benefit your own Company?
29 Yes 2 No 1 No answer 1 Not involved
3 Yes 3 No
12 Yes 3 No
44 Yes 8 No 1 No answer 1 Not involved
If the initiative was developed would you implement it in your Company?
29 Yes 2 No 1 No answer 1 Not involved
3 Yes 3 No
9 Yes 6 No
41 Yes 11 No 1 No answer 1 Not involved
30
IAQG - APQP/PPAP 101 Questionnaire Summary
Question EAQG APAQG AAQG IAQG
If the initiative was developed would you implement it with your Suppliers?
29 Yes 2 No 1 No answer 1 not involved
3 Yes 3 No
10 Yes 5 No
42 Yes 10 No 1 No answer 1 not involved
If the initiative was developed would it benefit ail Sectors?
28 Yes 4 No 1 No answer
5 Yes 1 No
14 Yes 1 No
47 Yes 6 No 1 No answer
Would your Company like to nominate someone to join the Initiative Project Team?
15 /18 Yes 18 No
0 Yes 5 No 1 If approved
8 Yes 7 No
23/26 Yes 30 No 1 If approved
31
IAQG - APQP/PPAP 101 Questionnaire Summary
• 101 Survey results very positive in support of the initiative • Strategy Working Group endorsed
Recommend vote of approval
31
Presenter: Alan Daniels (Boeing) Subject: APQP/PPAP
Advance Product Quality Planning (APQP) / Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
Does the Council accept the proposal to:
Develop an internationally harmonized standard on Advance Product Quality Planning (APQP) / Production Part Approval Process (PPAP).
A vote in favor means: Work begins developing a standard in accordance with presentation.
Not voting in favor means:
No harmonization activities will start and no international standard will be established.
Council Decision:
32
Questions
33
IAQG 9101 Team Masahiro Kawamoto
Moscow, Russia 23rd May, 2013
Actually, yes we can…
9101E – Re-Ballot Results
Sector Eligible to vote No Reply Approved Not Approved Approved Disapproved AAQG 27 8 19 0 100% 0% EAQG 34 11 21 2 91% 9%
APAQG 12 5 7 0 100% 0% Total 73 24 47 2 96% 4%
96%
4%
Overall Re-‐Ballot Vote Approved Disapproved
19 21
7
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
AAQG EAQG APAQG
Re-‐Ballot Vote Count by Sector
Not Approved
Approved
37 (86%)
47 (96%)
6
2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ballot 1 Ballot 2
9101 Ballot Votes
Not Approved
Approved
9101E – Re-Ballot Results
44
70
101
29 38
5 0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Ballot 1 Ballot 2
9101 Ballot Feedback
Comments
Editorial
Technical
Summary:
- Team has reviewed and dispositioned on all comments (Total: 104 comments) through F2F meeting (March 2013: hosted by PFW in Speyer, Germany) and WebEx meetings.
- Re-Ballot started on 26th January 2013 and closed on 24th March.
- Moscow/Chicago meeting (F2F & WebEx) was held for creating(revising) the guidance materials.
- The final draft for publication will be submitted after AAQSC affirmation ballot.
- As a result of review on comments, no technical change is needed. Team has completed a draft for final editing and publication.
9101E – Re-Ballot Results
Questions
38
Alain Bonnard EAQG Operations Manager
Final results
39
9100 Survey
Note
• Preliminary results (APAQG & EAQG) presented during IAQG Nagoya October 2012 meeting (AAQG consolidated results not available at this time)
• Final 2012 results with consolidation of the 3 sectors answers presented here after
40
9100 Survey Summary
Number of 9100 Survey answers
Topic AAQG APAQG EAQG Total IAQG
Number of Answers
20** on 21*** (100 %)
12 on 12 (100 %)
35 on 35 (100 %)
67** on 68*** (100 %)
Number of answers provided
at 100 %*
18 on 20 (90 %)
11 on 12 (92 %)
33 on 35 (94 %)
62 on 67 (93 %)
Total of Answers accountable
18 on 20 (90 %)
11 on 12 (92 %)
33 on 35 (94 %)
62 on 67 (93 %)
*: Not complete at 100% Supplier figures not provided **: Eaton figures not requested (New Member) ***: Rolls-Royce figures consolidated within EAQG answer
41
9100 Survey Summary
Sector
Number of Members
Internal IAQG Companies Number of Companies
certified
Certification Average
Company Sites Average / Member
AAQG (20) 19/20 (95 %) 89,5 % 39
APAQG (12) 12/12 (100 %) 93,5 % 10
EAQG (35) 35/35 (100 %) 90,1 % 13
Total IAQG (67)
66/67 (99 %) 89,5 % 20
Internal IAQG Company Certification
42
9100 Internal Certification
Plot order: AAQG - APAQG – EAQG (From Left to Right)
0
40
80
120
160
200
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67
CerJficaJon Rate Number of Sites
9100 Certification - IAQG - Internal
Certification Average Company Sites Average
89,5 % 20
43
9100 Survey Summary
Sector
Number of Members
IAQG Supply Chain Supply Chain Certification
Mandatory Rate (1)
Certification Average
Supplier Sites Average / Member
(2)
AAQG (20) 8/20 (40 %) 68,0 % 1796
APAQG (12) 9/12 (75 %) 84,2 % 212
EAQG (35) 26/35 (74 %) 70,5 % 625
Total IAQG (67) 43/67 (64 %) 72,3 % 920
IAQG Suppliers Certification
(1): Ratio of Number of IAQG Members mandating 9100 Certification to their Suppliers (2): Average of Suppliers sites (Eligible Suppliers) per IAQG Company
44
0
4000
8000
12000
16000
20000
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67
CerJficaJon Rate Number of Suppliers
9100 Certification - IAQG - Suppliers Certification
9100 Supplier Certification
Certification Average Supplier Sites Average
72,3 % 920
Plot order: AAQG - APAQG – EAQG (From Left to Right)
Supply Chain Certification Mandatory Rate
43 IAQG Companies mandating 9100 Certification / 67 (64 %)
45
9100 Survey Summary
Sector Internal Suppliers
2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012
AAQG 83,4 % 84,3 % 86,0 % 71,5 % 70,8 % 68,0 %
APAQG 91,3 % 96,6 % 93,5 % 60,6 % 72,6 % 84,2 %
EAQG 93,5 % 90,4 % 90,1 % 69,5 % 68,5 % 70,5 %
% of answers
100 % 100 % 100 % 67 % 98 % 93 %
Total IAQG
90,2 % 89,9 % 89,5 % 68,7 % 69,9 % 72,3 %
Evolution of Certification Rates 2010 2012
46
Comments
Suppliers certification rate: • 2 identified bias:
– AAQG: – Effect of Member companies not mandating
suppliers to be 9100 certified ( 12 on 20 60 %): – Rate at 60,2 % instead of 77,7 % for the others
(The 8 mandating certification) – EAQG: – EAQG Members with only Defense and Space
activities (6 on the total of 35): – Rate at 42,3 % instead of 75,8 % for the others
(The 29 not limited to Space or/and Space activities)
47
Next
2013 Survey: • Keep yearly periodicity • (Matching the IAQG 90% Certification goal
monitoring) • Keep goal to get 100% completion (100% answers
from IAQG Company Members) • 2013 Survey schedule:
– Same questionnaire as 2012 – Survey launched: May 6th, 2013 – Survey due date: July 31st, 2013
• 2013 results to be presented during Montreal Autumn 2013 meeting
48
Page 49
Thanks for your valuable contribution
50
Questions
top related