Lean Organizational Assesment That Is in Dvelopment - 1

Assessment Tool
Element of Rays
Tool That Could Be
Ray Interpatation of Jeromes Excel Tabs that Can be Used Integrated into
Jerome Verbiage Verbiage to Supplement Jeromes Tool Jerome Tool
Inventory
Management Material Control
Computerized Maintenance
CMMS System
Coordination and
Communication Team Meeting
Visual Management Visual Management Visual Management

Relations with
Union Values/Culture
5S 5S
Improvement and
Change Readiness Visual Management
Change Over SMED SMED SMED

Performance
Management Employee Utilization
Receiving Inspection-Quality
Incoming Quality Management System.
Emergency and Environmental Health and

Safety Safety
TPM TPM TPM
Level Schedule Sychorized Flow
Takt Build to Schedule
Pull System Kanban
Transportation External Logisitics
JIT JIT JIT

Demand Mgt Packaging
Manufacturing
Engineering
Perfromance Process Engineering Support
Other Support Behavior assessment of

Functions support functions
Abornormality
Detection Error Proofing Error Proofing
Problem Solving Problem Solving
Autonomation
Man/Machine Light or andon identification
Seperation of problems in a plant.
Upstream Quality In Station Process Control
Quality Control
Management Inspection
Flexible Manpower Flexible Manufacturing

Systems Systems
Layouting a cell in plant for
Cell Layout optimum material flow
Flow Design Internal Material Flow
Skill Building Worker flexibility

Functional
Integration 5S behavior
Standard
Operations Standard Operations Standardized Work
Quality Control and
Management QMS
Leadership employee
Management Style Assessment
Logistics Internal Logistics
Performance Performance
Annotation Use of FMEA
SPC
Tools Unique to Ray's
assesment Voice of Customer
Tools Unique to Jeromes

Assesment Quality Management System
Tools that are primarily the
same but differ in how deep Flexiable Manufacturing
they probe a topic System
Items We will try to integrate into current

assesment Training Systems
Motivational Assesment
Measurement System
Human Resources
Leadership
People
IT System
Benchmarking
Lean Product Design
Corrective Action System
Volume
Product Mix
First Time Through

Supply Chain
Management(Non Productive)
Wasted Operator Motion
SCM Modules
Product Planning
Sequence
Enviromental
Supplier Quality System
Lean Layout
Data Management
Effectiveness
Capacity
R & M Capability
Metrics
Internal Logisitics
Packaging and Labeling
Program Management
External Logisitics
Rays Assumed Definition of Jerome's Verbiage
The effectiveness of the control of material within a plant

The Effectiveness of the Preventative Maintenance and
Maintenance Repair Tracking System
The effectiveness of teams to meet and commuicate cross
shift and cross functional and team meetings
The measurement of the effectiveness to apply visual
identifiers to all processes, material handling processes,
paper work, etc to reduce errors and confusion and
misplacement of materials.
The measurement of the efficiencies of union relations

The effectiveness of workplace organization
The effectiveness of the willingness of the organization to
change there behavior and get involved
The effectiveness of the companies ability to rapidly
change over on any process, tool, machine, etc for
optimization of ending production of one part and starting
another in any process
The effectiveness of the employee utilization and capacity
via time study information
The effectiveness of the system that checks the quality of

supplier products at receiving.
The effectiveness of the organizations ability to prevent
accidents and response to emergency situations and the
measurement of the infrastructure available to be able to
respond quickly.
The measurement of the effectiveness to switching work
from skilled workers to the line operators for maintaining The effectiveness of
equipment. moving material faster
through the plant from
The effectiveness of being to run production without batch the receiving dock to the
processes with real demand. shipping dock
The effectiveness of a company to build as close to
possible through engineered and plan process cycle times
to the customer order demands.
The effectiveness of implementing pull card system and
other visual mnagement indicator systems for moving
materials within a plant to improve internal material logistic
coordination and communication
The effectiveness of External Logistical Suppliers ability to
optimize shipping cost
The assement of the firms movement towards JIT material
supply delivery and their knowledge of the methods.
The effectiveness of the plants ability to reuse packaging
or to insure they are standardizing their packaging sizes to
make flow to the production areas and warehouses much
easier to control and manage.
The measurement of the capabilities of the firms

manufacturing engineering staff on the ability to lead
continuous improvement activities and their knowledge of
lean and six sigma tools to make these improvements.
The measurement of the capabilities of the firms other

support organizational staffs on the ability to lead
continuous improvement activities and their knowledge of
lean and six sigma tools to make these improvements.
The effectiveness of error proofing to solve or eliminate

quality and complexity issues in the process and product.
The effectiveness of the plant to use problem solving tools
including CAR
The effectiveness a process to run automatically via an

installed lighting identification system to identify problem
process areas so everyone can see a problem exist and
how to improve employee's reaction time to these
problems so workers can work on alternate processes
while the machine is functioning in automaticThe
effectiveness of the process to separate and identify
between work that is manually and automatically based.
The effectiveness of containing problems in the work
station it was made
Inspection Systems
The effectiveness of the plants ability to fix quality used in the plant to
problems. check part quality
The measurement of the flexibility of equipment to adapt
easily to different product volumes and mixes within the
same process area
The effectiveness of optimization of equipment use with an
individual process cell only
The measurement of the effectivness of controlling material
flow from the dock to the POU
The effectiveness or measuring of successful Worker
Flexibility through On the Job and other training.
Measure of effectiveness of the application of 5S from a
cultural perspective
The effectiveness of Standardizing operator work functions

The effectiveness of the plants quality management
system
Effectiveness of leadership capabilities and communication
skill sets in vertical enviroment
The effectiveness of internal logistics
The effectiveness of the use of a FMEA risk prevention
Method
Measurement of the Effectiveness of understanding and
using SPC tools
The effectiveness of how well the plant is listing to internal
and external customers and the supply base.
A measurement of the plants Quality Management System
and how it is affectinging the aability of the company to
transform into a Lean organization
The measurement of the company ability to process
flexible equipment and processes for downtime
preventation and optimum production flow
An assesment of the plants training system robustness

An assesment of what motivational killers are most
affecting the plant.
An assesment of the plant control and use of a effective
measurement system.
A Measurement of the involvement of the HR department

in the transformational change in the organization
An assesment of the decision making behavoir of leaders

The measurement of how much the plant or company
values the people in the organization.
The assesment of how involved the IT department is in
transformational efforts of the organization to improve data
distribution and material flow.
A small probe into understanding the method the firm uses
to benchmark their manufacturing processes for
competiveness to others in market place.
The assesment of the Product Development teams use of
lean and six sigma priniciples in the histroical and future
design of products.
The assesment of the soundness and application of a
corrective action system within a plant or company.
An assessment of how the plant reacts and adjust to
volume fluxuations
An assesment of how much of a product mix is a plant
delaing with to hget a better understanding of the
complexity of the plant processes.
An assesment of the plants abaility to make part correctly
this first time ran through their process to provide an
indication of how much reowrk is actually occuring and
being covered during other non value added time that can
be eliminated from the process.
An assesment of he plants innovation in reducing indirect
cost and controlling non productive materials.
An assesment of how much opportunity exsit for wasted
operator motion reductions
The effectiveness of the plant to outsource to lower cost
producers modular sub assemblies and assemblies.
An assement of the plant knowledeg and ability to optimize
the product development process.
An assesment of the plants ability to control material in a
sequential fashion
An assement of the companies enviromental control
system and effectiveness
An assesment of the companies robustness of their
supplier quality control system.
An assement of the plants layout for making lean re-
arrnagements to optimize material movement and flows
within a plant.
An assesment of how effective data collection, data
analsysis and data reporting in accompolished on the plant
floor.
An assesment of how much additional capacity is available
in the plant for additional business
An assesment of how much effort the plant has placed on
Reliability and Maintainability prevention processes for
their equoipment and tooling.
An assesment of the current metrics used to measure plant
effectiveness within the plant and how they are driving
improveent and change..
An assesment of internal material flow and material control
systems
An assesment of how standrized packaging and labeling is

in the plant to understand how it is affecting material flow.
An assesment of the robustness of Program Management

capabilities for managing projects within a plant
An assesment of a plans opimization efforts of their
external logistics suppliers.
Visual Factory: Workplace Organization (5S's)
Has the facility deployed the Red Tag process to the plant floor for all
production processes in the plant, as well as support activities (e.g. -
Maintenance,
Red Tag processReceiving, Shipping,
implemented Measurement Labs, including:
plant-wide.
5
Records of all red tagged items exsit for each work group area.
4
Red Tag procedure and spare tages posted in holding area for each work group
3
Individual or centralized Red Tag Holding areaa are identified for each Work Group
2 and clearly labeled.
Red Tag process not implmented in the facility
1
Has the facility defined and documented the criteria for clearly distinguishing
between what is needed and to be kept, and what is unneeded and to be
discarded,
Production /including the following
Industrial Material categories:
Parts and Inventory
5
Floor and shelving space
4
Equipment and Machinery
3
Non productive manufacturing supplies require to run the process
2
No criteria set
1
Has the facility defined and documented roles and responsibilities for
operators, area supervision, Work Group Leaders, management, etc. pertaining
to implementation
Holding and
areas cleared onmaintenance
regular basis of the Red Tag process?
plant-wide.
5
Implemented in greater than 75% of the plant.
4
Where deployed, there is evidence that the Red Tag holding areas are cleared on a
3 regular and timely basis
Implemented in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
2
Not Done
1
Do the Work Groups practice the policy of "A Place For Everything, And
Everything In Its Place," in production areas as well a support activities (e.g.
Maintenance, Plant Floor Offices, Receiving, Shipping, Measurement Labs),
Workstations labeled
5 including:
Equipment / machines labeled
5
Direction of process flow labeled
5
Lineside part locations labeled
4
Work-in-Process (WIP) / finished goods locations labeled
4
Scrap / rejects / defective parts locations labeled
4
Storage locations (e.g. tools, cleaning supplies) labeled
4
Locations for gages, tooling, fixtures, dies labeled
4
Piping color-coded for fluid type and direction of flow labeled
3
Rotation direction on motors and equipment labeled
3
Lubrication points identified and labeled per relevant equipment supplier standard
3
Tool carts organized and labeled
3
All hazardous materials used, manufactured, stored, dispensed, or transported are
2 properly labeled
Error Proofing and Quick Changeover applications labeled
2
Minimum / maximum levels for lineside inventory identified
2
Minimum / maximum levels for tooling, gages, and nonproduction inventory identified
2
Divider lines on floor clearly distinguish walking areas and aisle locations from
1 production areas
Divider lines on floor clearly identify designated storage locations for production
1 materials and equipment
Divider Lines on floor clearly identify location of non-production materials and
1 equipment (e.g. display boards, plant floor desks, shelves, cabinets, work tables, etc.)
Do the Work Groups continuously maintain and adhere to the Stabilization
techniques established for their work area?
Stabilization principles regularly followed on an ongoing basis plant-wide.
5
Stabilization principles regularly followed in greater than 75%, but less than or equal
4 to 100% of the plant
Work Groups do not adhere to Stabilization principles on an ongoing basis
1
Where 5S has been deployed, has the facility created an environment in which
the concept of Shine has become deeply ingrained as a part of daily work
habits forTargets
Cleaning the Work Group
defined andmembers,
tracked including the identification and
5 documentation of:
Cleaning methods & procedures written for area
4
Cleaning Assignments defined by shift/operator
3
Cleaning tools needed for station exisit at the station
2
Work Groups do not adhere to Shine principles on an ongoing basis
1
In common area where 5S has been deployed, has the facility created an
environment in which the concept of Shine has become deeply ingrained as a
part of daily work habits for the Work Group members, including the
identification and documentation of:
Cleaning Targets defined and tracked
5
Cleaning methods & procedures written for area
4
Cleaning Assignments defined by shift/operator
3
Cleaning tools needed for station exisit at the station
2
There is no defintion of who is responsible for common area Shine principles on an
1 ongoing basis
Do the Work Groups utilize 5S checklists which document the specified tasks
for maintaining the first three S's on an ongoing basis?
5S checklists utilized plant-wide.
5
4
3
2
Not Done
1
Does the Work Group Leader and/or area management monitor the 5S
checklists on a ongoing basis?
5S checklists are monitored once per shift.
5
5S checklists are monitored daily.
4
5S checklists are monitored weekly.
3
5S checklists are monitored every other week.
2
5S checklists are not monitored.
1
Does the facility conduct plant-wide 5S evaluations involving management,
which require documented improvement plans for follow-up evaluations?
Process to standardize 5S evaluations implemented plant-wide.
5
4
3
2
Not Done
1
How frequently are plant-wide 5S management evaluations conducted in at
least one of the primary areas of the plant (e.g. assembly, machining,
maintenance,
Weekly etc.)?
5
Monthly
4
Quarterly
3
Every 6 months
2
Not Done
1
Does the facility track the effectiveness of the 5S process through measurables
and can they demonstrate ongoing improvements in performance trends?
Weekly
5
Monthly
4
Quarterly
3
Every 6 months
2
Not Done
1
Rating
Scale
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
#
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
Generic Plant Visual Management Implemnentation Assesment (Holistic View) (Add Description Like Jerome
The plant is generally clear of all unnecessary production material, equipment and scrap
100% of areas clear with no exceptions
Up to 75% of areas clear
Plant untidy, no clear identification of scrap. Rework etc.
Aisles are kept clear of all obstructions
Clear aisle identification and no blockages or partial blockages at any time
A few incidences of wholly or partially blocked aisleways (<10%) but good overall
Aisles are clearly identified but still tend to be blocked overall
Aisles exist but are not clearly identified, those that are tend to be wholly or partially blocked (>50%)
Aisles do not exist
Floor marking clearly distinguish work areas, paths, and material handling aisles (including warehouse)
As above with full adherence, no exceptions
As above but with clearly defined locations within work areas for material, equipment, etc…
Good line definition between adjacent work areas and pedestrian or traffic aisles
Lines are on the floor but predominantly worn and tend to be ignored
No distinction between areas exists
Signs clearly identify production material, industrial material, inventory staging and material drop points
Very clear and unambiguous signage for every part. Max/min evident, access and egress easy, FIFO evident
As above but there are unique positions for every part. However, no clear identification of FIFO or volume control
Signs clearly distinguish work, inventory and material drop areas but no clear distinction within an area for different parts
Generic signs to identify the work area but no detailed signage
No identification at all
All employees are considerate of housekeeping and operators consider daily “clean-up and put away” activitiesas pa
As above. In addition, a 5S programme is evident and active (at least to 3S), with defective items listed and corrective action p
Cleaning procedures and equipment exist and time is allowed and used for cleaning on every shift, defective items are tagged
Cleaning procedures exist but no time is formally allowed and cleaning is occasional rather than continual
No formal cleaning procedures but some operators clean their area
Workplace is dirty and unkempt, no cleaning activities evident
There is a “place for everything and everything in its place”; every container, tool, rack, gauge & fixture is clearly labe
accessible
As above and all parts status is clear (e.g. green disc for checked and ready to use, red for unchecked, amber for checked and
inventory of the area contents
As above and the system is used but equipment/part status unclear
Everything has a defined area but system evidently not used
Some equipment or tooling has a defined area
Nothing has a “home”, equipment etc left anywhere
Standardized display boards at each work process area are available throughout the plant contain key information su
safety,quality data, operating measurables and problem countermeasure.
As above but standardised layout and information, may contain cell/line specific data
Cell/line specific display boards but no standardisation of format
Shared display boards used in area - Not line/cell/machine specific, no standardisation between boards (layout, information etc
Occasional display boards can be found in parts of the factory
No display boards exist
Display boards are frequently updated for productivity and quality data for each line or process area (target vs actua
quality: customer concerns, scrap, FTT, Uptime/utilisation vs planned runtime. Operators receive regular feedback on
performance)
As above but operators are involved in data update and feedback
Boards are up to date and team leaders give feedback on a regular basis (weekly maximum)
Data is up to date but maintained by non-directs (such as quality personnel) with little or no feedback to operators
Data is updated but infrequently (monthly or longer). Production data is target only with no evidence of current actual
Data is irregularly updated (evident by old or different dates for quality and production data on the same board or between boa
Call signals are used to call for assistance when a problem is encountered by a worker or machine
As above but with clear differentation of type of assistance required (e.g. colour coded stack lights)
Individual workstation call lights/signals in place
Line call lights/signals exist but are shared
Area call lights/signals exist but are shared
No mechanisms exist for calling for assistance
Check sheets describing and tracking the top defects (both internal & external) are posted and up to date at each wor
operatoris aware of the key quality points and defect history of the process they are doing.Samples and/or photograp
aid judgement)
As above and in addition, samples and/or photographs exist
Top defects posted at each workstation and explained to operators
As above and one point lesson plans issued to relevant personnel
Indications of defects on generic shared information boards only
No indication of defects to operators
Work Group Board Statisitics
Number of boards implmented process areas?
Number of Process Areas or Work Groups Where Board Could Be Implemented:
Number of boards implemented In Plant Support Areas, Material Handling Office, Receiving, Shipping, Maintenance, Non Prod
Number of In Plant Support Areas or Work Groups Where Board Could Be Implemented:
Number of supporting functional area Work Groups Boards implemented such as Finance, EH&S, Purchasing, Engineering?
Number of supporting functional area boards Work Groups Where Board Could Be Implemented:
Has the facility defined and documented a comprehensive (extending well beyond color-coding), plant-wide Visual Fa
(e.g. labeling, signs, min/max. levels, color-coding, gauge ranges, etc.)
Visual factory standrds are Written and followed plant-wide.
Not Done
Visual Factory: Visual Displays

Does the facility utilize Work Group Display Boards to provide information on measurables and key Work Group activ
and status that is stargetically located as close to the employees work station as possible?
Work Group Activity Boards implemented plant-wide at each process and sub process area.
Work Group Boards Implemented in greater than 75% of the plant.
Work Group Boards Implemented in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Work Group Boards Implemented in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Work Group Boards Implemented in a Intial Application Area Only, Not at all or less than or equal to 25% of plant processes.
The facility developed and documented a common format for General Information Work Group Boards, metrics, etc de
work area, including Support Activities (e.g. Maintenance, Engineering, Material Control, Purchasing)?
General Information Boards implemented plant-wide.
Implemented in Intial Application Area, not at all or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
Has the facility deployed product/defect displays to each work area to share information on standards and/or current
Product/defect displays implemented plant-wide.

Implemented in Intial Application Area, not at all or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
Where Where Work Group Boards where deployed, are the Work Group Displays throughout the facility current?
Visual Displays are current and updated frequently plant-wide.
Visual Displays are current in greater than 75%, but less than or equal to 100% of the plant.
Visual Displays are not current.
Visual Factory: Visual Controls

Where Lean Production System Iniatives have been deployed, do the various Work Groups incorporate the same stan
workplace in order to visually communicate established standards in all application areas, including support activitie
Visual Controls are current plant-wide.
Visual Controls are current or adhered to in greater than 75%, but less than or equal to 100% of the plant.
Visual Controls are current or adhered to in the Intial Application Area only, or less than 25% of the plant.
Have standrdized techniques been developed to recognize, at a glance, when inventory and/or parts exceed establish
height lines, limit lines, location lines, etc.?
Visual control techniques applied to tools, gages, maintenance task and for single point lessons.
Visual indication of standard operating range on equipment and gauges?
Signs/stickers indicate machine, equipment, & gage status or calibration requirements?
Color-coded floor space or indicator lines used for part storage locations to indicate standard for type and quantity of material.
Appropriate warning and hazards signs are posted in work areas and equipment.
Has the facility implemented a process for effective communication between production shifts, such that each operat
key quality issues and defect history for their workstation at the beginning of each shift using the work group boards
point for transfer of information?
Process implemented plant-wide.
Implemented in Intial application area, not done or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
Visual Factory: Process and Quality Control Boards
Do the Work group boards warn about Abnormalities from hour to hour, shift to shift, day to day: Has the facility docu
for the application of Visual Controls to warn about abnormalities, which identifies the criteria for the application of sp
processes and shows how the Work Group should responsed to those Abnormalities?
Adormalities displayed and communicated plant-wide and every work station.
Adormalities posted and seen in more than 75% of the plant.
Adormalities posted and seen in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Adormalities posted and seen in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Has the facility defined and documented detailed plans for the implementation of Process Control in their Work Group
the facility:
Plan displayed and communicated plant-wide.
Plan seen in more than 75% of the plant.
Plan seen in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Plan Seen in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Does the Work Group Boards have linkages to other feeder deprtment processes documented? Indivdual Station: Qu
Personnel, Performance
Linkages to feeder departments seen displayed and communicated plant-wide.

Linkages to other feeder departments seen in more than 75% of the plant.
Linkages to other feeder department seen in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Linkages to other feeder departments seen in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Linkages to other feeder departments seen at Intial application area, not done or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
Support structure for Work Groups using Process Control Boards defined and documented, and consistent with the p
organization?
Devices to warn about process or product abnormalities are implemented plant-wide.
Response requirements, including documented roles & responsibilities, been defined for Work Group members, maintenance,
Criteria for activating lights and stop-line criteria been defined, standardardized and trained throughout the work force?
A migration plan to move to the next level of the use of the Work Group baards been documented and rationlaized to coordina
devices such as (e.g. boards, stack lights, etc..)
Not Done
In areas where Process Control Boards will not be installed, has the facility implemented devices which can be easily
signal a warning about an abnormality or given need, including bells, lights, alarms, buzzers, and other techniques?
Implemented in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
Implemented in IAA or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
Not Done
Do the Work Groups utilize the Process Control Boards as a tool to prevent defects and inform downstream workstati
product mix, through-put targets and actuals, material shortages, etc, while keeping the line running within the specif
stop the line according to predetermined criteria?
Process Control Boards are 100% effective in accomplishing this objective.
Process Control Boards are 100% effective in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Process Control Boards are 100% effective in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Process Control Boards are 100% effective in Intial application area only, not done or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
r job
Error proffing effectiveness for Part / Fastener Assembly Processes
5 Part/fastners can be partially installed on this station.
4 Part/fastners can be misaligned during installation.
Is this part handed (L/R) and both stocked in this work position the part has been dsigned to be
3 interchanged.
2 Part/fastners can be installed in the wrong orientation?
1 Part/fastners can be installed to a wrong location?
Error Proffing Effectiveness for Dealing with Part Complexity
There is a sequence number scanned to verify process installation step and scanning is used to
5 verify the correct part is being installed
The part has distinguishing features identifiable (markings can be seen, colors are different and
4 not close in shade, etc)?
3 Bins/ containers/ racks color coded and /or are identified to help with error proffing efforts
There is a manual identification or material picking valaidation process in place to notified the
2 operator of correct / incorrect part selection.
The process is 100% dependant on the operator to know which part to install and the tool to use
1 to install the part
Error Proffing Effectiveness for Insuring Proper Part Securing
5 The part is designed with error proofing feastures so that it cannot be mis assemblied.
Torque is monitored and recorded for every fastener and notification is given to the operator when
4 torque is / is not met/(lights, line stop, audio signal, etc
There a method to count the number of fasteners installed if more than one of the same fasteners
3 is required
2 There are multiple tools/ fixtures/ gages used to install this part
The tool/ fixture/ gage can be mis-positioned for part/fastener installation or the process could be
1 ran if the tool/ fixture/ gage was omitted from being used in the operation
How Standardized Work Is Used to Improve the Effectiveness of Error Proffing
5 The system sounds of alarms when standard work method is not being followed via detection
Visual aids displays show orientation of the part, correct sequence, routing, part distinguishing
4 characters,etc
3 Stock containers / racks/ parts are indivdually labeled correctly and easy to identify?
The standardized work insturtion clearly explains how the operation is performed, e.g. direction of
2 bolt, location of cable, etc.
Standard work instruction only highlights fastener or part to use and location to place the
1 part/fastener and does not show the sequence of assembly or torques used for installing /
securing the fastener and or part.
Effectiveness of Error Proofing System to prevent the wrong part or fastener to be installed
on a High or Low-Run Option Associated with the part
For Electrical Connectors / Snap-Fit Fasteners are keyed so operator can Feel Connection Being
5 Made or Can Hear Clicking Sound.
Fasteners on the Part with Same Head Size but having different torque specifications can be
4 detected by the same torque fastneing device
Fixtures or unique materiald handling fixtures, gages, concepts are used to prevent parts from
3 being Mixed / Damaged at Work station due to stock piling
2 Can Part be Installed Incorrectly, but Visual Mark on Part for Orientation
Any of the following error proffing means is used via hard tooling and detection method to
improve error proffing effectiveness for part or fastener assembly. guide pins of different sizes,
error detection and alarms,Contact: Microswitches, limit switches, Noncontact: Photoelectric
switches and sensors, Fixed Value: Counter systems, Parameter sensing: Temperature, pressure,
1 etc,Checklists
Effectiveness of Error Proofing Communication and Employee Awareness System to
prevent the wrong part or fastener to be installed on a High or Low-Run Option Associated
with the part
Part is Used on All Models,Sequenced to the Line so that similar parts existing in the process
5 station but cannot be Installed
4 Andon System is used to notify leadership where down time or process area problem exisit.
Routing / Connecting of Wires / Cables Male and Female Parts Are Pre-Formed,Parts Fit In
3 Recognized Location,Routing Shown on Assesmbly Instructions
2 A “boundary sample” is provided at the work station
1 Workers understand the basics of error proofing
People Involvement Effectiveness of Error Proffing:
There is a formalised system in place for either production operators or specific error proofing
5 teams to analyse defects and to feedback their solutions to the team designing the products.
There is a formalised system in place for either production operators or specific error proofing
4 teams is
There to aanalyse defects
formalised proirintoplace
system the designing
for either of products.operators or specific error proofing
production
teams to analyse defects and to come up with in plant fixes or solutions to eleiminate the error
3 potential.
Evidence exists to prove that error proofing devices have been implemented to eliminate the top
2 production defects
Error Proofing devices are implemented for plant floor problems but no formalised process exists
to track what is being implmented and how it is communicated to other members of the support
staffs. Error Proofing devices exist and are implemented at the request of the supervisor only.
2
A formalised Error Proofing team exists to implement Error Proofing devices across the factory.
2 Error Proofing devices are implemented based upon data monitoring and analysis
Operators discuss error proofing opportunities with support staff at regular (at least once per
1 month) meetings
Process or Product Error proofing improvement are not a proirity for the process or facility at
1 present
Effectiveness of Maintaining Current Error Proffing Methods and Systems
Devices visually identified and routine checks (as part of SOP) on performance of error proofing
as well as the device being included in Maintenance PM checks. Operator instructed-empowered
not to run process unless error proffing methods and prevention systems are in place.
5
4 Devices visually identified and records kept of routine master part checks
3 Devices are routinely checked with master production parts but no records kept
2 Devices are randomly checked with master production parts but no records kept
1 Devices not identified or maintained
Effectiveness of the Use of Error Proffing Methods and Systems in Other Areas Other Than
Production
Evidence exisit that Error proofing has been applied to transactional processes that are used in
organizations such as finance, purchasing, invoicing, accounts payable, engineering and product
5 testing and validation.
Evidence exisit that Error proofing has been applied to transactional processes that support the
4 production process.
Error proofing has been applied to production support processes to eliminate defects in plant floor
3 safety, maintenance and document processing
2 Evidence Exisit that error proof methods are being used for material feed systems
1 Error Proofing devices introduced on production lines only
Effectiveness of Error Proffing Methods-devices in Automated Equipment

Error Proofing devices exist on automatic equipment that automatically adjust for dimisional
varaition opportunities that exisit for the automated process and its associated tooling used in the
5 automated process.
Error Proofing devices exist on both manual and automatic processes but are installed
4 predominantly driven by the process engineer/ supervisor
Error Proofing devices are present but are limited to automatic process control inside the
3 equipment
Error Proofing devices exist on automatic processes abut have some operator input in the function
2 of the device
1 Error Proofing devices are initiated by the production operators for the automatic processes
Effectiveness of Work Group Display Boards showing examples of Error Proofing
applications for the specific process, identified based on the priority established by
measurables and follow up data to ensure the effectiveness of the applications in
eliminating defects for their work areas?
5 Implemented in greater than 75% of the plant.
4 Implemented in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
2 Implemented in Intial application area or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
1 Not Done
Is there evidence of error proffing being used in any re-work process or method?Have the
Work Groups implemented extensive use of Error Proofing, which supports in-station
detection and rework, such that all defects to both internal and external customers have
been virtually eliminated per measurables trends and quality data?
5 Evidence seen in greater than 75% of the plant.
4 Evidence seen in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
2 Evidence seen in Intial application area or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
1 Not Done
Is their documented evidence which supports that error proffing improvements via design,
in-station detection and rework control methods, such that all defects to both internal and
external customers have been virtually eliminated per measurables trends and quality
data?
1 Not Done
5
4
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
1
5
4
3
5
4
3
2
1
2
1
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
Has the facility established a process for the full deployment of using Standrdized Work
Process Sheets and formats for all production and production support processes that includes
analysis of value added activitiies, non value added activities, process sequence, error proffing
devices used, safety devices used, equipment used, tooling used and gages used in the
process.
Machine-Tooling start-up and shut down instructions including Preventative Maintenace Inspection and
application instructions.
Operator Gage and Dimensional Validation Inspection sheets and instructions
Operator Capacity and Cycle Time Analysis including material handling and part gathering functions
with Value-Non Value Added Activities
Operator Instruction Sheet Sheets Only
Operator Job Saftey Instruction Sheets Only
Effectiveness of the Standardized Work Process Sheets associated with the manufacturing
process
Logos added or deleted to suit local agreements and programs.
Addition of local data to suit requirements.
Sign-off blocks, revision dates, sheet number
Key process icons
Line Rate
Work Steps
Work Sequence Layout
Customer Demand Rate
Work Element Times
Process / Part Name / Job Id
Possible Health & Safety Hazards
Recommended safe job procedures, materials, and equipment
Effectiveness of Standardized Work Documentation Quality and Document Control System
Detailed roles and responsibilities are defined and documented for developing, implementing,
updating, and maintaining the process in production and each functional area of the organization.
Current state Standard Work documentation exisit for all production and support organizations in the
facility such as material handling, finance, purchasing, etct
Required local applications for the deployment of Standard Work Instruction Sheets are defined and
documented, including relevant safety, environmental, material handling, material flow, maintenance,
quality
Where operations, and
deployed, do theperiodic
Standardactivities, in addition to production
Work Documentation Instructionprocesses.
Sheets contain all the required
fields, according to the current Airbus Standards
Plant-specific document control procedures, are defined and documented
In application areas where Standard Work Instruction Sheets are fully deployed, are the sheets
posted and / or accessible for the operator in the workstation, for all production - related
activities and processes?
Sheets posted and / or accessible in greater than 75%, but less than or equal to 100% of plant.
Sheets posted and/or accessible in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of plant.
Sheets posted and/or accessible in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of plant.
Sheets posted and / or accessible in Intial Application area only, or less than 25% of plant.
Sheets are not posted and / or accessible at any process area
Has the facility defined an ongoing process for audting compliance to Standard Work
Instructions for cycle time, inpsection methods, verision of the document, new product or
added
Periodicaccessory components
observations etc.
are regularly performed plant - wide. I auditing plan is in place.
Periodic observations are regularly performed in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
Periodic observation are regularly performed in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of
plant.
Periodic observation are regularly performed in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of
plant.
Periodic observations are regularly performed in Intial application Area only, not done or less than 25%
of plant.
Are the Standard Operator Instruction Sheets reviewed and/or updated whenever:
Legislation / regulations are changed
Accidents or high potential near miss incidents occur
Physical modifications to the workstation are made
A process or product change is made
Operator suggestions for continuous improvement are approved or implemented
In application areas where Standard Operator Instruction Sheets are fully deployed, can the
facility demonstrate substantial ownership of the Standard Operator Instruction Sheet by the
operators
There is evidence that Standard Operaton Instruction Sheets have owners in all non-production
support areas.
There is evidence that Standard Operaton Instruction Sheets have owners in all production areas.
There is evidence that Standard Operaton Instruction Sheets have owners in all production support
areas such as mainteance, material handling, shipping and receiving.
There is evidence that Standard Operaton Instruction Sheets have owners in all production functional
area support areas such as Finance, Purchasing, Engineering, etc.
There is evidence that Standard Operaton Instruction Sheets have owners in all management metric
and daily, weekly monthly performance and lean maturity reviews.
Their is evidence that the Standard Operation Work Instructions are Joint developed and
concurred with the Hourly Operator and the Process engineer and reflect a best practice
consensus on the work steps, sequence, job safety analysis, and environmental controls on
There is evidence
multi-shift that development
operations, of the
or operations withdocument
multiple was created in a final format by the operator
operators?
perfroming the task on any one of the multiple shifts without the support of engineering or other in
house support and their was consistent operator initiative, participation, and input to revisions were
made to orginal document.
There is evidence that development of the document was created in a final format by the operator
perfroming the task on any one of the multiple shifts and that there is evidence of consistent operator
initiative, participation, and input to revisions made to document.
There is evidence that development of the document was created in rough format by the operator
perfroming the task on a single shift and that consistent operator initiative, participation, and input to
revisions made to.
There is evidence that development of the document it a minimum was reviewed and approved by the
operator perfroming the task on a single shift.
There is no evidence that development of the document was done in a joint approach.
In application areas where Standard Operation Sheets are fully deployed, does the facility utilize
the Standard Instruction Sheets to train new operators, replacement employees, functional
support area staff etc. resulting in fewer defects, line stoppages and no accidents?
Standard Work Instruction Sheets are used to train new operators,replacement employees and
production and functional area support staff plant-wide.
Stndard Work Instruction Sheets are used to train new operators,replacement employees and
production and functional area support staff plant-wide. in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the
plant.
Standard Work Instruction Sheets are used to train new operators, replacement employees and
production and functional area support staff plant-wide. in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to
75% of the plant.
Standard Operation Instruction Sheets are used to train new operators replacement employees and
production and functional area support staff plant-wide.in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to
50% of the plant.
Standard Operation Instruction Sheets sit in a book located in the application area and are never
updated or referenced.
In application areas where Standard Operation Instruction Sheets are fully deployed, do Work
Groups communicate changes to workstation layouts to the facility Material Replenishement
Coordinator on a timely basis in order to minimize lineside Inventory levels
Standard Work Instruction Sheets are forwarded immediately to material control, purchasing and other
affected areas in the plant to inform them of potential inventory level changes that could occur from the
change
change in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
change in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
change in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Standard Operation Instruction Sheets chnages are keep and comunicated only to different shift
operators, not engineering, not material control or purchasing.
In application areas where Standard Work Instruction Sheets are fully deployed, does the
facility document work element times on the Instruction sheets and insure this information is
transfeed to the plant IE and new product quoting department to insure proper work standrds
are being used to develop new and more accurate product or component cost estimates.
Standard Work Instruction Sheet Changes are clearly defined as to who is responsible to
develop new work times, update the document and who to communicate the change
information to in the facility.
Work step times recorded plant-wide.
Work Step Item Changes are collected and communicated in greater than 75% of the plant but less
than 100% of the plant.
Work Step Item Changes are collected and communicated in greater than 50%, but less than or equal
to 75% of the plant.
Work Step Item Changes are collected and communicated in greater than 25%, but less than or equal
Work Step Item Changes are collected and communicated in only the Intial Application area, not done
or less than, or equal to 25% of the plant.
In application areas where Standard Work Instruction Sheets are fully deployed, do the Work
Groups record the current Customer Demand Rate on the Instruction sheet?
Customer Demand Changes are adjusted, recorded and communicated plant-wide.
Customer Demand Changes are adjusted, recorded and communicated in greater than 75% of the
plant but less than 100% of the plant.
Customer Demand Changes are adjusted, recorded and communicated in greater than 50%, but less
than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Customer Demand Changes are adjusted, recorded and communicated in greater than 25%, but less
than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Customer Demand Changes are adjusted, recorded and communicated in only the Intial Application
area, not done or less than, or equal to 25% of the plant.
Are Operators are given a formal training period before doing a job on their own
Operator tested for competence and compliance to the SOP after training and on a regular basis
thereafter
Formal company induction training in addition to off-line and on-line training given. The employee
works beside an experienced operator until competent and confident
Formal training period given off-line and on-line
“Watch and Learn" training only
No formal training period

Operations have been analysed to minimise wasteful activity through optimal
positioning/orientation of equipment and effective use of resources (Consider part travel
distances, material feeding, access/egress, layout)
Total factory operations reviewed methodically considering ABC product grouping; layout optimised for
all lines
As above plus workstations analysed for effective and ergonomic operation
Process flow carried out for main lines (high volume) and equipment rearranged to facilitate reduced
waste
Machines placed in process or group technology arrangement
No consideration of material & traffic flows considered

Sub-assembly or production areas that supply a main production line or cell are linked to
prevent/minimise inventory buffers
Sub-assembly areas are directly linked to main lines with simple Kanban trigger signals to initiate
supply. Changeover flexibility allows MTO (Make-to-Order) operation
Sub-assembly batch sizes have been minimised through changeover reduction to optimise set-to-run
ratio
Buffer areas fed by sub-assembly areas have been designated for each main line. The capacity has
been matched to main line usage rates but sub-assembly batch sizes are not controlled
Sub-assembly areas feed a buffer area with a finite capacity to try to prevent over-production, but there
is no direct link to main lines
Sub-assembly areas are stand-alone with no direct link to main lines. Changeovers are planned to suit
the sub-assembly operation only. Buffer stocks are poorly controlled
Production operators are multi-process capable, fully trained and able to do the work at several
stations within a production cell, line or area. (Target should be: each operator capable of
running 3 stations and each station has 3 operators trained to run that operation (1-3-1))
There is a soundaction plan and progress monitor of achievement of plan for flexibility
The level of training/competence is shown with clear differentiation between levels and grading criteria
Training matrix evident with live record of operator capability and flexibility within a cell/area
Evidence of some operator flexibility, no formal plan to improve
No operator flexibility exists; demarcation of jobs is prevalent
Layouts and cells have been implemented on the shop floor to enable single piece (continuous)
flow of material through production
Evidence exists of total machine analysis and layouts are optimised for single piece flow wherever
practical
Where practical, balanced equipment (rates) has been linked to enable small volume or single piece
flow
Batches standardised and equipment capabilities analysed to try and balance material supply and
demand rates
Batch mode dominant but effort has been made to optimise/ standardise a common batch quantity
No consideration given to material flows, factory predominantly operates in batch mode
When demand volumes increase or decrease, production processes are rebalanced to take
effect of the new demand
Demand volumes are constantly monitored. An action plan is in place that is triggered against defined
volume breaks. Changes to manning and equipment run rates is made by team leaders
Planning and production liaise whenever changes to demand occur. Decisions are made to run rates,
manning and machine layout as necessary
Production fluctuations handled by increasing/decreasing number of machines run. Surplus capital
equipment is held “just-in-case”
Increases to demand covered through overtime running, decreases not addressed
No effort is made to analyse impact of volume changes, same equipment and manning parameters
continues
A Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) has been developed for each production process (SOPs
contain standard cycle times and process or task sequence for each production process)
SOPs are evident for every operation – no exceptions
SOPs have been developed for up to 75% of all operations
SOPs do not exist
SOPs are used to train operators for every production process (Evidence should be sought of
training methods referencing SOPs)
SOPs are used, operators tested for competence and re-audited against the main steps on a weekly
basis
SOPs are used as above then operators are tested for competence
SOPs are used off-line and on-line to train operators against
SOPs are used off-line only to train operators on process steps
SOPs are not referenced for training purposes
Each production process has the SOP posted within direct view of the worker performing the
task
SOPs have been posted for all operations – no exceptions
SOPs have been posted for up to 75% of all operations
No SOPs posted
SOPs are in a format that allows ease of understanding and training (Main steps; detail; care
points and diagrams/photographs )
SOPs have good clarity and are simple to understand, capable of being followed by anyone
The SOPs are detailed and specific for variants
The SOPs are quite detailed but generic for all variants
The format of the SOPs is a long list, no diagrams or care points
SOPs are not really evident – work-to-lists and work instructions are not acceptable as standards
Each production process has been designed to be completed within a standard cycle time (or
TAKT) for a given part
There is evidence of continual monitoring & rebalancing of TAKT times
Production processes designed against standard cycle times, balanced and reviewed regularly for
changes
Production processes originally designed against standard cycle times and balanced but rate no longer
current to requirements
Evidence of some equipment or processes working within standard cycle time but equipment in a line
or process not balanced
No evidence of equipment or processes designed against standard cycle or TAKT time
Operators provide input and are involved in the process of job design and standardisation
Operators write their own SOPs and are the primary resource for job design
Operators are part of a team for SOP/job design
Operators are asked their opinions at point of work and this information is fed back to others for
SOP/job design
Operators are involved after SOPs or jobs have been designed to verify practicality – feedback given to
creators for amendments
Operators are not involved in SOP or job design
SOPs are time dated, issue controlled and have a clear indication of what
improvements/changeshave been made and why/what
Evidence exist that all employees in that area have received training against the new/revised standard
SOPs are time dated, issue controlled and indicate what changes occurred with reasons why
SOPs are time dated, issue controlled and indicate what changes occurred but no reasons why
SOPs are time dated and issue controlled but no indication of what changes occurred between
versions or the reasons
SOPs that exist are original issue. Where changes have occurred, there is no indication of what, why
or when
Frequently repeated, non-production operations in the plant are standardised such as
changeover process, quality check, equipment and perishable tool checks.
SOPs developed for 100% plus evidence of records showing on-going improvements
SOPs have been developed for up to 75%
SOPs do not exist
SOPs throughout the plant are regularly audited for completeness and adherence
Evidence exist that audits are monthly and on a rolling basis (Improvement action plan in place)
Audit plan is in place with evidence of adherence but the frequency of audit is once per year
Audit plan is in place but no evidence of plan adherence
Informal auditing takes place on an ad-hoc basis
No auditing of SOPs takes place
How many large-scale machines or single-process areas are in the plant through which 50% or
more of different products must pass?
0
1
2
3
4
5
How would you rate the overall bias of the plant's process selction with respect to scale?
How easy is it to alter the total production rate by +/-15%?

Very easy
Easy
Somewhat Difficult
Moderately Difficult
Very Difficult
What is management's target operating capacity for individual departments or machines?

96%-100%
91%-95%
86%-90%
76%-85%
50%-75%
How would you rate the overall bias of the plant's process selection with respect to technology level?
Simple Technologies
Somewhat Simple Technologies
Moderate/Mixed
Somewhat Complex Technologies
Complex Technologies
At each operation, that has a human working, are the elements of work within a cycle with times
posted?
96%-100% in operations reviewed in the plant
50%-75%in operations reviewed in the plant
Is the total cycle time identified at each operation?
Is each operation diagramed showing the operator's walk path for materials and work orders?
Is the Bill of Material posted at each job?
Is there a graphic showing the required production tools and safety equipment needed at each
operation?
Are Key Product Characteristics identified at the station(s) that produce(s) that characteristic?
Are successive checks identified in work elements?
Are rework materials marked and stored in clearly defined areas?
Are rework materials reverified?
Define the % of non utilized manpower time in station for material handling or walk time
functions only.
0-10%
10-20%
20-40%
40-60%
More than 60%
Annotation:
The process for stopping a production process whenever an abnormality occurs,
either manually or automatically, in order to clearly identify problems as soon as
they occur.
Detection
5 Fool proofing devices guarantee any assembly or part abnormality will be

automatically detected on station
5 All other defaults are also detected on station
5 It is possible for any visitor to visually understand current quality status (live
tracking)
5 Risk analysis (FMEA) is performed on all critical points
5 Quality is monitored per operator
5 Support functions make frequent use of poka-yokes to prevent errors
4 Poka-yokes guarantee any critical assembly or part abnormality will be

automatically detected on station
4 All defaults which would be costly to rework later in the process are detected
on station
4 Quality level is displayed on station, making it possible for any visitor to
visually understand quality status (shift performance)
4 Risk analysis (FMEA) is performed on most critical (vital hazard) and critical
(failure of non vital equipment) points
4 Support functions such as maintenance & logistics also implement some
poka-yokes to prevent major errors
3 Focus is on preventing errors through poka-yokes versus team members
across the shop floor
3 Devices or in some cases controls make it impossible for critical assemblies or
parts to leave the station unnoticed
3 Most defaults which would be costly to rework later in the process are
detected at the station
3 Quality is monitored per station (robust reporting system guarantees quality
issues are feed back to source wherever they are detected)
3 Risk analysis (FMEA) is performed on most critical points (vital hazard)
2 Some poka-yokes are present, but team members are still expected to prevent
errors
2 Controls secure no abnormalities on critical assemblies or parts will leave the
line unnoticed. Quality is monitored at line level
1 There is no use of Poka-yokes and team members are expected to identify
and prevent errors
1 It is difficult to identify problems and abnormal events go largely unnoticed
Reaction
5 There are clear process stop procedures in place and the team members are
empowered to stop the process the instant an abnormality occurs
5 Everything is done to correct the problem. Normally the process won’t be
restarted unless a curative solution has been found
Team members are empowered to stop the process according to established
4 procedures whenever an abnormality occurs and wherever it occurs
4 When a problem with a process (screwing, riveting) occurs, all operators stop
the operations
4 Andons are in place to clearly signal the locations of all problems
4 Team leader and quick response team will automatically be notified of the
problem in a cascade mode
4 The process might be stopped up to 2-3 hours on the main line to let the quick
response team solve the issue
In machining areas: machine is stopped as soon as a significant drift is found
4 on quality measures (even if part are still within tolerance). Corrections in
parameters are implemented
Team members can stop the line for quality or safety problems but might have
3 to go for the supervisor/team leader or to call the support team on the phone
to get support
3 A strong visual signal (for instance flashing light) is in place to indicate a call
3 There is a dedicated quick response team to solve quality issues
The process will be stopped so that the problem is analyzed, but it will restart
3
if the problem cannot be fixed within 45 mn
In machining areas: machine is stopped as soon as a part is found is out of
3 quality tolerance and a strong visual signal indicates operator requires help
Team members can notify supervisor/team leader of a problem and might stop
2 the process if it is no longer possible to work correctly or if there is no
significant impact on production
2 There is no specific mean in place for team members to signal a problem

(outside of walking to the team leader)
2 In machining areas: machine is stopped as soon as a part is found out of
quality tolerance but operator has to go for support
1 The target is to never stop the process in order to produce at maximum
capacity
1 Process stop authority may reside as high as the factory manager
In application areas where SPC could be applied such as machining, CMM part
measurement valaidation, On time delivery, etc throughout the enterprise their is
evidence of the use of SPC tools in a real time feedback enviroment.
SPC Charts are implemented plant-wide at strategic process and sub process area.
5
SPC Charts are implemented plant-wide at strategic process in greater than 75% of
4 the plant.
SPC Charts are implemented plant-wide at strategic process in greater than 50%, but
3 less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
SPC Charts are implemented plant-wide at strategic process in greater than 25%, but
2 less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
SPC Charts are implemented plant-wide at strategic processes in a Intial Application
1 Area Only, Not at all or less than or equal to 25% of plant processes.
There is evidence that SPC charts such as P, NP, U and C charting methods are
in use in various plant floor and office processes.
There is evidence that SPC charts such as P, NP, U and C charting methods are in use
5 in various strategic process and sub process area.
4 in various strategic process and sub process in greater than 75% of the plant.
in various strategic process and sub process in greater than 50%, but less than or
3 equal to 75% of the plant.
2 in various strategic process and sub process in greater than 25%, but less than or
equal
There to
is 50% of thethat
evidence plant.
SPC charts such as P, NP, U and C charting methods are in use
1 in various strategic process and sub process in a Intial Application Area Only, Not at all
or less is
There than or equalthat
evidence to 25% of plant using
employees processes.
SPC charts trending charts had a good
understanding of the (6) key indicators for recoginzing when a process is out of
control.
There is evidence that employees are very much aware of how to interpet SPC charts
for out of control conidtions where SPC charting methods have been applied in various
5 strategic process and sub process area.
There is evidence that employees are very much aware of how to interpet SPC charts
4 for out of control conidtions where SPC charting methods have been applied in various
strategic
There process and
is evidence thatsub process are
employees area. in greater
very than 75%
much aware of to
of how theinterpet
plant. SPC charts
3 for out of control conidtions where SPC charting methods have been applied in various
strategic process and
There is evidence thatsub process are
employees area. in greater
very than 50%,
much aware of howbut
to less thanSPC
interpet or equal
charts to
2 75%
for ofof
out the plant.conidtions where SPC charting methods have been applied in various
control
strategic process and
There is evidence thatsub process are
employees areavery
in greater than 25%,
much aware buttoless
of how than SPC
interpet or equal to
charts
1 50% of the plant.
for out of control conidtions where SPC charting methods have been applied in various
strategic
There is process
evidence and sub
that process
there area in a Intialcorporate
is a standrdized Application Area
SPC Only,
tools Notare
that at all or
less than or equal to 25% of plant processes.
deployed and a training system in in place to insure easier commuincation
between departments and between plants when unforseen issues arrise.
There is evidence that the same set of data recording, data analysis and data
reporting exsit accross the plant and that their has been a concentrated effort to make
sure the data was being processed through this (3) step data process in being
completed in real time and adding value to the operator on the floor in his/her daily job
performance.
5
4 performance in greater than 75% of the plant.
performance in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
3
2 completed in real time and adding value to the operator on the floor in his/her daily job
performance in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
performance in a Intial Application Area Only, Not at all or less than or equal to 25% of
plant processes.
1
How does the organization determine current and long-term
customer requirements?
Real time releases from Customer in EDI or order automated
electronic format that automatically adjust schedule and distribute
information to affected process and sub process areas and the supply
5 issue.
Daily releases from Customer in EDI or order automated electronic

format that automatically adjust schedule and distribute information to
4 affected process and sub process areas and the supply issue.
Weekly releases from Customer in EDI or order automated electronic

Monthly releases from Customer in EDI or order automated electronic

Quarterly releases from Customer in EDI or order automated
electronic format that automatically adjust schedule and distribute
information to affected process and sub process areas and the supply
1 issue.
How does the organization determine new products and services

as well as new features for existing products and services?
Via an established Adhoc and Customer Survey Process that
consilidates the feedback from all the customers into a central
5 databse for analysis and best volume opportunities.
Use of industry or professional asscoition based reasearch
4 information.
3 Generic Customer web or manully based surveys
2 Ad hoc one on one meeting with the customers
1 There is no process in place
How does the organization improve its processes for identifying
customer needs and requirements?
By applying standard continous improvement tools and systems such

as Six Sigma, Lean Enterprise, BPR or other innovative approaches
to the data collection, data analysis and data reporting of the
5 information.
Via an established internal Adhoc and and employee survey process

that distributes the customer feedback via a centralize location with
4 consolidsated information to the affected Air bus plants.
Use of industry or professional asscoition based reasearch to
3 benchmark our success against competing firms.
2 Ad hoc upper ledrship directives.
1 There is no process in place for continous improvement of this activity.
How does the organization or indivdual plant build strong
relationships with its internal and external customers?
Monthly budgeted one on one cross functional face to face meetings

that include participants, that are not filtered, "yes men" from
leadership, middle management and the production line workers to
openly discuss issues, contraints and establish problem resoltuion
5 plans.
Quaterly budgeted one on one cross functional face to face meetings
4 plans.
Bi-Yearly budgeted one on one cross functional face to face meetings
3 plans.
Yearly budgeted one on one cross functional face to face meetings

2 plans.
There is no process in place within the organization that is common

for obtaining customer, leadership and production worker level
feedback and tracked completion of resolution of the issues resulitng
1 form these meeting
What does the organization do to develop customer service

standards and processes that gives the organization the ability
to engage with the customer at the highest level in all instances?
There is an established customer knowledge sharing system in place
to make the customer aware of what Airbus customer service
standards are and their is support feedback survey data from the
customer that Airbus complinace to these stanadards is occuring in
5 the field of play.
There is an established customer service set of stanadards that are in

place and customer service representaives have been well trained
and tested in their knowledge of those standards and customer
feedback surveys are being used modify problem enterprise or
4 indivdual support behavoirs.
There is an somewhat established customer service set of standards
that are in place, but no formal employee or customer awareness
3 training of these standards.
Standards exisit but are followed on an indivdual interpation basis

2 with noisvalaidation
There no system,ofstandard
the employee understanding
or method of defines
in place that the standards.
internal
and external customer expectations or addresses how to collect this
data and distribute the information through the enterpirse or the
1 customer base.
How effective is your contact with the customer regarding your
products and services?
Mostly all industry professional organization collecting and reporting
this data classify Airbus as #1 in the industry for customer
5 satisfaction.
this data classify Airbus as in the top 2 in the industry for customer
4 satisfaction.
this data classify Airbus as in the top 3 in the industry for customer
3 satisfaction.
this data classify Airbus as below the industry standard for customer
2 satisfaction.
this data classify Airbus as worst in the industry for customer
1 satisfaction.
How does the organization use customer feedback and
complaints?
Thier is a system in place so customer complaints or internal

customer service support personnel reports of customer issues are
posted for the production work teams to discuss in their daily Work
Group board meeting within 12 hours of receipt from the in-bound
information providing Source and corrective action and response
plans as to how the issue will be resolved and the estimated time
frame for resolution have been feed back to the customer to expalin
how the issue will be addressed within 24-36 hours from reciot of the
5 issue.
The information is placed into a coporate wide based system for

tracking purposes and arrives within 4-8 hours to reach the actual
location in the enterprise where the cause is most likely derived.
Problems can be reviewed by all levels of the orgnization. There is a
manual or automtaic structured feedback mechanism in place to
inform the customer filing the compliant that the cause is being
investigated, resolved or when a communication will occur to inform
4 the client that the issue is resolved.
The information is placed into a indivdual facility based system for

tracking purposes and arrives within 8 hours to reach the actual
location in the enterprise where the cause is most likely derived.
There is a manual unstructured feedback mechanism in place to
inform the customer filing the compliant that the cause is being
investigated, resolved or when a communication will occur to inform
3 the client that the issue is resolved.
The information is placed into a centrlaized system for tracking
purposes but takes more than 48 hours to reach the actual location in
the enterprise where the cause is most likely derivied. When the
issue finds its way to the responsible area there is no structured
feedback mechanism in place to inform the customer filing the
compliant that the cuase is being investigated, resolved or when a
commounication will occur to inform the client that the issue is
2 resolved.
Leadership is made aware of the issue and starts making calls to find
out who is responsible and displinary action is enforced on the
department, manager or employee responsible for the root cause of
1 the issue.
Other Potential Assesment Questions

How does the organization evaluate its relationships with
its customers?
How does the organization build trust and confidence in its

products and services?
How does the organization evaluate and improve the customer's

perception of the organization's commitment to quality?
How does the organization determine customer satisfaction

within its customer segments?
How does the organization's customer satisfaction rating compare

to its competition?
How does the organization evaluate and improve its approach to

analyzing customer satisfaction in relation to the competition?
Does the organization collect trend data on customer

satisfaction and customer retention?
Does the organization measure negative related attributes

of customer service, such as complaints, refunds, claims,
returns, failure to rebuy or repeat, downgrades, etc.?
Does the organization measure customer satisfaction with

products and services in relation to the competition's
customer satisfaction with its products and services?
Does your organization measure customer turnover?
Do trends indicate that the organization's market share is

increasing as a result of quality improvement initiatives?
How are Warranty claims complaints and other customer feedback

distributed and addressed in the organization.
this activity.
QMS:
The quality management system at plant level
Quality Containment
5 Thanks to high quality level and lay out integration of in cell containment concept, quality is insured on the spot everywhere in the
plant
5 Level of default is very low allowing a minimal rework staff
5 Proactive effort to improve upstream detection and correction of quality issues
4 Only perfect parts or components are allowed to leave the production unit - or station for main assembly lines - : the complete
plant mentality is “in-cell containment, no transmission of defaults to internal customers”
4 Quality gates have clear & strict specifications and they are fully respected
4 Rework process is well structured and rework is performed by dedicated staff since operators are fully loaded with their normal
operations
4 Supplier parts with defaults are blocked upstream from the internal process
4 Total Cost of Quality is monitored for each production team
3 Quality defaults are detected in each production unit (or at each station for large assembly lines). Majority of defaults are
corrected on spot, according to availability of staff.
3 Within cells or sub assemblies policy is that a part not meeting quality standards shouldn’t leave the cell and it is respected
3 Quality gates are respected
The accountability for the completion of product is within plant (plant feels fully responsible for quality defaults and missing parts)
3
3 No part are allowed to leave the plant with uncorrected defaults
Rework time is fully captured by KPIs

3
2 Defaults are detected by plant (undetected(1) vs. detected defaults ratio < 0.5%)
2 When delivering parts or modules not meeting quality standards, the plant communicates 100% of outstanding work information to
its customer
Defaults are usually corrected. Unique exception when delivery time would otherwise be impacted.
2
2 There are quality gates but they are not always respected
2 There is a tolerance for missing parts, which are considered as outside of plant responsibility
2 Rework time at the end of the line is tracked
1 The quality net is loose and lets some quality defaults regularly leave the plant unnoticed (undetected(1) vs. detected defaults
ratio >5%)
Most of other quality defaults are detected at the end of the assembly line but only part of them are corrected, by available staff.
1
1 Rework time is not tracked

Quality Control and Management System
5 Quality is built in all processes relying essentially on self inspection and repeatability
5 In case of quality problem, most of the time containment measures are in place in less than 3 hours
5 In case of quality problem, most of the time definitive correction is in place within one shift
5 Quality insurance documentation & procedures are regularly questioned and may be recalibrated
5 Quality improvement work shops rely largely on operators
4 Quality inspection mostly performed by line operators, with quality department just auditing samples
4 There are regular meetings, at least monthly, to define longer terms preventive plans and to refine the quality policy
4 Top frequency issues are addressed in a systematic way
4 Overall quality effort is largely preventive
4 Quality insurance documentation & procedures are strictly respected
4 In case of quality problem, average lead time to put in place containment measures within 24 hours
4 In case of quality problem, average lead time to put in place definitive correction within 2 days
4 The complete quality & design staff is based a few meters from assembly line
4 Quality improvement actions are led at the team level with status displayed on team panel
4 Visual area dedicated to scrap
4 Level 4 in SOP is achieved

In machining areas: operators are knowledgeable of statistical quality control tools and are able to implement any needed
4 correction
3 A large part of quality inspection is performed by line operators
3 There is a quality database allowing to review quality issues by type and source
3 A daily meeting is organized to review quality issues and implement corrective actions plan
3 Line quality people are based on the shop floor
3 Quality insurance documentation & procedures are comprehensive but not fully respected
3 In case of quality problem, average lead time to put in place containment measures within 2 days
3 In case of quality problem, average lead time to put in place definitive correction within 5 days
3 Team quality results are displayed
3 Clear process for scrap is implemented (criteria to decide on scrap, location for scrap, responsibilities)
3 Level 3 in SOP is achieved
3 In machining areas: operators fill in statistical quality control tools and are able to detect any slip in quality
2 There is quality insurance documentation & procedures for most critical processes
In machining areas: operators fill in statistical quality control tools, are able to make go/no go decisions on quality of parts but
2 only quality department is able to interpret results
2 Operators perform some quality inspection
2 Quality defaults are partially recorded (mostly based on rework description)
2 Quality management is purely reactive (with lead time measured in days)
2 There are quality people clearly assigned to each production area
1 Quality & process standards and limits remain unchanged
1 Functional approach "it's the Quality department's job"

1 Few records are kept (usually those of rejections) and there is little trending or review
Contingency plans exisit to meet customer needs in case of utility interruptions, labor shortages, key equipment failure,
and field returns
Contingency plans exisit from aplnat wide and indivdual work area prespective and their is evidence that these plans have been
5 activated before and proven to be sucessful in response these types of occurances.
There is evidence contingency plans exisit from plant wide and indivdual work area prespective and their is no evidence that
4 these plans have been activated before and proven to be sucessful in response these types of occurances.
There is evidence contingency plans exisit from plant wide and but not indivdual work area prespective and their is evidence that
3 these plans have been activated before and proven to be sucessful in response these types of occurances.
2 The are indivdual work area plans in place but employee awareness of these system is a minimal level.
1 The are no plant wide plans in place or employe awareness of these system is a minimal level.
QMS requires multidisciplinary approach required for developing plant, facility and equipment plans to optimize plant
layouts for material travel, material and equipment use of floor space and has a method implemented to monitor the
effectiveness of existing operations and has ties into lean manufacturing KPI that link to QMS effectiveness.
Evidence clearly shows that Plant layouts are developed at the plant location with evidence that over 50% of effective plant fllor
layout and material flow optimization has occured with plant floor operator input,optimized material flow, material congestion
analysis, in bound dock and receiving system impact studies and mimimal material storage, POU requirements, analysis,
5 documentation of assumptions are in place to validate the most effective layout has been generated.
Evidence clearly shows that Plant layouts are developed at the plant location with limited evidence that plant floor operator
input,optimized material flow, material congestion analysis, in bound dock and receiving system impact studies and mimimal
material storage, POU requirements, analysis, documentation of assumptions are in place to validate the most effective layout
4 has been generated.
Plant layouts are developed at the plant location with limited evidence that plant floor operator input,optimized material flow,
material congestion analysis, in bound dock and receiving system impact studies and mimimal material storage, POU
3 requirements, analysis, documentation of assumptions are in place to validate the most effective layout has been generated.
Plant layouts are developed at the plant location with little or no plant floor operator input, no optimized material flow, material
congestion analysis, in bound dock and receiving system impact studies or mimimal material storage and POU requirements,
2 analysis, documentation or listed assumptions in place to validate the most effective layout has been generated.
Plant layouts are developed at the centralized corporate location with little or no plant floor operator input, no optimized material
flow, material congestion analysis, in bound dock and receiving system impact studies or mimimal material storage and POU
1 requirements, analysis, documentation or listed assumptions in place to validate the most effective layout has been generated.
Do QMS documents review the product design inputs, including customer requirements (special characteristics,
identification, traceability and packaging), use of information (gained from previous design projects, competitor
analysis, supplier feedback, internal input, field data, etc.), and targets for product quality, life, reliability, durability,
maintainability, timing and cost.
1 Does the QMS system has provision for Manufacturing process design input that identifies, documents and requires the
review of the manufacturing process design inputs, including productivity, process capability, cost targets; customer
requirements; and past experience.
5
1
Is there a quality plan for each product designed and manufactured which defines the quality practices, resources, and
activities relevant to design and manufacture?
1
Has top management established the interrelationship of all personnel who manage, perform and verify work affecting
quality? Are these individuals independent?
Does the QMS system establish a suitable communication processes within the organization?
1
Is their a measurement of the Effectiveness of the Communication system regarding quality system effectiveness
established? Are there regular reviews of the Quality System?
2
At a minimum does the Management review contain Audit results,Customer feedback,Process performance and product
1 conformity,Status of preventive and corrective actions,Follow-up actions from previous management reviews,Changes
that could affect the quality management system,Recommendations for improvement,New and revised regulatory
requirements.
1
Do Management Reviews also include MDR Reporting,Vigilance,Problem Reports,Recalls,Action items from previous
management reviews
5
4
2
Do outputs of MR include decisions and actions related to Improvements needed to maintain the effectiveness,
1 Improvements of product related to customer requirements,Resources needed, Does the output include any decisions
and actions related to improvements of the effectiveness of the QMS, Has the organization established, documented,
implemented and maintains a QMS and evaluates its effectiveness?
1
Does the manufacturer have control over all outsourced processes and are these controls mechanisms identified within
the QMS?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the QMS documentation include:Documented statements of a quality policy and quality objectives,A quality
manual,Documented procedures,Effective Planning, operation and control of processes,Records?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the documentation required by National or Regional Regulations where product is sold for the product, Please
reference these regulations.
5
4
3
2
1
Are QMS documents available at all locations for which they are designated, used, or otherwise necessary?
5
4
3
2
1
Are all obsolete documents promptly removed from all points of use or otherwise prevented from unintended use?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the manufacturer have files that contain, or refers to the locations of the evidence of safety and effectiveness
requirements in MDR’s?
5
4
3
2
1
Are the responsibility and procedures between the manufacturer and the Supply Chain clearly defined and documented
(e.g. contracts, procedures)? Which include:
· Recall/Vigilance/Problem Reporting
· Incident Reporting
· Market Complaints
· Traceability of sold devices
· Training
· Spare Parts
· Technical Documentation
5
4
3
2
1
Has a procedures been established which defines the control of documented procedures including:
· Review and approval [prior to issuance]
· documentation of date and individual approving document]
· Update and re-approval of documents
· Identification of changes are identified
· Relevant versions of applicable documents are available at points of use.
· Documents remain legible and readily identifiable
· Ensure that documents of external origin are identified and their distribution controlled.
· Prevention the unintended use of obsolete documents and identification.
5
4
3
2
1
How is it ensured that changes to documents are reviewed and approved either by the original approving function or
another designated function having pertinent background information for decision?Are approved changes
communicated to the appropriate personnel in a timely manner?Are records maintained of changes to documents?Do
change records include a description of the affected documents, the signature of the approving individual, the approval
date, and when the changes become effective?Is the retention period defined for obsolete documents to ensure that
documents to which products that have been manufactured and tested are available for at least the lifetime of the
product as defined by the manufacturer?Is the lifetime of the product defined by the manufacturer?Are records
maintained at the manufacturing establishment or other location that is reasonably accessible?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the QMS require the components, sub assemblies and the final product include or refer to the location of the date
of manufacture, the quantity manufactured, the quantity released for distribution, the acceptance records of the product,
the primary identification label and labeling used for each production unit, and any component identification(s) and
control number(s) used?
Does the organizations Document Control System ensure:
· Legibility
· Identification
· Storage
· Protection from damage [and prevent loss]
· Retrievability
· Retention period
· Disposition
· Back up if storage is in automated data processing system]
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization planned and developed the processes needed for product realization?Is production planning of
product realization consistent with the requirements of customer needs.
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization take into account the following for product realization:
· Quality Objectives and requirements
· Establish processes, documents and resources
· Verification, validation, monitoring, inspection and test activities for product acceptance.
· Records demonstrating products meet requirements [s. 4.2.4]
5
4
3
2
1
Is risk management established and documented throughout product realization?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization Determined:
· Requirements specified by the Customer including delivery and post delivery.
· Requirements specified for the intended use.
· Statutory and regulatory requirements.
· Additional requirements specified by the organization.
5
4
3
2
1`
Has the organization reviewed the product requirements prior to commitment to supply product to a customer? The
following must be ensured:
· Product requirements are defined and documented.
· Contract or order requirements differing from those previously expressed are resolved.
· The organization has the ability to meet the defined requirements.
5
4
3
2
1
Are customer requirements confirmed by the organization prior to acceptance?
5
4
3
2
1
If product requirements change, has the organization defined in the QMS the need to amend relevant documents and update
training if necessary?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the order entry system ensure that products are approved for shipment only when regulatory requirements are fulfilled
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization determined and implemented an effective program for communication with customers relating to:
· Product Information
· Enquiries, contractor or order handling including amendments
· Customer feedback
· Advisory notices
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization developed procedures for Design and Development Planning?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization plan and control the design and development of product?
5
4
3
2
1
Planning and controlling of design and development this context, the following aspects must be defined:
· Design and Development Stages
· Review, verification and design transfer activities
· Responsibilities and authorities.
· Actualization of plans
· Interfaces and communication between various groups involved
5
4
3
2
1
Is a risk analysis and/or FEMA part of the development process?
5
4
3
2
1
Are procedures and responsibilities to perform and review risk analysis clearly assigned and documented for the design
and development stages for a new product?
5
4
3
2
1
Are risk acceptance criteria defined in the relevant QMS procedures?
5
4
3
2
1
Is risk analysis results part of the Design History Records?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization developed procedures to ensure that the design requirements relating to a product are appropriate
and address the intended use of the product, including the needs of the user.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the determination and recording of inputs relating to product requirements include:
· Functional performance and safety requirements according to intended use.
· Applicable regulatory and statutory requirements.
· Where applicable, previous design and development results for similar product.
· Other requirements essential for design and development (e.g.: price, service life)
· Output(s) of risk management
· Documented review and approval, including date and signature, by designated individuals
5
4
3
2
1
Are the results of design inputs complete and unambiguous
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization developed procedures for defining and documenting design output in terms that allow adequate evaluation
of conformance to design input requirements?
5
4
3
2
1
Are the Design Outputs provided in a form that enables verification against the inputs and approved prior to release?
Do design and development outputs shall:
· Meet the input requirements for design and development
· Provide appropriate information for purchasing, production and servicing
· Contain or reference product acceptance criteria.
· Specify the characteristics of the product that are essential for its sale and proper use.
· Include a signed and dated review and approval
5
4
3
2
1
Are records of design output maintained?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization developed procedures to ensure that formal documented reviews of the design results are planned and
conducted at appropriate stages of the device’s design development?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization defined planned arrangements where design and development review shall be performed to
evaluate:
· To evaluate the ability of the results of design and development to meet requirements.
· To identify any problems and propose necessary actions.
5
4
3
2
1
Do the participants of the review include representatives of functions concerned with the design and development
stages?
5
4
3
2
1
Do the participants of the review include an individual who does not have direct responsibility for the design stage being
reviewed as well as any specialists needed.
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization developed procedures for verifying product design.
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization demonstrated that the verification activities met the input requirements and are all records
maintained.
· Results of verification
· Action Taken
· who performed the verification
· the date the verification was performed
· Identification of the design
5
4
3
2
1
Are design records available which demonstrate (but not limited to):
Compliance with applicable standards
Tests performed in comparison to products with comparable design/model.
Does Design verification include effects of design changes as well as the validation of computer systems?
Has the organization developed procedures for validating the product design.
Design and Development Validation is performed in accordance with planned arrangements?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the Design and Development Validation System include:
· Fitness for use
· Partial validation, if applicable
· Validation prior to product delivery
5
4
3
2
1
Are Design and Development Changes identified and records maintained?
5
4
3
2
1
Are there procedures for the identification, documentation, validation/verification, review, and approval of design
changes?
5
4
3
2
1
Are changes reviewed, verified and validated as well as approved before implementation?
5
4
3
2
1
Does review include evaluation of the effect of the changes on constituent parts and product already delivered?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization have a process or procedure for identify a significant change to a marked product and notification
to the Notified Body?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization established documented procedures to ensure that purchased product conforms to specified
purchase requirements?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization defined in procedures the extent of control over the supplier dependent upon the effect of the
purchased product on subsequent product realization or the final product?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization document the following criteria with all alements of it supply chain?
Evaluate and select suppliers based on their ability to supply product in accordance with suppliers’ requirements,
[including quality requirements].
Criteria for selection, evaluation and re-evaluation shall be established.
Records of the evaluation shall be maintained
5
4
3
2
1
Do suppliers who provide finished devices have documented procedures in place to ensure that the finished component
or product delivered is safe and effective?
5
4
3
2
1
As a manufacture who use suppliers to provide parts, components or services that could affect the safety and
effectiveness of the finished device have documented procedure in place to ensure that the finished device is safe and
effective?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the companies Purchasing information describe the product to be purchased. Such information must include,
where appropriate a description of the requirements pertaining to:
· Product approval, procedures, processes and equipment.
· Qualification of personnel
· Quality management system requirements.
5
4
3
2
1
Do purchasing documents include an agreement that the suppliers, contractors, consultants agree to notify the
manufacturer of any changes in the product or service?
5
4
3
2
1
Are copies of relevant purchasing documents (product specification, ordering specification, etc) retained? (e.g.:
according to specified traceability requirements for components)
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization have the following available for internal and supply chain purchase or manufactured components?
· Product characteristics.
· Procedures
· Documented requirements
· Work instructions
· Reference materials, as necessary
· Reference measurement procedures, as necessary
5
4
3
2
1
Have procedures been established and maintained for changes to specifications, methods, processes, procedures
regarding production and process changes to the supplier whether internal or external?
5
4
3
2
1
Do process controls monitor process parameters and component and device characteristics during production?
5
4
3
2
1
Do process controls include criteria for workmanship which is expressed in documented standards or by means of
identified and approved representative samples?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization developed a Device History Record for each component, batch of device manufactured?
· Amount manufactured
· Amount approved for distribution
· Batch record is verified and approved
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization defined the extent of traceability required for both internal and external suppliers
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization defined standard labeling and packaging for internal and external suppliers?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization documented requirements for cleanliness of product from the internal or external supplier?
· Product is cleaned by the organization prior to sterilization and/or use.
· Product is supplied non-sterile and subjected to a cleaning process prior to use.
· Product is supplied to be used non-sterile and its cleanliness is of significance in use.
· Process agents are to be removed from product during manufacture.
5
4
3
2
1
How is the extent of traceability defined, documented and maintained to enable corrective action in regards to:
· Database of sold products
· Final destination/location of sold products.
· Serial and/or lot number for identification.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the Measuring equipment in the facility:
· Calibrated or verified at specified intervals or prior to use,
· Adjusted or re-adjusted as necessary.
· Identified to enable the calibration status to be determined.
· Safeguarded from adjustments that would invalidate the measurement results.
· Protected from damage and deterioration during handling, maintenance and storage.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization assess and record the validity of the previous measuring results when the equipment is found not
to conform.
5
4
3
2
1
Are records maintained of the calibration and verification activities?
5
4
3
2
1
Are Personnel performing work that has to do with equipment calibartion that could affect product quality, [including
internal quality audits], competent on the basis of:
· Education
· Training
· Skills
· Experience
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization ensure that personnel are aware of the relevance and importance of their activities and how
they contribute to quality objectives?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization determine the necessary competence for personnel?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization provide methods for training or take other actions to satisfy training needs.
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization evaluate the effectiveness of the training taken internallly or externally?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization maintain appropriate records of training ?
5
4
3
2
1
Have procedures been established which identify training needs based on indvidual and regulatory requirements?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the manufacturer have and maintain the necessary infrastructure to ensure that the characteristics and
performance of their internally manufactured conmponents, sub assemblies or assembliesis (are) not adversely affected
by transport or conditions of storage.
5
4
3
2
1
If work environment conditions can have an adverse effect on product quality, does the organization have documented
requirements for enviromental controls for temperature, etc.
5
4
3
2
1
How are the environmental conditions controlled and monitored?
5
4
3
2
1
From a security standpoint has access control been established for entry of personnel/materials?
5
4
3
2
1
If appropriate, are special procedures available for handling used and/or returned product, in order to prevent
contamination of:
Other products
Manufacturing
Environment
Personnel
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization planned and implemented a monitoring, measurement, analysis and improvement process which
includes:
· Conformity of product
· Conformity of the quality management system
· Effectiveness of the quality management system
5
4
3
2
1
Are these problem reports or consumer complaints used as input into the corrective and/or preventive action system?
5
4
3
2
1
Are records of customer complaint investigations maintained?
5
4
3
2
1
If any customer complaint is not followed by corrective and/or preventive action, is the reason recorded?
5
4
3
2
1
Are Internal audits established that at a minimum that the quality management system:
· Conforms to the planned arrangements
· Conforms to the requirements of this international standard,
· Conforms to the quality management system requirements established by the organization,
· Is effectively implemented and maintained.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization have polices and procedures that defined QMS:
· Audit criteria
· Audit scope
· Audit Frequency
· Audit Methods
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organizations selection of auditors by the organization ensure objectivity and impartiality?
5
4
3
2
1
Do internal audits take into account the full scope of the quality system including directives, external standards,
regulatory requirements where product is sold?
5
4
3
2
1
Does management for the area being audited ensure that actions are taken without undue delay to eliminate detected
NCR’s and their causes?
5
4
3
2
1
Are follow-up audits performed and documented to verify implementation and effectiveness of the corrective actions?
5
4
3
2
1
Can the auditor come to the conclusion that the quality system is effective?
5
4
3
2
1
Have suitable methods for monitoring and measurements of quality system processes been determined, applied and
reviewed?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization monitor and measure the characteristics of the product to verify requirements have been met at
appropriate stages based on planned arrangements and documented procedures?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization properly identify and control product, which is nonconforming to prevent its unintended use or
delivery?
5
4
3
2
1
Are their procedure(s) that have been established including responsibilities and authorities for dealing with
nonconforming product?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization consideration on or more of the following when developing the nonconforming product program:
· Taking action to eliminate the detected nonconformity,
· Authorizing its use, release or acceptance under concession,
· Taking action to preclude its original intended use or application.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization ensure that nonconforming product is accepted by concession only if regulatory requirements are
met? Are records identifying the person(s) authorizing the concession maintained?
5
4
3
2
1
If nonconforming product is corrected, is the component, module or assembly subject to re-verification?
5
4
3
2
1
If product needs to be reworked (one or more times), has the organization documented a rework process in a work
instruction?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the reworked component, module or assembly undergo the same authorization and approval procedure as the
original work instruction?
5
4
3
2
1
Prior to authorization and approval of the work instruction, has the organization determined any adverse effect of the
rework upon product? Is this documented?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the organization documented procedures to determine, collect and analyze data to demonstrate the suitability and
effectiveness of the quality management system?
5
4
3
2
1
Is any of the information listed below used to improve the effectiveness of the quality management system?
· Feedback (Customer Satisfaction)
· Conformity to product requirements
· Process and product characteristics
· Supplier feedback
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization Identify and implement any changes necessary to ensure and maintain the continued suitability
and effectiveness of the quality management system through the use of:
· The quality policy
· Quality Objectives
· Audit Results
· Data Analysis
· Corrective and Preventive Actions
· Management Reviews
5
4
3
2
1
Is their a customer complain, are theirt procedures that reference requirements if activities outside the organization
contributed to the complaint; and a plan of how relevant information shall be exchanged between the organization(s)
involved?
5
4
3
2
1
If a customer complaints are not followed by Corrective or Preventive Actions is the reason be authorized by some level
of senior leadership and recorded?
5
4
3
2
1
If a internal or external supplier or the organization itself needs to recall or correct a device, or to notify its owners and
users in becoming aware that the device: (a) may be hazardous to health; (b) may fail to conform to any claim made by
the manufacturer, or importer relating to its effectiveness, benefits, performance characteristics or safety; (c) may not
meet the requirements of a regultory body if thier a procedure in place to handle this situtation?
5
4
3
2
1
To prevent the recurrence of nonconformance, has the organization developed a procedure covering the following
aspects:
· Reviewing nonconformities (including customer complaints)
· Determining the cause of nonconformities,
· Evaluating the need for action to ensure that nonconformities do not recur,
· Determining and implementing action needed including as appropriate, updating documentation
· Applying appropriate statistical methodology to detect recurring quality problems
· Recording of the results of any investigation and of action taken
· Reviewing [verifying or validating] the corrective actions taken for effectiveness.
· Implementing and recording changes in methods and procedures needed to correct and prevent identified quality
problems.
· Ensuring that information relating to quality problems or nonconforming product is disseminated to those directly
responsible for assuring quality of such product or the prevention of such problems.
· Submitting relevant information on identified quality problems, as well as corrective and preventive actions, for
management review.
5
4
3
2
1
To eliminate the cause of potential nonconformance’s, has the organization developed procedures covering the
following aspects:
· Determining potential nonconformities and their cause,
· Evaluating the need for action to prevent occurrence of nonconformities,
· Determining and implementing action needed,
· Recording of the results of any investigations and of action taken
· Reviewing preventive action taken and its effectiveness.
5
4
3
2
1
Is their any evidence of Value Benchmarking Studies:
5
4
3
2
1
Are their any evidence of Value Cost Target Setting Studies for internally as well as exterally manufactured or purchased
components
5
4
3
2
1
There is a formalised quality feedback process that allows operators to receive feedback from both
Internal and external customers. (such as a Quality Operating System (QOS))
Evidence exists to verify that a formalised feedback process exists and has been used to actively eliminate defects over the
5 preceding 36 months
Evidence exists to verify that a formalised feedback process exists and has been used to actively eliminate defects over the
4 preceding 12 months
3 A formalised feedback process exists and is actively used to eliminate defects
2 A formal feedback process exists
1 No formalised feedback loop exists
Defective items are immediately detected when they occur in the production process. Very seldom does a bad part
makeit to a downstream process or to the customer with a lot of suspect parts in between requiring additional inspection
5 Practically no rework exists throughout the factory
4 Some rework loops and areas have been eliminated from the facility. (Evidence required)
3 Rework areas are present on the facilities but defects are tracked through the area and fixed by the end of shift
2 Rework parts exist throughout the facility but are tagged and held in quarantine areas that are visually identified
1 Rework parts exist throughout the facility in uncontrolled locations
A Quality system exists to address supplier quality issues in the production process.
A formalised quality feedback process exists with the suppliers. Evidence exists to prove improvement in purchased part quality
5 for the last 24 months
The Quality Operating System for supplier quality provides feedback to the operator where the defect was found. All members in
4 the section are aware of how the top defects with supplier quality are being addressed
3 The Quality department visits the area the defect is found and investigates countermeasures with the supplier
2 When defects are found the parts are tagged and placed into a quarantine area
1 When defects are found the parts are either left or moved from the production area
What portion of total employees have had basic SPC training?
5 81%-93%
4 56%-80%
3 20%-55%
2 8%-19%
1 0%-6%
What portion of operations are controlled with Statistical Process Control (SPC)
5 94%-100%
4 70%-94%
3 31%-70%
2 11%-30%
1 1%-10%
What portion of the SPC that is done is accomplished by operators as opposed to Quality or Engineering specialists?
5 71%-100%
4 31%-70%
3 11%-30%
2 1%-10%
1 0%
What is the overall defect rate?
71%-100%
31%-70%
11%-30%
1%-10%
0%
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
How easy is it to shift output when the product mix changes?
Very easy
Easy
Somewhat Difficult
Moderately Difficult
Very Difficult
Is each operation audited to see that standardized work is followed?
Is operator certification posted for each operation for performing the operation?
Are problems documentation worksheets for any customer dissatisfies posted at the operation where
the error was made within the last 12 weeks?
Are boundary samples present for each part produced?
Are rules and procedures clear when rework is needed?
Are countermeasures to problems managed effectively?
Do Short distance exisit between workstations allows operator to work 2 adjacent workstations
without increasing cycle times.
Is their evidence of 1-piece flow (maximum WIP of one part between 2 operations)
Are Workstations created for working in standing position
Electric/control panels do not increase distance between workstations and do not prevent frontal
feeding of component container storage
Component containers are located on the workstation, facing the operator
Containers are placed with their small length facing operator to allow enough room for several part
numbers at the work station
Location of empty containers waiting for removal does not increase the distance between
workstations (i.e. empties rack is over or under full rack)
All operators on the same side for straight-line layouts, all operators on the inside for U-shaped
layouts
Product passes automatically to the next process as much as possible

Change-over times are less than 1 minute for assembly equipment
Tools and tooling required on the line are accessible without operator moving
Tooling is manually portable by operator (less than 22 pounds)
Tooling is set by quick fasteners (i.e. quarter turn type)
Current changeover time is posted and visible to all operators on the line
Possible to change to a new part number a minimum of 10 times each hour using less than 15% of the
shift time (less than 10 minutes per hour)
Possible to simultaneously store component parts for several part numbers right on the workstation
All changeovers are performed by operators with no need for a special set-up person
There is Presence of visual marking (color-coding) of tools and other change over items in a station
to limit risk of errors during tool changeovers
There is a plant IE database or the work standrd recording and tracking system being used for
recording and documenting the labor standard.
Has the proper overhead and indirect labor burden been ngineered and reviewed for each
manufacturing station?
Is their a cycle time and operator work stack chart comparion of all products ran through the plant
manufacturing stations.
There is a Program for Education and Training to systematically enhance maintenance technical skills.
The is established support and guidance for operator self-maintenance and operators have been
provide instructions to operators on cleaning, lubrication, safety, and contamination
countermeasures.
There is evidence of Downtime Countermeasures to Track breakdowns, analyze root cause, apply
countermeasures with the goal is to increase mean time between failures (MTBF) and reduce mean
time to repair (MTTR).
There is evidence of a Preventive Maintenance Program that includes Identity and number all
equipment, establish standards for cleaning, lubrication, and inspection. Develop schedule of PM
activities and track conformance to schedule - this includes lubrication program activities.
There is evidence of a functional Spare Parts Management system that has establish inventory
standards and reorder points for parts needed on Planned basis and has applied 5-S principles to
storage area.
There is evidence that each process location has a Maintenance Cost Analysis that defines where
cost is incurred for parts, indirect supplies, oils & lubricants, manpower, and outside contractors.
Organize systematic actions to reduce costs - goal is to reduce long term total cost - not to be
sacrificed for short term cost improvement.
Their is documented evidence that Maintenance Efficiency Improvement has occured from tracked
maintenance activities by category: planned (time-based, condition-based, predictive), and unplanned
(breakdown) with a goal to increase percentage of maintenance hours on planned vs. unplanned, and
lower overall total for both.
Flexible Manpower:
The combination of a production system (i.e., - machines/facilities and providers)
designed for flexibility and a highly cross-trained workforce in an environment that
supports a successful deployment of production
Man Machine Seperation

For machining areas or large equipments (like
testing equipment):
The machine design allows the equipment to run for batches of parts without requiring
5
operator intervention
testing equipment):
Equipment cycle has been optimized and operator intervention is limited to loading the
4
materials and launching the cycles.
testing equipment):
Jidoka (error prevention) devices are incorporated into the design of the machine to
3
ensure quality, allowing 1 team member to run several machines of 1 or more types
testing equipment):
1 team member may run more than 1 machine (typically the same type), but it is still
2
necessary to monitor the process to prevent errors
testing equipment):
Machines are designed without jidoka devices and every machine must have 1 team
1
member assigned to monitor the process to ensure parts quality
Cell/Line Layout
A minimal amount of operations remains on the main assembly line, all the rest having
5 been transferred to sub-assembly areas
5 Sub assemblies and main line in a fishbone layout
Motion economy is maximized within cells by minimizing walk patterns with U shape
4 layout and material conveyance (gravity feeders, conveyers)
Operators are able to perform operations on different stations within the cell, with
4 minimal motion
4 Parts and people flow diagrams are drawn for all processes (to optimize flows)
3 There is a clear split between line and preparations areas (preparations are made in
dedicated areas by dedicated operators, line operators focus on assembly)
3
Operators remain in the same area
3
Parts and people flow diagrams are drawn for some processes (to optimize flows
2 Internal parts logistics are served by specific staff
2
Operators don’t need to leave the assembly line or cell to go for parts or tools
Operators move outside of their working station or working cell (to go for parts or tools
1
or to work in a different process area …)
Flow Design
Distances between warehouses and lines are minimal (unless pooling economy makes
5
central warehouse more economic)
5
Moving line or conveyers to move production
5
No logistics is required between lines and sub-assemblies
5
Parts flows have been optimized
Analysis has been performed on all part flows leading to implementation of
4
improvement action plans
3 Flows are systematically analyzed and matter in new investment decisions

Flow analysis is performed for a large share of parts leading to implementation of some
3
improvement ideas
2
Flows are taken into account for new investment but might not prevail over other criteria
2
Main flows have been analyzed
1
No real flow analysis is performed
Skill Building
5
Most operators are able to perform more than 3 different trades
5
Multi trade and multi station training makes it easy to replace any absentee
4 Detailed qualification boards are displayed in all areas and include targets
A majority of operators are able to perform operations of at least 2 different trades at the
4 station and some are able to train other people on the full work package
3 There is a fully formalized process for cross-training team members
3
All operators are able to perform operations on other stations within the same trade(1)
3
Skill levels are tracked and clearly displayed on team panel
3
SOPs are used to train people
Some operators are able to perform the full work package at the station (including
3
different trades)
2
Most operators are able to perform operations on another station within the same trade
Some people are able to train fellow workers also on other stations on operations within
2
the same trade(1)
2
Competences are not formally tracked
1 Few operators are able to perform some work on another station
1
There is no formal process for qualifying operators and all training is “hands-on”
Funtional Integration
A large part of operators have skills to solve problems in a structured way (PDCA, 5
5
whys, …)
5
A large part of functional activity are dedicated to operational improvement
Most operators have extra assignments (update a KPI, insure protection equipment
4
supply, perform TPM)
4
Maintenance is no longer involved in basic TPM (outside of defining tasks)
4
Some operators have skills to solve problems in a structured way (PDCA, 5 whys, …)
4 All operators are aware of 5S and leave a clean work station at end of shift
4
Some logistic people are able to perform parts quality audits
Some operators have an extra but simple assignment (update a KPI, insure protection
3
equipment supply, perform TPM…)
A majority of operators perform daily basic 5S (leaving working station clean and tools
3
in the right place at the end of the shift)
2
If necessary, operators perform 5S tasks (from time to time, on request of team leader)
There is no function integration in the plant, TPM is performed by Maintenance, quality
1
control by Quality
Standard Work Procedures
5
Video routinely used to improve SOPs
Operators are able to update SOPs with Manufacturing Engineering approval on a daily
5
basis
5
SOPs exist for all processes
4
SOPs exist for most processes
4
Team members always follow procedures
4 Standard Operating Procedures are a basis for improvement activities

SOPs, i.e. clear description of sequenced operations have been developed for all
3
major processes (especially with high variation or safety risk)
Most of them are posted as paper instructions at stations (available to anyone) at a
3
standard place
3
SOPs are used to train people
3
SOP are produced by cross functional teams
3
Operators follow SOPs
Basic work procedures exist, but are not fully up to SOP expectations and are not
2
strictly followed by team members
2
The procedures are developed by Manufacturing Engineering
2 Procedures are updated
1
Operations are performed at best based on engineering drawings.
Way of working and sequences of operations vary between operators and are different
1
from shift to shift
5
5
4
1
5
1
5
1
5
1
5
1
5
5
4
1
5
1
5
3
2
1
5
1
5
2
1
5
4
1
5
2
1
1
5
2
1
1
5
4
3
5
4
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
1
5
1
5
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
4
3
3
2
4
3
4
3
1
5
5
4
3
2
1
3
2
4
3
5
4
1
5
1
5
3
2
5
4
2
1
1
5
3
2
4
3
1
5
1
5
1
5
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
4
3
5
4
5
4
2
1
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
3
2
3
2
1
There is evidence that the total number of production jobs have job safety analyses and
procedures or work practices completed?
There is evidence that job safety analyses and procedures or work practices are reviewed or
updated on a set schedule.
Whenever Employee suggestions for improvement are made?
Only when Legislation/regulations are changed?
Only when Accidents or high potential near miss incidents occur?
Only when Physical modifications are made?
Only when a process or function is changed?
There is evidence thatemployees and supervisors/group leaders have had input into the
completion of the Job Safety Analyses?
There is evidence that Job Safety Analyses have been used as a training aide with employees
prior to being assigned tasks?
There is evidence of a strong Incident investigation process and training on the process usage
by operators and supervisors.
There is evdeince that every manufacturing station has been optimized to incorporated signs,
tags or similar devices as appropriate to let operators know of impending danager?
There is evidence that Job Safety Analyses been posted at the worksite, or readily accessible
to employees for review?
Does the incident investigation process include formal investigating and reporting of the
following types of incidents?
Non-disabling injuries (including ergonomic/first aid)?
Disabling injuries (including ergonomics)?
Occupational illnesses (including ergonomics)?
Fatalities?
Fires and explosions?
Property damage at or above an established cost base?
Process losses at or above an established cost base?
Undesired environmental events?
Near-misses?
Major incident?
High-potential incident?
High-potential near-miss?
All fatalities?
All major or high potential injuries or illnesses?
All major or high potential property damage injuries or illnesses?
All major or high potential undesired environmental events?
All other major or high potential loss incidents?
Does the incident process define the extent of report distribution?
Does the incident report provide for identification of corrective actions and when they will be
completed?
Do personnel responsible for conducting investigations receive formal training in incident
investigation techniques?
Does the incident report include Identification and analysis of substandard acts/substandard
conditions, basic/underlying causes, and lack of control?
Is there a written procedure to guide personnel actions during investigations conducted by

external agencies such as government officals?
Does the organization have at-the-scene participation of operations managers in the

investigation of incidents?
Is their a written announcement of initial general information about any major or high-potential
injury/illness communicated to middle level managers and operators at the floor level (as
appropriate) no later than the next working day for events such as unplanned? (20/80)
Injury/illness ?
Fires?
Undesired Environmental events?
Property Damage?
Is there a process used which ensures that corrective actions, and follow-up of those actions,
are carried out as recommended in the incident/near-miss investigation report?
Does the corrective action process require actual follow-up by an appropriate individual with
check-off on an item-for-item basis as actions are completed?
Does the process require a report to leadership at least monthly on the status of incomplete
corrective actions?
Are the results of follow-up action for major and high- potential loss incidents communicated to
appropriate:
Personnel within the facility or site?
Divisional or corporate staff?
Can the facility demonstrate a thorough system is in use for the reporting and investigation of
near-misses having high-loss potential?
Is their evidence that records of incident investigation reports maintained?

Are all the following factors shown in the incident report for each of the organizational groups
for injury/illness incidents such as Facility;Area; Department; and or machine or tooling
number
Types of incidents?
Equipment/substances involved?
Activity at time of injury?
Parts of body harmed?
Age of persons injured/ill?
Length of service of persons injured or ill?
Time of day incidents/illnesses occurred?
Environmental factors?
Other?
Are all the following Indications used in the incedent report to define which of the following
causes are determined for each of the organizational groups for injury/illness incidents: Facility
;Area ; Department:
Immediate Machine
causes (I.e. or tool acts and conditions)?
substandard
Basis causes (i.e,. personal factors and job factors)?
Lack of control (I.e. inadequate program, standards, or compliance to standards)?
Are incident safety statistics and analyses maintained for at least two years?
How often are near-miss frequency rates computed and communicated to senior management?
every month
every 3 months
every 6 months
yearly
not done
Has a coordinator(s) been appointed in writing to develop and administer the overall
emergency preparedness process?
Are costs of for fires, property damage, etc. recorded as operating costs for the only the
indivdual departments concerned?
Has the health and safety coordinator(s) received suitable and adequate training to enable them
to undertake the evaluation of safe practices or appropriate practices under each of the listed
possible
Emergencyroles?
medical?
Emergency evacuation?
Fire Brigade?
Confined space rescue?
Power Press Release/ Equipment Extrication?
Release, spills, or leaks of hazardous or facility managed materials?
High angle rescue (Rescue from Heights)?
Security Emergency?
Natural Disaster?
Other Emergency Need?
Is the emergency response analysis conducted semi-annually?
Are there emergency plans and emergency response plansfor the following:
Evacuation Plan?
Emergency medical response?
Confined space rescue?
High angle rescue (Rescue from heights)?
Security emergencies?
Natural disaster?
Behavioral Emergency / Critical Incident Stress Debriefing (BE/CISD)?
Off-Site Transport Emergency?
Other Emergency Need?
Fire Prevention Plan?
Facility Fire Response (Brigade)?
Has a designated central control area (Emergency Operations Center) and alternative location
been established?
Has an on-site Incident Commander (Incident Management System) been appointed and trained
to take charge in an emergency situation?
Is the incident commander knowledgeable in the Use of the Incident management System
(Emergency Incident Command)?
Is their evidence that Telephone numbers and contacts of key facility and Company personnel
including notification procedures are posted in all work areas?
Is their a established and well known and staffed spill plan that defines spill control equipment
and counter-measures?
Are all essential (non-Company) emergency services, telephone numbers, contact points,
addresses, etc., known and listed at Security and updated as required and at least annually?
Are appropriate up to date emergency service telephone numbers listed and prominently
displayed at all facility telephones?
Has the emergency plan been appropriately distributed and relevant contents effectively
communicated to required external authorities?
Has the emergency plan been appropriately distributed and relevant contents effectively
communicated to all facility personnel?
Does the facility conduct annual evacuation training drills?
Have specialized firefighting procedures been developed to control fires for high hazard or
special operations?
Has the presence of all hazardous materials been made known to fire units which would
respond to the facility in the event of an emergency?
Has the facility established a procedure for the types of chemical incidents the facility will
handle and which will be referred to outside agencies through written spill procedures?
Is the Emergency Plan revised promptly whenever site operations or other elements of the plan
change?
Is the Emergency Response Plan included in the QMS document control process?
Has the facility identified and labeled the master control devices to be used to control energies
during an emergency?
Is a facility diagram depicting the locations of all master control devices available for use by
appropriate response personnel displayed throughout the facility?
Are appropriate response personnel familiar with the location and shut-down procedures of all
master control devices?
Has a systematic survey of the facilities been made within the past three years to identify the
need for:
Fire Extinguishing systems?
Fire Separation construction?
Hazard detection and alarm systems?
A spill plan that defines control and countermeasures?'
Emergency lighting?
Emergency power?
Means of egress?
Other emergency and rescue equipment?
Are fire insurance underwriter’s recommendations pertaining to fire suppression, protection,

equipment, and programs completed within the following time frame? Less than 2 yrs less than
3 yrs Greater than 3 yrs
Has an Emergency Response Team (ERT) been established and trained to respond to the
following emergency situations?
Emergency medical?
Fire Rescue?
Confined Space Rescue?
High Angle Rescue / Rescue from Heights?
Release, spills, or leaks of hazardous or facility managed materials?
Security emergencies?
Do Emergency Response Team (ERT) members participate in post event critique sessions in
order to provide input relative to actual emergencies and training exercises?
Is a follow-up system used to ensure that recommendations made following critiques of

emergencies and training exercises are properly considered and addressed?
Do these persons have immediate access to first aid supplies and are their job functions and
locations such that effective response times and administering of first aid will not be affected?
Are training and / or licensing certificates current for those individuals designated as
emergency medical first responders / first-aiders?
Has the facility identified the minimum number of individuals required to be trained in first aid
techniques, to cover all work areas during all working hours?What percentage of employees
are trained and certified in first aid techniques? (% x 10)
Is a system used to keep external organizations who may respond to emergencies informed of
possible emergency needs?
Is there a written plan for business resumption activities in the event of loss to the facility (or)
critical operations within the facility due to an emergency?
Are periodic enviromental, saftey and enmergency response tests and drills conducted with the
external organization(s)?
Are there agreements with external organizations to provide personnel and equipment in the
event of an emergency as required?
Are auxiliary communications systems available to sup-port ongoing internal and external
emergency communi-cations when primary systems are rendered inoperative
Have procedures been developed to manage and control the flow of information externally for
accidents involving potential health, safety, and environmental hazards; their effects and
actions taken to control these hazards to:
Appropriate emergency departments/services?
Local authorities?
General public?
The media?
Are legal as well as appropriate senior management and public affairs personnel involved in
reviewing and approving information releases?
Has a systematic approach been used to identify the need for specialized work permit systems
for construction, planned new process enviromental releases, etc?
Has a systematic approach been used to identify requirements for permits to operate from
appropriate authorities?
Is there a written follow-up system to ensure all permit requirements are met and that permits
are obtained?
Are checks made to determine the validity and status of qualifications, licenses and
certificates, etc., presented by potential employees?
Is each employee given a thorough review of relevant enviormental, health and saftey rules at
least annually?
Are there provisions for employee input during rules preparation update training?
Is there a process for retraining employees when they are transferred to areas where different
rules apply?
Is a system used for: Dealing with those who do not comply with work related rules?
Is a system used for: Recognizing those who comply with work-related rules?
Has the system relative to rule compliance and recognition been reviewed and accepted by
employee representatives?
Has this system been distributed and communicated to all employees for the following:
Company's enforcement procedures?
Recognition system?
Application of the Company's enforcement procedures?
Positive recognition rule compliance?
Are records kept when retraining or skill practice occurs as a result of non-compliance with
rules?
Has a systematic assessment been conducted to determine personal protective equipment

needs?
Is a system used to continuously strive for reducing dependency on personal protective

equipment as a primary means of controlling occupational hazards?
Have personal protective equipment standards, rules and/or procedures for appropriate jobs
been defined in writing for the following?
Employees?
Visitors, vendors, contractors, etc.?
Is there provision for employee input into identifying the needs for, and making selection of,
personal protective equipment?
Is proper personal protective equipment available to employees as appropriate when

requested?
Are items of personal protective equipment regularly maintained and kept in good condition?
Are proper storage and/or cleaning facilities for personal protective equipment provided?
Do employees have access to disposable gloves and CPR face shields/pocket masks
throughout the facility?
Have all personal protective equipment needs for controlling exposures to potentially
infectious materials been identified and made available to affected employees?
Is there a process to ensure that all eyewear meets accepted safety standards?
Is there a system used to ensure that employees are given proper fitting for personal protective
equipment requiring special attention?
Does the system for personal protective equipment include the following:
Instruction in the need for and use of PPE?
Instruction in the cleaning and maintenance of PPE?

Maintaining instruction records?
Periodic reviews for compliance?
Does the facility have a written respiratory protection program that meets the Company’s
requirements?
Are emergency use respirators (such as SCBA's) inspected at least monthly?
Evaluate the degree of compliance with standards for the usage of the following types of
personal
___% Footprotective equipment throught the plant.
protection
___% Temperature protection
___% Hand protection
___% Arm/elbow/shoulder protection
___% Knee protection
___% Eye protection
___% Hearing protection
___% Radiation protection
___% Respiratory Protection
___% Fall Protection
___% Leg Protection
___% Chest Protection

Is recognition given when personal protective equipment has prevented or minimized injury?
Is a systematic approach used to anticipate potential occupational health and industrial
hygiene hazards when:
New processes or changes to existing processes are proposed?
New hazardous substances or changes to existing hazardous substances are
proposed?
Does the facility use a systematic approach which includes the following techniques to identify
and evaluate occupational health and industrial hygiene hazards:
Review of job safety analyses and work procedures for all production jobs?
Review of work procedures for routine, non-production tasks?
Review of work activities for all other occupations (e.g., Maintenance)?
For the occupational health and industrial hygiene hazards identified by the facility, is a system
in place to:
Prioritize occupational and industrial hygiene hazards where controls are needed?
Involve employees in the determination of required controls?
Determine control based on relative health risk?
Develop an "action plan" which specifies which control method to implement?
Conduct a follow-up system to ensure action plans are implemented?

Is a system used to ensure that appropriate Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) are readily
available for all hazardous substances used, manufactured, stored, or transported as a part of
the location's operations that includes the following:
Current MSDSs are available?

Chemical inventories for the facility are up to date?
MSDSs received from suppliers are forwarded to the appropriate office(s) for updates?
Is a system used to ensure that all hazardous materials used, manufactured, stored or
transported are properly labeled?
Is a system in place which requires:
Initiation of appropriate Industrial Hygiene Surveys, including air monitoring?
Initiation of action plan to address Industrial Hygiene recommendations where required?
Follow-up to ensure that control actions are being implemented where required?
Maintaining records of all data developed through the monitoring of identified health hazards?
Sharing and explaining industrial hygiene reports and results to employees?
Are proper job instructions, with emphasis on occupational health and industrial hygiene
topics given when:
Employees are newly hired?
Employees move to new workstations with different hazard exposures?
A new health hazard is introduced to the work area?
Has a noise exposure survey been conducted in your facility within the last two years?
Are feasible engineering controls used to reduce noise exposures when decibels exceed 85
dBA for 8 hours?
Is a system in place to ensure the use of hearing protection devices where required?
Are hearing protection devices selected based on an evaluation of objective performance
measures (i.e., noise reduction ratings) and employee exposure data?
Is newly purchased or fabricated equipment tested to comply with Air Bus Noise Control
Standards?
Are standard practices in place to maintain existing noise control measures, control
compressed air and steam, and maintain or repair equipment on a continuous basis?
Are employees whose noise exposure may equal or exceed 85 dBA over and 8-hour time-
weighted average (TWA) notified of their exposure and included in the plant's Hearing
Conservation Program?
Are employees in the Hearing Conservation Program trained on the effects of excessive noise,
the use, availability, and care of hearing protection, and the purpose of audiometric testing?
Does the facility have a designated Laser Safety Officer who is responsible for implementing
the Laser Safety Program for Class 3 and Class 4 lasers?
Are Laser Safety Data Sheets completed and up to date for each Class 3 and Class 4 laser in
your facility?
Are Standard Operating Procedures available to opera-tors and maintenance personnel who
work with Class 3 and Class 4 lasers or systems containing such class lasers?
Does your facility have a procedure for identifying material containing lead before demolition,
construction, renovation, or maintenance activities begin andFor projects involving the
disturbance of lead containing materials, is air monitoring conducted as needed? Are the
appropriate employees enrolled in medical surveillance who are exposed to lead or abestos?
Are the flow, velocity, and volume characteristics of the portable water system in your facility
reviewed annually for possible dead ends or low flow areas?
Has your facility installed backflow prevention device(s) to protect the portable water system?
Are the backflow prevention devices tested annually or more frequently as required by local
authorities?
Does your facility conduct a Cross-Connection/Pipe identification Survey annually?
Is the portable water in you facility tested for contaminants annually?
Does a system exist which ensures pipe identification labeling is current and adheres to Airbus
Pipe labeling and identification standards?
Does your facility implement the Heat Stress Program annually?
Does your facility conduct a walk-through annually to identify potential heat problem areas and
employees and management informed about the dangers of heat stress??
Are employees allowed to acclimatize to hot jobs?
Does the facility have Full-time medical personnel/services on the premises?
Regular part-time medical personnel/services on the premises?
Contractual medical personnel/services?
Informal medical personnel/services?
Full-time medical personnel/services available at hospital
No relationship.
Do the medical personnel meet all professional requirements and are related documents readily
available (including licenses and certifications, etc.)?
Do the medical personnel inspect the cafeteria on a monthly basis?
Have medical personnel responsible for providing services received appropriate training?
Do all medical personnel conduct a walk-through to familiarize themselves with the processes
within the facility?
Does the medical department maintain a record of qualified health care professionals, and
medical centers for referrals and consultation?
Does the medical department have required documents and reference manuals readily
available for all medical personnel?
Is the medical facility clearly identified?
Is there emergency lighting that provides a clear pathway for evacuation
Does the medical facility have rooms which are:

Adequate in number, type and size
Suitably located?
Provide Privacy
Have alternate power source for emergency treatment areas?
The medical facility comlies and is maintained to regulatory and/or appropriate medical
standards?
Is there appropriate medical equipment that is Available,Properly maintained,Properly

calibrated with records of calibration on file:
Is there an effective system of maintaining and dispensing medications, including narcotics?
Are medical supplies… :
Adequate in number, type and size
Suitably located?
Appropriate to medical services
Is a system in place to ensure that employee medical records and files are under secure control
of the medical or HR department?
Are all medical records maintained in accordance with company and regulatory policy with
regard ton Access,Confidentiality,Retention:
Is there a system for employees to confidentially report suspected health problems?

Is there a prominently posted procedure for obtaining medical attention?
Is a directive prominently posted requiring employees to immediately report all

injuries/illnesses?
Is this directive translated into sufficient languages so that all employees can understand?
Is there a process in place to notify the medical department of employee transfers in and out of
the facility so that the medical records may be transferred and kept at the current work-site with
the employee?
Evaluate the effectiveness of the medical services based upon compliance with regulatory
requirements:
Excellent application
Good application
Fair application
Poor application
No services provided
Has a regular workplace medical surveillance system been established to...:
Identify potential exposures?
Perform medical monitoring?
Does "Human Resources " at the facility use the following measurables to track the results of
saftey, health issues?
-Perecent of medical absenteeism;
-Percent of occupational missed work days from health and safety issues
-Percent of non-occupational missed work days fro health and safety issues
-Percent of restricted workers

- Workers' compensation cost
-Hourly fringe cost
-Medical department cost (pharmaceutical and durable medical goods costs)
Have jobs been identified proactively in the facility where medical restricted employees can
work?
Do medical personnel assist in reviewing jobs in a manner to evaluate compatibility with

specific restrictions and assist in the placement of restricted employees?
Are all medical visits documented for all occupational and personal medical visits to the
department or outside provider?
Is there a system in the organization which provides employee access to information on

wellness, mental health and substance abuse issues?
Does the system provide an avenue to address wellness, mental health and substance abuse
issues?
What percentage of employees requiring post-offer pre-placement examinations have received

the examination?
Does pre-placement medical examination occur that include tests to detect pre-existing
conditions and drug and alcohol screening?
Are specific medical examinations carried out as required by legislation (i.e., audiometric
tests,eye examinations, and breathing test etc.), where certain health hazards have been
identified in the workplace?
Is there a system for maintaining records of these examinations?
Are safety/loss control bulletin boards located so every employee has an opportunity to see at
least one during the working day?
Do guidelines determine which items will be placed on safety/loss control bulletin boards, and
do these guidelines include ergonomics and items required by legislation, Is information
posted on safety/loss control bulletin boards up to date?
Are safety/loss control posters and banners used to support programs aimed at accident
causes, are they located appropriately and planned in advanced?
How often does senior leadership participate in organized safety/loss control promotional
programs based on written themes concerning loss control problems?
Every Month
Every 3 months
Every 6 months
Yearly
Not done
Do individuals and groups receive recognition or awards based on contribution to programs,

to encourage interest in the safety/loss control process?
Are unique or unusual systems of communication, other than those already mentioned, used to
promote safety/loss control?Is there an effective ongoing housekeeping promotion system in
the organization?
How often have group safety/loss control meetings included off-the-job and employee family
safety topics in the past twelve months?
Every Month
Every 2 months
Every 6 months
Yearly
Not done
Are employee family members included in any off-the-job safety education and promotion
programs and how often are they communicated?
Every Month
Every 2 months
Every 6 months
Yearly
Not done
Have appropriate Air bus team members been assigned as contract coordinators to monitor
contractor Saftey performance while on-site?
Is it specified how contractors are to coordinate ongoing work and their safety/loss control
system activities with those of the facility and of other contractors?
Are contractors required to participate in safety Airbus Helath and Saftey programs for known
hazards relating to the contractor's work such as Power Lockout, Chemical Safety, Lead,
Asbestos and Confined Spaces, before being allowed to perfrom work on the site?
Does the contractor have and know all applicable emergency plans and phone numbers before
starting work?
Is contractor compliance with applicable regulations, organizational requirements, contract
obligations and contractor programs regularly reviewed by a Air Bus representative?
Are the following reports forwarded by the contractor to Company personnel in order to
monitor the contractor's safety/loss performance while on Company property and sent to the
proper company authority:
Serious accident/injury/illness reports?
Property damage reports
Fire damage reports
Government or other outside agency inspection?
High-potential near miss?
Other?
Does the security system control the entrance, presence and exit of contractor employers,
employees, equipment and materials?
Are contractor work-sites inspected periodically and after completion of work to ensure appropriate
cleanup and control of residual risks?
Is a multi-disciplinary team (Local Ergonomics Committee) used to manage current ergonomic

events that are identified at the site?
Have members of the (Local Ergonomics Committee) been assigned the following roles and
responsibilities:
Record Keeper
Facilitator
Medical Representative
Interface with ongoing Design For Ergonomics Process
Engineering Representative
Have appropriate members of the LEC been trained in the appropriate process and technical
training course including:
Ergonomics Process Course
Required refresher Training
At least two members of LEC received Advanced Ergonomic training
Design For Ergonomics

Has the LEC established goals and objectives for the facility?
Is there a process in which performance to goals and objectives are measured?
What percentage of the plant's employees have received ergonomic awareness training?
What percentage of the plant's production supervisors have received ergonomics training for
supervisors?
Is there a system/procedure to convey ergonomic concerns on existing jobs at the site to the
LEC which includes?
Reviewing appropriate medical/formal data
Informal reporting
Conducting proactive Risk Analysis
Is there a written process for prioritizing ergonomic concerns on existing jobs at the site?
Is thre a team utilizing appropriate administrative and/or engineering control to

reduce/eliminate ergonomic stresses identified on high risk jobs?
After an ergonomic concern is identified and placed on the Concern Log, is an initial evaluation
conducted within two weeks?
After a ergonomic solution is in place, does the ergonomics team conduct a formal follow-up
with the employee within 4 weeks?
Are investigative reports, e.g. Corrective Actions or equivalent, generated for ergonomics
concerns that contain the following elements:
Job Description/Suspected Problem Description
Root Cause
Interim Solution
Permanent Solution
Verification
Are ergonomic investigative reports, e.g. correctiuve actions., which identify and address high
priority concerns forwarded to the following for review and action:
Ergonomic Coordinators
Product Engineers
Process Engineers
Appropriate Company Ergonomic Coordinators
Are operators as well as supervisors involved throughout the job improvement cycle fo
ergonomic concerns?
Does plant leadership support the Ergonomics Process by actively:
Developing ergonomic solutions?
Obtaining cost estimates and preparing projects?
Obtaining funding for procurement of material?
Supporting design and installation of effective ergonomic solutions?
Supporting new equipment training for employees?
Does a proactive ergonomic review process in place that requires that a sign-off occurs for the
process to verify that the issues do not exisit and that ergonomic reviews and approvals have
taken place proir to bring equipment into the facility?
Is there a system which ensures that proactive ergonomic reviews take into account:
Historical Data on similar operations
Analytical Tools
Worker Input
Has an hourly and salaried coordinator been appointed for each of the following Health and
Saftey Programs:
Chemical Safety Training (HazCom)?
Energy Control and Power Lockout?
Powered Material Handling Vehicles?
Guidelines Responsibilities and Safe Practices?
Confined Space Entry
Lifting and Rigging?
Working at Heights?
Ergo for supervisors?

Health and Saftey Issue Troubleshooting?
Maintenance Vehicles?
Have all employees requiring energy control and power lockout training for their jobs received
appropriate training?
Is there a system in place to modify lock out procedures and placards on a timely basis, when
changes are made to equipment or process?
Does the facility have a written local lockout plan that defines procedures for company
personnel and outside contractors so compliance can be enforced?
Does the facility have a written local lockout policy that states employees must go through lock
out training before working on any equipment and that it defines procedures and disciplinary
actions for internal personnel and outside contractors so compliance can be enforced
Are ECPL compliance audits conducted on a regular basis and documented?
Is there a system in place to actively design equipment for convenience of lockout?
Have all employees that operate powered material handling vehicles been trained in the safe
operation of the specific vehicle(s) they operate?
Do operators receive raining and are assigned a licens for approval to drive these vehicles and
have a strong license renewal process?
Are employees required to have their license available when operating a PMHV?
Have all pedestrians been trained when working by or with PMHV?
Have employees been trained in safe fueling practices for the vehicles they operate?
Has a systematic approach been used to identify and label all confined spaces?
Does the written plan include procedures for the following:
Performing work in all confined spaces?
Entering confined spaces to perform work?
Issuance of permits to enter confined spaces?
Rescue operations in confined spaces?

Are Permit issuance required for entrance into all confined spaces that require vlaidation and
calibration of any air qulaity analyzer rquired for perfroming the task?
Is there a system in place to actively eliminate confined spaces through engineering or design?
Is an annual review of the confined space entry program conducted and documented?
Have employees who are required to move dies or large objects been trained in safe handling
procedures?
Have employees who are required to perform troubleshooting on machine tools received
training in safe troubleshooting procedures?
Have employees who operate maintenance vehicles received training on the safe operation of
these vehicles?
Have affected employees who are required to climb higher than six feet been trained?
Has all working at heights equipment inspected?
Have all free climbing jobs been identified and evaluated?
How soon after appointment/arrival at the worksite is a general orientation conducted with new
employees?
First Day
Within 3 Days
First Week
Within First Month
Over 1 Month
Are drills conducted regularly to test the emergency notification system and to achieve the best
possible response time for the emergency involved?
Has the facility established a pro-active monthly Safety Process Review Board?
Does the facility have a Leak tag process?
Does the facility have a Danger tag process
Does the facility have a posted safe Dock Procedures process and monitor employees for
complaince to this process
Are Plant floor or work group safety talks conducted:
Daily
Weekly
Every other week
Monthly
Never
Are shop floor employees, Health & Safety Representatives (where applicable) and first level
supervision conducting basic health and saftey risk assessments?
Does the facility have an effective follow-up system in place for corrective actions, which
involves the management team and the Health and Safety Committee?
Has the facility identified and labeled master control devices for major energy sources or utility
controls?
Do you have a system in place with regard to Rules and Work Permits governing employee
work practices and behavior, such as smoking on the job, horseplay, drinks on the floor, etc?
5
3
2
3
2
2
1
1
5
1
5
1
Has the facility designated a person to manage or administer the training process?
The facility completed an annual Training Needs Analyses for all job classifications or functions with input from the
Plant Business Plan, required courses such as safety, environmental and regulatory, and individual departments that
considered 75% o rgreater of the following?
1. Production employees?
2. Skilled Trades employees?
3. Salaried employees?
Has the facility implemented and reviewed a skills profile process for salaried personnel?
75-100% of all departments
Has the facility completed, reviewed and updated a Job Flexability Matrix or database for job classifications and
functions in each department?
Does the facility use a common process for providing job instructions and On the Job Training (OJT) when employee
are tring to complete the flexability matrix?

Has the facility created a Training Plan that includes lean specific (Airbus Production System) tools and behavioral
training and reviewed and personalized it for plant needs?
Has the facility established a Training Plan with the following components:
* Input from all facility areas and support departments?
* Schedule to complete facility training based upon job requirements?
* Forecast of training costs in the annual business plan?
* Concurrence from the facility leadership?
Has facility management authorized resources like the following to support the facility training needs?
Human Resources (instructors, funding)?
Equipment support and training rooms?
Alternative funding sources (training grants etc.)?
Has the facility used training summary reports at least semi-annually to monitor the Training Plan and used the result
of evaluations to make future training decisions?
Is the Training Plan updated as a result of changes to:
Manufacturing processes?
Changes to the business plan?
Training evaluation reports?
New Training Requests?
Training alignments and consolidations?
Does the facility conduct / provide general orientation as well as safety and environmental training for new employees
and contractors prior to their first day on the floor?
Does the facility have a process for identifying the training requirements based upon job requirements for newly hired
or transferred employees that considers Airbus Production System, Production, Health & Safety, Work Groups, Qualit
and Environmental requirements?
Can the facility demonstrate lean specific (Airbus Production System) tools training in all departments on the plant
floor?
Does the facility have a process for satisfying training requests that includes the following:
Formal method of submitting requests?
Process accessible to all employees with concurrence of supervisor?
Verification of the request with a needs analysis when necessary?
Current training requests added to delivery schedule?
New training is added to the training plan and the annual business plan?
Does the facility have a process to qualify company instructors and verify vendor instructors?
For the classes and job instruction offered last year, what percentage of instructors have been qualified/certified?
75-100% of instructors.
Is level one evaluation data (participant reactions) being used to improve courses?
Level one evaluations used to improve 100% of courses.
No level one evaluations conducted.
Has the facility conducted level two evaluations (participant performance) to measure whether or not the learning
objectives have been achieved ?
Level tow evaluations used to measure performance after training in 100% of the courses.
Level two evaluations used to measure performance after training in 75% of courses.
Level two evaluations used to measure performance after training in 50% of the cause
Level two evaluations used to measure performance after training in 25% of courses.
No level two evaluations conducted.
Has the facility conducted level three application evaluations to measure whether or not the learning objectives (skills
have been applied on the job?
Level three evaluations used to measure the application of the learning objectives (skills) to the job in 20% of the courses.
No level three evaluations conducted.
Does the facility measure the results of training linking the learning objectives and Training Plan to improvements in
Airbus Production System Measurables, Manufacturing, Health & Safety, Quality and Environmental data?
Has the designated training person provided feedback to the OCM regarding the application of the Airbus Production
System learning objectives to the job (effectiveness of training) and the results of training?
Does the facility have a Airbus Production System and Health and Saftey training database or process that has the
ability to:
* Contain hourly and salaried employee training records?
* Provide reports sorted by employee name, job function or classification, department or area, and course or OJT title
* Import and export records to other relevant systems?
* Retrieve records in a timely fashion?
* Protect records from damage, deterioration, or loss?
*Generate reports which identify which employees need specific courses?

The appears to be a culture of Telling Lies or misinformation of
the facts when talking with employees
1
The leadership appears to make Prejudiced Decisions Based on
Stereotypes.
1
There appears to be anexciting mix of nationalities, cultures, and
race for creative input
1
It appears that when employee share their ideas they are
negative, and based onhurtful prejudice.
1
The facility appears to have a cultures where everyone is
convince that they have an equal chance to succeed?
1
The conversations with the employees and supervision appeared
to always express a constant pessimism, cool detachment, and
negativity.
1
People enjoy saying and hearing depressing things. Negativity is
sometimes fashionable in the facility.
1
The facility has a overall felling of positive expectations other
than pessimism.
1
The facilities employees seem to Focus on the Facts of a
Situation and not on People’s Beliefs or Perception
1
There appears to be a Confronting uncurrent when dealing with
people.
1
When work goals are vague, people substitute setting vague
performance goals with their own goals or assume that “anything
goes.
Peoples goals appear to be clear, concrete, and challenging.
1
The facility leadership are viewed as being a hypocrite and
statements, and personal behavior are consistent with this
overall view of the facility.
1
You get a sense that employees feel that leadership and front line
supervision makes unnecessary Work Rules.
1
Demotivators such as telling people they can’t decorate their
work space in open office settings or in their work area is
prevalant
3
2
Demotivators such as telling people are not allowed to listen to

music while they work even if it does not interfer with their work.
1
Leadsersip and front line supervisors are seen to have an
opinion of themselves that they are all powerful or are successful
as a person.
1
There appears to be a culture that leadership values listening
carefully until we understand it from their point of view.
1
It appeasr that when people get frustrated they appear to get
angry at everyone and express it forcefully which leads to
demotivation of the work force.
1
The culture of the leadership, front line leadership and hourly
work forace is that of catching people screwing up and pointing it
out to them
5
4
1
Their appears to be a reinforcing culture where leaders, front line
supervisors catch and encourage people to succeed and remind
them of past successes, if they fail
1
Their is a Profit Sharing system in place based on total operating
unit (or total company) performance.
Typically, payments are made based on a pre-determined

profitability target/formula, with individual amounts determined
as a function of base compensation.
1
Stock Options are offered to all levelsa of the organization
toserve as a broad-based performance incentive.
1
Group Piece Rate is a the incentive system in place and rewards
groups for the total production of the group.
5
The facility has a goalsharing plans where group incentive plans

that provide financial pay-outs based on improved performance
in specific areas, as defined by performance metrics.
1
Is their a Continual Improvement operational philosophy that
makes use of the talents within the facility to continually improve
in quality, service and price for our customers in an increasingly
efficient way that protects the return on investment to our
stockholders.
1
5
5
4
1
5
1
5
4
3
1
5
4
3
1
5
2
1
1
5
5
4
3
2
1
Gage Repeatability & Reproducibility are performed for all Lab gages?
Evidence seen in greater than 75% of the plant.
Evidence seen in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Evidence seen in Intial application area or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
Not Done
Gage R & R are performed for all Plant Floor gages?

Not Done
Gage R & R are performed for all Plant Floor Hand Measurement gages?
Gage R & R are performed for all Plant Floor In Process/In Equipment Measurement gages?
Not Done
Is their a study of process area by process area of what gaes have an R& R greater than 20%:
Does the suppliers perform any 100% inspection on all parts received?
Does Airbus get copies of the supplier Gage R&R for all measurement and measurement devices
used for the supplier provided parts?
What percentage of inspections in house are perfromed by attribute gages and is always seen as
conforming or nonconforming to some standard of quality or performance.
How often is their a systematic and independent quality audit of the measurement system to
determine whether quality activities and related results comply with planned arrangements and
whether these arrangements are implemented effectively and are suitable to achieve objectives.
How often is their a systematic and independent quality audit of the measurement system used to
validate the accuracy of maching centers via laser gage inspection to determine whether program
offsets are truly achieving the quality activities and that related results comply with planned
arrangements and are suitable to achieve objectives.
Not Done
How many people are qualifed to perfrom Measurement System Quality Audits in the facility.
How often is a Boundary Sample or Physical piece, which establishes, a sensory standard when
the measurement characteristic is used to define or communicate difficult subjective
measurements wether they are temporary or permanent, and the easliy-visually define the
acceptable measurement limits.
Not Done
How often is calibration or comparison of one measurement system or instrument not verified as
accurate to another standard measurement system or instrument with verified accuracy for hand
measurement devices?
How often is calibration or comparison of one measurement system or instrument not verified as
accurate to another standard measurement system or instrument with verified accuracy for
Machining center accuracy and repeatability?
Not Done
Are their examples of A signed Certificate of Conformance by a responsible thrid party stating that
the maching center, the hand measurement device has met the stated requirements.
Are their plant floor examples of use of Control Plans where written descriptions of the systems
for controlling parts and processes are written to address the important characteristics and
engineering requirements of the product.
Is their evidence that Corrective Actions are being taken to eliminate the causes of an existing
nonconformity, defect or other undesirable situation in order to prevent recurrence. Corrective
actions may involve changes, such as in procedures and systems, to achieve quality improvement
at any stage of the quality process.
Not Done
Does the leadership, mid management and the hourlky workforce have a good understanding of
the Cost of Quality and can point to readly to examples of methods of quantifying and analyzing
financial data that deal with Quality in terms of costs.
Not Done
Is their any evidence by indivdual process area of where the (4) levels of "cost of quality" are
visual shown as being the largest contributor to process probllems such as prevention, appriisals,
internal failure rates, external failure rates?
Not Done
Are their efective examples by process area of Countermeasure Actions taken to resolve problems
and prevent recurrence.
Is their examples of predetermined defect trcacking by process area that identifies the reasons
fornonfulfilment of an intended usage requirement or reasonable expectation of a machine or
measurement device?
Not Done
Does the facility have the authority to establish a new, or change an existing product specification
for any product shipped to a customer or is this only apporved through central corporate offices.
Are their examples of final approval systems where component parts, modules or sub assemblies
show Acknowledgement that the process has provided acceptable quality parts under normal
conditions.
What is the frequency of First Party Audit for Measurement Systems that are audits completed
internally by the organizations own staff.
Is their a sound system in place that shows all gage numbers, location, ceritification dates,
certification source or any other device that can be preceived to be called a (Gauge) because it is a
device used to verify the dimensional integrity of a finished product?.
Not Done
Can plant floor operators and leadership explain if asked if the can define a Gage Repeatability and
Reproducibility (GR&R) as a mathematical study of repeatability and reproducibility showing error
as a percentage of tolerance and/or total variation.
Is their any examples of Histogram graphic representations of frequency distribution displayed as

a vertical bar chart for any process area?
Is their evidence of supplement Inspection Standard to the production drawing,where it contains
information and requirements for organization verification of products that can be easily read and
understood by the line operator.
Was the facility able to introduce the assesor to the Lead Auditor or quality auditor designated to
manage a quality audits.
Are their any plant floor examples of Long Term Process Control or ongoing control of a process
through the use of statistical tools aimed at variation reduction and nominal targeting.
How prevalent is the use of Lot Measurement Control and monitoring performed that adequately
reflects a homogeneous example of material or demisional inspection either manufactured or
received.
What precentage of supplier purchased or vertically integrated manufactured components have
Material Traceability or a lot control system that provided traceability for material from the point of
usage backwards through the manufacturing processes with all material identified.
Can the facility show examples of how they reacted to Minor Nonconformances or rare lapse in a
procedure or requirement of the standard being audited that showed the measurement control
system was not adeqaute or being followed?
Where their easily seen Objective Evidence that was Qualitative or quantitative information,
records or statements of fact pertaining to the quality of an item or service or to the existence and
implementation of a quality system element, which is based on observation, measurement or test
and which can be verified.
When asking leadership or an operator to what a Pareto Chart is, can the describe it as a graphical
tool for ranking causes from the most significant to the least significant.
Not Done
If asked does the leadser or plant floor operator understand the basic principles of a parteo chart
which suggests that most effects come from relatively few causes; that is 80% of the effects come
from 20% of the possible causes. (Also known as the 80/20 Rule)
Are their visual examples or verbal examples that leadership or operators can decribe that shows
that Preventive ActionAction(s) were taken to eliminate the causes of a potential nonconformity,
defect or other undesirable situation in order to prevent occurrence with any aspect of the
organization such as Preventive actions taken on changes, procedures and systems or to achieve
quality improvement at any stage of the quality process.
Could leadership or plant floor operators show examples of Process Audits or onsite evaluations
of a process, for comformance to stated quality criteria or for confirmation or problem solving
purposes.
Rate the overall view of the Quality Assurance system in the facility or planned and systematic
activities implemented within the quality system that demonstrate, as needed, adequate
confidence that an entity will fulfill requirements for quality.
If asked could leadership or plant floor operators show any evidence of the identification and
tracking of Special Causes or explaining that a special cause is a source of variation that is
intermittent, often unpredictable, unstable; sometimes called an assignable cause. It is signaled
by a point beyond the control limits or other non-random pattern of points within the control limits
on a control chart.
Not Done
Are the clamping and locating features of the fixtures used as gages for the representative of the
way the part is used in production?
Are their multiple clamping and locating fixtures used for locating parts in machines that are
measured for conformity of each other so not to reduce additional varaition into processes such
as maching or measurement processes?
If applicable, is the measurement data expressed in plane or position and do the gages comply
with the co-ordinated Cut-planes as defined by product devoplment standard for design cut
planes?
Is their a sound system that identifies all test equipment necessary to complete Process Validation
testing for ongoing production and audit testing that highlights the calibration masters and
locations.
Are all gage instructions available at the location of the gage, no matter where used in the
process?
Not Done
Have all operators who will perform measurements received appropriate training in the operation
of gages andother measurement devices?
Have the upper and lower limits of all 100% in-line gages been adjusted inwards to account for
gage error (%R&R) so that a non-conforming part is never passed?
Are human resource plans driven by the company's strategy to
improve quality; i.e. training, hiring, empowerment, teams, etc.?
5
4
3
2
1
Are the company's human resource strategies related to quality
improvement goals?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization use employee related data to
improvehuman resource management (hiring practices, training,
etc.)?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization promote employee contributions to quality
performance goals?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization give employees the authority and support for
solving problems and making improvements within their work area?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization measure and evaluate the effectiveness of
employee involvement, empowerment, and innovation?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization encourage employee involvement at al levels
and does the organization have key indicators to monitor employee
involvement?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization systematically assess the needs of the
workforce and develop plans for training and education at various
levels and categories of employment?
5
4
3
2
1
Is actual training of the employee reinforced as part of the job and
actually applied to the work area?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization use indicators to assess that training is helping
to improve both the employee and the quality of work within the
respective work area?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the oganization measure employee training by job category?

5
4
3
2
1
Does your performance and recognition system support quality
improvement goals?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization regularly review and improve its compensation,

performance measurement, and recognition programs?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization have evidence and data on employee
recognition programs, such as types of awards, locations, and other
trend information over the last few years?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization continuously work to improve safety,health,
morale, and overall satisfaction of its employees?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization work proactively to develop employee services,
such as day care, car pooling, and other services that enhance
overall employee satisfaction?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization assess and evaluate overall employee
satisfaction?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization have supporting data related to improvements
for employees, such as safety, absenteeism,turnover, grievances,
customer complaints, and other quality factors that demonstrate
employee satisfaction?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization measure data related to customers,
products, supplier performance, financial performance,
and employee performance? Is this data useful and
understandable to decision makers
5
4
3
2
1
How reliable is data to the decision maker and is this data

distributed to decision makers on a timely basis?
5
4
3
2
1
How do you evaluate and improve data management

practices, such as shortening the process cycle and
transforming data into useful information?
5
4
3
2
1
Does your organization use external benchmarks and
competitive data to drive improvements, operating
performance, and planning?
5
4
3
2
1
How extensive is the competitive benchmarking data?

5
4
3
2
1
Is the organization using benchmarking to improve
critical processes,create innovation, and reach planned
targets?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization evaluate and revise the scope and
accuracy of its benchmarking data to improve planning
and improve performance?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization systematically analyze data for
determining customer trends, problems, new
opportunities, and areas for improvement?
5
4
3
2
1
Is there a continuous process of improving data
collection and analysis, such as shortening the cycle
time, making people more productive with better
information, and providing easy access.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization collect key cost, financial,
operating, and other data, translating it into useful
information for employees and other decision makers,
supporting both operating and long-term planning
decisions?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization reduce data collection cycle
times and improve the integrity of data for decision
makers?
5
4
3
2
1
To what extent is senior level management involved in the

company's quality and productivity improvement efforts?
This includes planning, communicating, measuring,
changing, mentoring, etc.
5
4
3
2
1
Is senior level management integrating the values of
quality and continous improvement into everything they
say and do, internally and externally?
5
4
3
2
1
Is senior level management effectively communicating

the company's focus on customer, productivity and
quality to all levels within the organization?
5
4
3
2
1
How effective is senior management in developing and
reviewing their own leadership skills and abilities,
learning to become more personally involved within the
organization?
5
4
3
2
1
Do you have specific guidelines and standards for
holding managers accountable for quality and
productivty increases, including supervisors and others,
designed for different levels and functions within the
company?
5
4
3
2
1
A focus on the customer, productivity and quality are
effectively communicated to all employees within the
company.
5
4
3
2
1
Employees have regular training and support to reduce
errors and improve quality, including comparisons to
planned improvements.
5
4
3
2
1
How effective are managers and supervisors at
reinforcing the customer focus and quality values
amongst employees? Are managers and supervisors
evaluated on this reinforcement?
5
4
3
2
1
The organization has strongly integrated ethics, public

responsibility, environmental protection, and safety into
its business practices.
5
4
3
2
1
The organization plans ahead to consider the reaction
and impact a product or service may have on the local
community, environment, and human safety.
5
4
3
2
1
The organization is considered a leading corporate
citizen within its local community.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization have evidence, such as trend data,
to clearly show that it is addressing social issues and is
actively involved in community services, education,
environmental protection, health care, and other public
quality programs?
5
4
3
2
1
How is overall planning integrated into lower level
planning at business unit levels and department levels for
short term and long term decisions?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization re-align or re-engineer a process to

make sure it fits with strategies for work performance?
5
4
3
2
1
Strategic plans are deployed throughout the entire
company.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the strategic planning process evaluated and improved
on a regular basis?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the company have major quality and productivty

improvement goals and objectives within its strategy?
5
4
3
2
1
How effective is the company at sharing and deploying its

short term goals with employees, suppliers, and others
who have to execute on the strategy?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization's long term goals relate to
improving quality and productivity?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the organization project out benefits from long
term and short term planning? How does this compare to
key benchmarks?
5
4
3
2
1
People:
The attitudes & behaviors exhibited by the employees of the company and their desire
for change, as well as the emphasis placed on continuous improvement by the
organization
Management Style
5
Plant management offices are located on the shop floor
5
Annual survey results yield action plans, at all levels, to solve issues
5 There are several plant annual meetings with direct communication to entire staff
5
Plant management spends as much time on the floor as in office
Plant management spends more than 30% of time on the shop floor confirming real
4
performance of the plant
4
Open door policy
Information is delivered to the full staff daily (communiqués, TV, through hierarchical
4
channels)
4
Team leaders and supervisors are located on production line
4
There is a plant annual survey to capture staff opinion
4
There is at least one annual overall plant meeting with direct communication to entire staff
4
There are at least 8 people reporting to a manager at each level
3
There is a daily plant management meeting on the floor to review production issues
3
There is a monthly gathering and communication to plant management of all levels
3
Plant management carries out shop floor audits weekly
Management attends weekly performance reviews to check progress of improvement
3
working groups directly with team members (weekly rotation to review all groups)
All employees receive specific & formal feedback on their performance at least once a
3
year
Ratio of people reporting per manager at each level is measured and targets have been
3
set
2
Plant Management practice monthly audits on the shop floor
2
Direct communication to employees mainly through written communiqués
2
Management perception of plant performance primarily based on figures & reports
2
All managers receive specific & formal feedback on their performance at least once a year
Plant management unaware of conditions on the shop floor, meet only in meeting rooms,
1
few visits to the shop floor (less than 10% of time spent on the floor)
1
Shop floor performance based on financial reports only
Coordination and Communication
Production Unit Manager has hierarchical control of support resources which give him full
5
command to achieve its performance objectives
5
All functional objectives are clearly linked to operational goals
Pre-shift and handover meetings in production are cross functional, involving indirect
4
functions like maintenance, logistics, engineering and quality
4
Support functions are located a few meters from assembly line
3 There are standardized meetings between team leaders at hand over of shifts
There is a communication of team leader to operators at the beginning of the shift but
3
there is also a end of shift handover from operators to team leader
Plant management meetings are all scheduled and coordinated, except for exceptional
3
emergency situations
There is a daily plant management meeting (cross functional) on the floor to review
3
production issues
3
Support functions are located within the same building as production
3
Support function team members are clearly identified on team display panel
2
There are hand over meetings between team leaders at hand over of shifts
2
Team leader communicates to team at the beginning of the shift to plan work
2
These communications have no standardized content
There are scheduled weekly cross functional meetings at plant level (plant management
meetings). Other meetings are planned monthly on specific topics (quality, HR,
2
performance …)
1
No cross functional meetings or team meetings at beginning or hand over of shifts.
1 The plant manager runs ad-hoc sessions with plant staff, which are often ill attended and
do typically not lead to actions that are cascaded down to the shop floor
Improvement and Change Readiness
5
Most employees are involved in some improvement initiative
Improvement activities are not necessarily driven by senior or staff functions, but are
5
frequently initiated and completed by directly involved employees
Each team defines its improvement targets in line with directions and targets decided at
4
plant level
All support services have translated plant improvement plan into specific improvement
4
actions, customer oriented towards production
4 Teams have incentives on performance improvement
4
Top management pushes managers to use improvement resources
4
A majority of staff takes part in improvement working groups or in the suggestion plan
Improvement activities are visually documented on the shop floor and in all support
4
services (making it possible for visitors to understand content and status)
There are regular reviews of improvement plan status (all action plans are reviewed at
4
least 4 times a year)
4
1% empowered and full-time resources dedicated to working on improvement
4
A plant unique database of issues tracks status of all problems
3
The annual improvement plan & targets are cascaded from plant to team level
Top management clearly supports improvement initiatives with communication, finances,
3
personal, time investment and physical presence
3 All Managers down to team leaders have incentives on performance improvement
3
There are clear metrics to measure improvement action plan progress and efficiency
There is a suggestion plan (improvement ideas) to which incentives are attached (can be
3
recognition).
3
At least 25% of staff takes part in suggestions or improvement initiatives
3
.5% empowered and full-time resources are dedicated to management of improvement
Improvement plan is in place (goals, action plan, metrics) but it lacks the “tie-in” to an
2
integrated business plan
2
All senior managers have incentives on performance improvement
An employee suggestion program is in place but very few people take part in it because of
2
little/slow action taken on submitted suggestions and lack of incentive
2
Resources are extremely difficult to get assigned to improvement initiatives
1
Little or no connection between company goals and shop floor activities
1
Employees do not understand how they can support the company objectives
There are few improvement activities involving team members and there is no formal
1
improvement organization
1
Upper management/ support-staff focus is on large-scale operations
Relations with Trade Unions

There is a very strong alignment between unions and management on values and
5
priorities
5
Modernization initiatives arise from any of both parties
Even if there is no formal requirements, workers are represented in major decision making
4
bodies and/or meetings
4
Plant agreements are signed regularly with a large majority of unions
4
Variable incentives are accepted at team level
Communication between management and unions is fluid although objectives are not
3
shared.
3
Time, motion analysis, videoing in the shop floor is accepted
3
Variable incentives are accepted at plant level
3 Plant agreement proposals may integrate input from the unions before going on decision
3
Agreement can be reached on some topics with a majority of unions
2
There is an open door policy at senior management level
2
There are regular meetings between plant management and unions
2
Agreement can be reached on some topics with some unions
Highly antagonistic relations with union representatives. Discussion between unions and
1
plant management is very difficult
Performance Management
Value added analysis is performed for any task including engineering, maintenance ,
5
quality …
Optimum density of workers has been thoroughly studied and implemented in all
5
production stations (ideally optimum number of workers is visually indicated on station)
4
Actual performance of line can be understood by any visitor (visually)
Team leader takes immediate corrective action in case of drift in relation to production
4
target
4
Plant management clearly understands where waste occurs in each of the processes
Every year, different areas in the plant are completely re analyzed in depth to look for
maximal productivity (time reviews, value added analysis, motion analysis…) in a
4
consistent manner so that the complete plant is covered within a few years
4
Some productivity has been done on each of the stations during the last 12 months
4
There are KPIs on the utilization of support resources (including engineering)
There is a productivity plan and annual targets for all support services and these targets
4
are achieved
4
Team incentives are attached to performance KPIs
Actual line or cell performance is known at the end of the shift and corrective measures
3
are taken
Thorough process mapping is sporadically done and produces some results but there is
3
no systematic coverage of the complete production area
Utilization of direct production operators is controlled at team level and displayed on team
3
panel
3
Annual productivity plan targets are achieved
3
Standardized break times are established
There are some utilization measures of production staff at plant level (% workload vs.
2
workforce)
Actual line or cell performance is known at the end of the shift but no corrective measure is
2
taken
2 The annual productivity target is cascaded to production unit in a top down approach
2
If a clocking system is in place, workers clock working time close to their station
1 Utilization of direct and indirect staff is not known quantitatively
1
There is an annual productivity target at plant level, but it is regularly not met
Emergency and Safety
A specific operator per operator risk analysis has been carried out and adequate
5 measures taken
Knowledge and experience in safety and emergency drills are shared with other
5 companies in the area to benchmark and learn from each other
Minimal recordable incidents, the plant is benchmarked by other industries for its good
5 results
5 Plant was granted a safety award by external organization

Employees report accidents and incidents that occur at home or away from the office. The
5 site tracks accident rates for "off the job" (e.g. at home) accidents
4
Procedures are reviewed at least once a year or when conditions change
A safety improvement plan has been deployed to each team and management audits
4
teams’ risk analysis and safety improvement plan progress
Based on a global database, accidents are analyzed by category and location and specific
4
measures are taken to curb them within a PDCA approach
4
All staff receive incentive, attached to plant & team safety results
When entering a business area, large displays of how many days elapsed without an
4
accident is visible
Safety equipment requirements have been defined for each station and are incorporated
3
to SOP instructions, visible to any visitor
3
Safety rules are respected
3
Plant management carries out safety audits to check safety compliance
3 Safety rules are communicated to visitors and enforced
3
Safety is part of plant KPIs
There are emergency procedures for all foreseeable incidents, and they are available
3
throughout the site
Key employees are trained in emergency response. They are displayed on team
3
communication panel
3 Location and nature of accidents are recorded in a comprehensive database
3
Accidents are recorded at the team level and displayed on team panel
3
Most severe accidents are treated in a PDCA approach
2
There are emergency procedures for main risks of accidents
2
Accidents, incidents are recorded and integrated into KPI
2
There is a one time basic safety training for new hires and contractors
2
There are clear safety rules
2
There is a well identified walkway across the plant
2
Management abides by safety rules
1 There are no documented emergency procedures.
1
High level of recordable incidents for the industry
1
Only significant incidents are recorded
1
No safety training given
1
Basic trends are analyzed but information is not used effectively
How is Absence and Overtime Record information tracked and maintained:

5
Can Hr show Job Descriptions and Responsibilities for all employees

5
3
2
Do Organisation Charts (Departmental) exisit for all areas of the plant

5
4
How much time is a;lloted for employyes to see Overtime Reports and Requests
5
2
1
There is a designated champion for Continuous Improvement in the plant

with the necessary resources, organisation and infrastructure in place. (In
sites of <100 employees CI champion may be not be dedicated)
CI Champion role has been established for at least 24 months. Has a deep
5 understanding of lean application and staff working directly in support of CI under
his/her direction
4 As above but with a direct reporting structure to the Plant manager
CI Champion role established. Has working knowledge of lean techniques and
3 evidence of achievements in this role, but has no direct reporting structure to the
Plant manager
CI Champion nominated, but no deep understanding of lean application
2
techniques in the work place
1 No CI champion
Employees have been trained in CI methods and have an understanding of
lean manufacturing.Verify the score for this question by asking a cross
section of employees to see if they understand the concepts of Waste, Non
Value Add, Value Add etc.
All operators display a full and implicit knowledge of lean application tools to
5
eliminate waste
Employees have a good understanding of lean manufacturing and waste
4 identification. They should display an awareness of some of the lean tools, such
as Poka yoke, quick change over, etc
Employees understand the concepts of lean manufacturing and can differentiate
3
between waste / NVA / VA etc
Employees have a basic awareness of lean manufacturing techniques and
2
philosophy
1 No understanding of lean manufacturing
Continuous Improvement projects are structured, planned and time bound
with milestones.
All CI projects are subject to a detailed planning methodology with detailed input
from the work group, and there is evidence to show very little time slippage from
5 original milestones. All CI projects are roadmaped for the people to follow for the
overall plan and the indivdual process areas.
4 All CI projects are planned with detailed input from the work group only
CI projects have a planning methodology to drive the successful implementation,
3 but much of the planning is performed by the supervisor or process engineer
CI projects have some basic form of planning, but do not detail responsibility
2
and/or timing for the required actions
1 No CI projects evident, either historically or at present
There are processes in place to solicit the ideas from the work groups /
employees, and recognise the success of the activities conducted by the
work group employees is;
Over 80% of all CI projects emanate from the shop floor and are completed in a
5 timely manner. Communication systems are in place to show the workgroup the
timing of the improvement
At least 60% of all CI projects are raised by the production employees or work
4 groups. Evidence to prove that the majority of the ideas are implemented in a
timely manner
At least 40% of all CI projects are raised by the production employees or work
3
groups
Formalised suggestion scheme in place, but many of the suggestions have not
2 been completed in a timely manner. (Many ideas have not been implemented)
1 No formal reward or recognition system in place

The results of CI activities are cascaded effectively to all similar processes
throughout the plant.
The project planning , roadmapping an area lean maturity matrix process
5 encompasses replication of the improvement across the factory. There is
evidence to support that this is happening with all CI projects
Project progress across the factory is coordinated by the CI champion and
4 reviewed regularly by the Plant manager. Basic standards exist for visual
management, 5S, etc
The CI champion arranges coordination and replication across the factory. Basic
3
standards exist for visual management, 5S, etc
2 Projects are replication in the factory in an ad-hoc and informal manner
1 No evidence of extrapolation
Continuous Improvement has been rolled out beyond the boundaries of the
shopfloor
CI has moved into the supply chain with a dedicated team for non-plant support
5
(eg: suppliers, customers…)
As above but CI is well established in all functions with direct support for the CI
4
champion
CI introduced to non-manufacturing areas which do not directly support the
3
shopfloor (finance, sales/marketing, etc)
2 CI rolled out to direct support functions to production
1 CI still only focused on shopfloor opportunities
The Plant has developed a lean strategy that ties into their current policy
deployment plan and has key milestones and deliverables.
Policy deployment in place with direct link to lean strategy, complete with key
5
milestones and progress charted
4 Policy deployment plan and lean plans exist but independent
3 Policy deployment plan in place but no lean plans exist
2 No policy deployment plan but an outline lean plan in place
1 No policy deployment or lean plans exist
Plant Management communicates organisational objectives with all

employees and gives feedback on employee satisfaction survey at least
twice per year with opportunity to discuss employee satisfaction.
CEO/Plant Manager personally addresses all employees at least twice per year
5 on employee satisfaction & organisational objectives; a corrective action plan is
in place (with action tracked)
CEO/Plant Manager personally addresses all employees twice per year on
4 employee satisfaction & organisational objectives and uses briefing structure to
debrief throughout the year
Employees are debriefed through a formal structure (such as cascade) that is
3
consistent across the plant and timely
Employees are debriefed informally, ad-hoc structure or at varying times between
2
departments
1 No communications with shop floor
Employees are able to accurately describe what are the company's

objectives and how their job help the company to achieve those objectives
Know the objectives fully, know exactly how their work contributes, and also
5
know where the company is against those objectives
4 Can generally describe the objectives and understands how their job contributes
Aware of the objectives, know where to find them and has some idea of how they
3
personally contribute
2 Have some idea of the objectives but personal contribution unclear
1 No idea of the objectives
Employees at every level are empowered to work in groups to address
improvements in all aspects of the business (Quality, Cost, Delivery,
Improvement, Safety, Morale, Environment)
Employees are given the opportunity to pull together self managed teams and
5
allowed time, facilities and support in the delivery of improvements
Cross-functional, multi level teams are commonplace but tend to be run by team
4
leaders or higher level with little operator involvement
3 Teams are organised but tend not to include shopfloor personnel
2 Group activities infrequent or historical but not very active
1 No group activities exist now or previously
Senior management team has been trained in lean manufacturing and are
active in its deployment
Managers are very proficient in lean principles and assist in training, in addition
5
to taking part in workgroups
4 All managers have been trained and actively support group activities from time to time
3 All managers have been trained and have goals aligned to lean
2 All managers have been trained in lean concepts
1 No lean training has taken place at management level at all
Production technical support and support staff routinely go to the

shopfloor to assess actual situation and talk to the production workers
Production technical support and support staff are often at the workplace
5 checking that everything is running well and to assist improvement potential with
the production workers.
Production technical support and support staff occasionally attend but usually
4
after a problem has been raised or recognised
Production technical support and support staff will attend but only when
3
requested for assistance
Since installation, production engineers only ever seen in machine breakdown
2
situations
Production technical support and support staff never seen except during new
1
machine installation
There is good effective communication between production shifts in the
plant
Operators shifts overlap such that structured communication always occurs at all
5 levels between shifts; important information is always logged and/or shown on
local board
Log books are used but team leaders or supervisors also have a verbal handover
4
(where shifts overlap)
3 All communication occurs by means of log books or written records
Informal systems are in place but are different between departments and/or
2
process lines
1 No communication structure exists
Operators can stop the line when a defective unit is found or when they
cannot complete their process according to the SOP
5 As above, stop the line action is detailed specifically in the SOP
Operators can stop the line at any time for defective products or SOP issues and
4
put corrective actions in place
3 Operators can stop the line but only after they have informed their immediate
supervisor; they must continue working until the supervisor arrives
Operators cannot stop the line but defective products may be asided until the
2
supervisor arrives
1 Operators have no authority to stop the line
What is the organization type?
5 Exploitive
4 Bureaucratic
3 Consultive
2 Participative
1 Highly Participative
How are workers on the factory floor compensated?
5 Individual Incentive
4 Hourly Wage
3 Group Incentive
2 Salary
1 Salary+Annual Bonus
To what extent do people have job security?
5 Layoffs Are Rare
4
3 Transfers & Retraining Reduce Layoffs
2
1 Layoffs Every Year
What is the annual personnel turnover
5 0%-2%
4 3%-6%
3 7%-11%
2 14%-30%
1 31%+
What percentage of personnel (ALL Personnel) have received at least eight
hours of teambuilding training?
5 91%-100%
4 31%-90%
3 11%-30%
2 6%-10%
1 <5%
What percentage of personnel are active members of formal work teams, quality
teams, or problem-solving teams?
91%-100%
31%-90%
11%-30%
6%-10%
<5%
Has the plant's Current State Mapping process covered or exisit for All
processes on the plant floor and business support processes?
5 91%-100%
4 31%-90%
3 11%-30%
2 6%-10%
1 <5%
Has the plant's Future State Mapping process covered or exisit for All
processes on the plant floor and business support processes?
5 91%-100%
4 31%-90%
3 11%-30%
2 6%-10%
1 <5%
Is their any evidence of the Development, verification, and use of the
Application Area Current State Map.
5
4
3
2
1
Is their any evidence of the Collection and use of the baseline Air Bus
production System measurables in any Lean Application Area.
5
4
3
2
1
Is their any evidence of the Development, verification, and use of the
Application Area Future State Map.
5
4
3
2
1
Are their any examples of identify opportunities between Current and
Future State Maps (Gap Analysis).
5
4
3
2
1
Does the plant's process for developing objectives include the following
Policy deployment of goals and objectives?
5
4
3
2
1
Examples of translation of corporate key business objectives or Indicators
KPI into measurable plant performance actions.
5
4
3
2
1
Review of workgroup or individual performance relative to these plant
performance actions occurs on a daily basis.
5
4
3
2
1
Has your plant implemented Policy Deployment plant wide (including
support areas) as a method for developing, aligning, and communicating
objectives, including he Airbus Production System
5
4
3
2
1
Air Bus Lean Production System Objectives cascaded/communicated;
minimal/no evidence of involvement of respective organization levels in
developing objectives.
5
4
3
2
1
To all levels of management, with Superintendents/Team Managers are
participating in setting their aligned Airbus Production System Lean objectives.
5
4
3
2
1
Has your plant developed a Plant Specific Implementation Plan (PSIP),
roadmap and/or roll-out plan for Airbus Production System
implementation?
5
4
3
2
1
The plant can demonstrate compliance with all aspects of their published
PSIP and or deployment roadmap?
5
4
3
2
1
The the Airbus Lean Deployment Plan includes provisions for migration
from non standard IT applications and/or associated deviations or what
ever is required to insure optimal process flow.
5
4
3
2
1
What has been the scope of personnel involved in the ongoing

improvement planning process?
Plant's senior management and union leadership (Plant Manager, direct reports,
5
and union leadership)
Involvement from senior management and/or plant implementation team only.
4
3 Involvement from middle management .
2
1 Involvement from Work Groups
Who are the primary drivers for Airbus Production System implementation
in your plant?
5 Work groups drive the continuous improvement process.
4 Mid-level management as Element champions - coaches/instructors, etc.
3 Operating Committee as Element champions - coaches/instructors, etc.
2
Plant Implementation Team with Steering committee identified and functioning as
1
support group.
What kind of activities does your plant's senior management perform to get
involved and support Airbus Production System implementation (including
H&S and Environmental)?
Ensure empowerment of work groups and Teach philosophy and disciplines..

5
4 Understand FPS measurables and Focus on elimination of waste..
3 Provide recognition and Encourage union leadership to participate.
2 Provide guidance and support.
1 Conduct visits to the floor and Attend team meetings.
What kind of training has the plant's senior management received
regarding the Airbus Production System?
5 Boot camp or equivalent.
4 Change management.
3 Stability Workshop on processes/tools.
2 MeasurablesTraining
1 Workshop.
How has the plant's senior management prepared middle management &
supervision for the work group based organization?
Senior management has completed preparation of all mid level management for
5
the work group based organization
Senior management has begun to preparation (e.g., through meetings, mid-level
4 management survey, training sessions etc.) for the work group based
organization.
Minimal evidence of preparation for the change to a work group based
3
organization.
2
1
What kinds of activities does your plant's union leadership perform to get
involved and support Airbus implementation?
1 Workshop.
What kind of training has the plant's union leadership received regarding
the Airbus Production System?
1 Workshop.
What kind of training have Plant supervision & Middle management
received regarding the Airbus Production System?
1 Workshop.
What approach to empowerment is being used at the plant, i.e., how are
leaders expected to encourage and support a more empowered
organization?
Specific plan, with a well defined approach in place which involves plant
5
leadership; includes analysis, action plans, implementation, and follow-up
4 Specific objectives exist, with positive results
3 Specific objectives exist
2 Based on individual approaches, but not structured
1 Minimal evidence
How does the plant measure salaried employees "team working"
behaviors?
5
4
3
2
1
Has PULSE (plant-wide salaried) survey been utilized to get employee's
opionions on adherence to productity and quality goals?
5 Responded by plant wide.
4 Responded by greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
3 Responded by greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
2 Responded by greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Responded by less than or equal to 25 % of the plant or no plant survey is
1
perfromed.
How is the PULSE survey used as a tool by plant leadership to understand
and improve employees' opinions?
5
4
3
2
1
Are PULSE surveys been administered on a timely basis or is their little or
no evidence that leadership is using the results as an improvement tool.
5
4
3
2
1
Does management actively recognize contributions to the business by
employees?
Process developed, implemented, aligned with Airbus Lean Measurables, and
5
reinforces continuous improvement.
Process developed, implemented, and aligned with Airbus Lean Measurables.
4
3 Recognition is actively performed by all levels of the organization.
2 Recognition is actively performed by management.
1 Recognition is delegated.
Has the plant developed a positive, non-monetary recognition process for
all employees?
Implementation structure meets regularly, provides strong leadership and
5
direction.
4 Implementation structure meets regularly.
3 Implementation structure in place with appropriate membership.
2 Structure, Roles/Responsibilities, and boundaries
1 Process developed, implemented.
Are specific roles in place to support implementation of the Airbus
Production System, including Health & Safety and Environmental?
5
4
3
2
1
Is the plant's organization structured to effectively support Airbus
Production System work groups?
Evidence demonstrates that work group based organization structure is in place
5
AND is effectively using/supporting Airbus Lean work groups.
4 Work group based organization structure in place.
Plant has begun implementation of a work group based organization structure.
3
2 Partially; work group based organization plan identified.
1 No Work group exisit
Are the plant's support activities structured for or aligned with Airbus
Production system implementation?
Roles and responsibilities are comprehensive, living documents; integrated and
5
utilized throughout the organization.
Roles and responsibilities documented, with evidence of communication and
4
understanding.
3 Strong alignment and involvement from support activities
2 Some involvement from support activities.
1 No Evidence of Support
Does the work group organization/plan include defined roles and
responsibilities for all levels of management consistent with those of the
work groups?
5 Roles and responsibilities documented.
4 Roles and responsibilities partially complete.
3
2
1
Has the facility developed a communications process and plan to provide
employees with general information about the Airbus Production System?
Communications process continuously reviewed and updated with identified

5
improvements.
Communications process is reviewed for adequacy & use of appropriate media.
4
3 Communications process rolled out.
2 Communications process rolled out, but not effective.
1 No cummication system in place.
Has the plant-wide Air Bus Production System measurables process been
implemented to collect, analyze and report measurables for plant end-item
products?
5 Implemented for all end item products in plant.
4
3 Implemented for at least one end-item product in the plant.
2
1 No evidence of measureable system in place
Are the Airbus Lean Production System Measurables utlizing Information
Technology (IT) Enablers used to collect, analyze and report the these
Measurables?
Using Airbus production System IT Enablers to process Plant-wide and all
5 Application Area Measurables or deviations may exist and migration plans are in
place.
4
There is a process for gathering plant-wide measurables and the plant has
3
identified a plan to incorporate IT enablers.
2
1
Do the Airbus Production System Plant-wide Measurables for end-item
products demonstrate stability and/or continuing improvement toward
objectives over time?
5
4
3
2
1
Is relevant Airbus Production System measurable information made
available to employees?
5
4
3
2
1
What is the focus of measurables analyses at Plant management reviews?
Airbus Production System trends and related Airbus Production System

5
implementation progress.
4 Above + Airbus Production System Measurables over time.
3 Above + Airbus Production System Measurables results.
2
1 Traditional business metrics only.
Are relevant Airbus Production System measurables used in the plant
Application Areas?
Exist plant wide.
Exist in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant.
Exist in less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
Exist in IAA only.
No evidence that measureables are in work group application areas.
Do Application Area Airbus Production System measurables exisit for Total
Cost for Application Areas?
5
4
3
2
1
Can the Application Area personnel explain how the Airbus Production
System Measurables are being used to eliminate waste and implement
Airbus Production System objectives in their work Area?
5 Plant wide.
4 Yes in more than 50% plant.
3 Yes In less than or equal to 50% of the plant.
2 Yes in IAA only.
1 No evidence of knowledge of production system measureables
Does the plant implement and manage Information Technology efficiently,
utilizing standards wherever possible?
5
4
3
2
1
Are Airbus Production System Measurables applied in the IT area of the
organization. Is 5S evident in the file management sturcture and public
share drives.
5
4
3
2
1
FPS sub-process, which require Information Technology are supported by IT
Enablers or manual alternatives. Deviations are in place for non-standard
solutions.
IT Enablers are routinely used plant-wide. Non-standard systems have been
eliminated or have a definite retirement plan.
Does the plant effectively use the Ford Intranet technology to access FPS
communications, documentation, training material and to communicate FPS
Issues?
The FPS Coordinator has direct access to the Ford Intranet and uses it to obtain
up-to-date FPS materials.
The Ford Intranet is routinely used by the Plant Implementation Teams to ensure
up-to-date FPS information is obtained and to access FPS Issues.
Ford Intranet is widely available and routinely used throughout the plant to obtain
up-to-date FPS information and access FPS Issues.
All local web sites must comply with the Center of Excellence for Web
Technology.
Plant's local web site meets standards, but the site is not well understood or
used in the facility.
Plant has local web site that meets standards and is effectively used.
ISO requirements
All ISO internal assessments results are reviewed routinely at senior
management meetings.
Manage the change
Does the plant's manage the change process cover the following aspects?
Product changes?
Process changes?
Supplier changes?
Safety & environmental related changes?
Does the plant have a defined/documented plant-specific procedure's) to
document, communicate, validate, and implement "significant" manufacturing
product, process, safety and environmental related changes such as those
received from the following?
Production Engineering
In-facility activity
Suppliers
Loss Control review
Hazard identification reviews
Ergonomic concerns
Environmental reviews
Facilities engineering
Has a manage the change process been implemented to cover the following
aspects?
All support documents are reviewed and updated as a result of change approval
All changes are documented and approved by appropriate personnel prior to

implementation of change
Any retraining is completed prior to implementation
Effectiveness of changes is ensured
Product tests are identified and completed
Manage the change process is reviewed for enhancements
Problem solving and continuous improvement
Does the plant have a structured problem solving method?
Does the plant utilize their problem solving method?
Utilized in IAA
Utilized in less than or equal to 25% of the plant
Utilized in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the plant
Utilized in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the plant
Utilized in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant
Utilized plant wide
Do affected employees provide input prior to the implementation of corrective
action plans?
Lessons learned and best practices
Is there a process to capture and communicate Lessons Learned and Best
Practices?
The plant does not have access to the corporate system, but has a plant specific
Lessons Learned and Best Practice process
The corporate Lesson Learned and Best Practice processes are used (additional
plant methods may be used as well)
Is there evidence that Lessons Learned / Best Practices are used in planning for
new projects / improvements?
Are the Lessons Learned and Best Practices shared?
Examples of sharing of internal LL & BP are available.
Examples of sharing of internal & external LL & BP are available.
OH & S Requirements
Are all levels of leadership conducting a safety walk at least monthly?
How well do leadership demonstrate 'Safety by Example?
Leadership behavior is frequently unsafe and provides a poor example.
Most, but not all leaders are modeling correct behaviors.
Leadership model all appropriate behaviors consistently.
Behavior Management
How strong is the evidence for the lack of tolerance for unsafe behaviors?
No evidence.
Activity in some but not all areas.
Consistent practice.
What is the use of positive reinforcement and recognition with in the operation?
No activity.
Pockets of good practice but not all areas.
Consistent practice.
Do all regular operating management meetings contain safety as a standing
(first) agenda item?
Is there a credible OH&S improvement plan with OH&S objectives established
for operation?
No plan exists.
A published plan with objectives exists.
There is organizational awareness of the plan.
Are OH&S objectives effectively cascaded through the performance
management process?
No cascade.
Cascaded to LL5.
Cascaded to LL6.
Cascaded to GSR.
Cascaded to workgroups.
Is the level of budgetary & human resources allocated to health and safety
improvement adequate?
How effectively are employees and work groups involved in safety improvement?
No participation.
Some participation.
Optimal participation.
Is there a safety review board/safety committee with active joint leadership?
None exists.
Fully supported with meeting minutes.
How extensive are plant communication efforts on OH&S?
None.
Audits are undertaken periodically.
Audits are regularly and effectives conducted.
Does the operation have an effective internal audit process for OH&S
management systems?
No process exists.
Audits are undertaken periodically.
Audits are regularly and effectively conducted.
Is there adequate management training and role clarity for OH&S?
None exists.
Roles are clear with training completed.
Value Stream Mapping
Development of the Value Stream Map.
A Value Stream Champion has been identified and is responsible to maintain and
lead the overall improvement of the value stream (both the Product and the
Information flow).
A cross-functional team from both hourly and salaried personnel has been
formed and jointly developed the Current State VSM and Future State VSM.
The Value Stream improvement objectives have been clearly defined.
Is an implementation process in place to prioritize, review, and improve the
actions to further drive the Wastes out of the Value Stream and achieve the
Future State?
Regular meetings address the Value Stream improvement.
FPS measurables are utilized to continuously track the improvements of value
stream over time.
Current State VSM, Future State VSM, FPS measurables, and action plan are
posted on the shop floor to communicate with personnel.
How does the Plant utilize the Value Stream Map (VSM)?
The VSM is used to focus on the Constraint(s) identification and improvements.
The Plant's FPS Plant Specific Implementation Plan (PSIP) is continuously

revised to further improve the flow fo the Value Stream.
The Plant has developed a VSM of its major product lines(s) with its customer(s)
and suppliers.
How does the Plant manage the customer Demand Rate?
The Plant is building products(s) according to current production schedule.
The Plant has identified Customer Demand Rate for major product line(s).
The Plant is building product(s) according to Customer Demand Rate.
The Plant uses appropriate mechanisms to demonstrate the pace of Customer
Demand Rate to the production personnel.
Where in the manufacturing process does the production schedule information
trigger the production?
More than one place.
More than one place, but there is evidence of a reduction in the number of
triggers for production.
Single location (to the most upstream point where material can flow).
Is the leadership structure, e.g., plant Steering Committee, in place (involves
union leadership where applicable)?
Implementation structure in place
Structure includes appropriate membership
Steering Committee meets regularly, i.e., minimum of 2-times per month
Steering Committee provides visible leadership to launch FPS and work groups;
generally IAA focused
Steering Committee provides visible leadership to expand FPS and work groups
beyond IAA, consistent with plant's implementation expansion plan.
Visible evidence exists that Steering Committee is providing strong leadership
and direction for the work groups and the overall FPS process plant wide.
Does the plant use a issues-resolution process that provides Work Groups an
avenue to get assistance with issues/concerns that cannot be resolved at the
Work Group level?
No process is apparent.
Informal process followed, e.g., activities evident, however it is not presently a
written procedure.
Written process in place which enables Work Groups to raise issues from one
level to the next, beginning with the supervisor/committee person, and ultimately
to the Steering Committee.
Clear evidence that process in place & utilized, that enables WGs to raise issues
from one level to the next, beginning with the supervisor/committee person, &
ultimately to the Steering Committee. WG members use the process & there is
evidence that problems/concerns have been resolved.
What is the plant’s plan for the Work Group structure (e.g., purpose, size,
geography, reporting relationships, roles and responsibilities, boundaries,
meetings frequency, etc.)?
Select all statements below which apply.
Steering Committee has a documented plan
Steering Committee has a documented plan and is implementing it.
Steering Committee has a documented plan. It is being implemented and there
is evidence that all plant personnel clearly are aware of and understand the
reason for Work Groups and their role in support of the work groups.
Clear understanding by all Supervisors (I.e., those having work groups in their
areas) of the work group vision and their role in support of the work groups.
Clear understanding by all persons in Work Groups of the purpose for work
groups and their roles as work group members.
Does the plant have a Work Group implementation / expansion plan, consistent
with the FPS expansion plan, with criteria and timing, and plan on how support
activities and management will be aligned to provide support for work groups?
Is local mid-level management (I.e., Supervisors / Superintendents) aligned to

provide needed support to the work groups, where they exist?
No/minimal evidence of support and alignment.
There is some evidence that Supervisors/Superintendents are aligned to provide
support to the work groups, where they exist?
There is strong evidence (e.g. documented process, meeting attendance,
meeting support, operator's descriptions, evidence of work groups focus on
continuous improvements in business results and the elimination of waste, etc.)
that Supervisors / Superintendents are aligned and strong support the work
groups.
Are support activities (e.g., maintenance/skilled trades, engineering, and other
staff offices, etc.) included in or aligned with Work Groups to provide needed
support to Work Groups?
No/minimal evidence of involvement and alignment exists.
There is some evidence that maintenance / skilled trades, engineering and other
functions are providing support to the work groups (where they exist)
There is strong evidence (e.g., documented process, meeting attendance,
meeting support, regular work group member, production operators' descriptions,
evidence that work groups focus on continuous improvements in business results
and the elimination of waste, etc.) that maintenance / skilled trades, engineering
and other supporting function are aligned or involved, and strongly support the
work groups (where they exist).
Have regular Work Group meetings been established on a plant wide basis?
Work groups established in IAA
No/limited action in this regard
Preparation for establishing Work Group base organization complete, but Work
Groups have not been established formally
Work Groups meetings established in the IAA
Assign the following points recognizing the expansion of regular shop-floor Work
Group meetings:
- Meetings focus on business issues (I.e., focus on continuous improvements in
business results and the elimination of waste), and
- There is evidence of strong organizational support for the work groups as

outlined in 8.2.3 and 8.2.4.
Calculate points by multiplying 340 (100%) times the percentage of operators /

employees regularly attending work groups meeting which meet this definition.
(See Assessor Instructions)
20% of operators / employees in work groups.

Has the plant developed a positive, non-monetary recognition process for Work
Groups and Work Group members?
No
Process/plan developed, or activities evident
Process/plan developed and implemented
Process/plan aligned with and supporting FPS
Process/plan reinforces continuous improvement and uses FPS measurables
What steps have been taken to ensure that internal (where appropriate) trainers
are qualified to deliver requisite training to plant personnel?
No trainers identified
Trainers identified
Trainers identified and trained/certified to deliver work group core skills training
programs
What steps have been taken to ensure all new hires (Hourly and Salaried)
receive FPS, and specifically, work group awareness training, during their
orientation?
Not included in orientation
Orientation includes FPS and work group awareness overview.
To what degree has the required work group core skills training plan been
developed?
No plan.
Training plan is complete
Training plan complete and training resources identified.
Training plan developed (e.g., material, resources, timing, etc.) and resources
identified consistent with FPS roll out plan.
To what degree has the required work group core skills training (Hourly and
Salaried) been completed?
Work group core skills training completed in IAA
None
IAA complete
IAA complete and plant wide plan in place.
Assign the following points recognizing expansion.
Calculate points by multiplying 270 points times the percentage of operators who
have completed work groups core skills training.
20% of operators trained in work group core skills.
What FPS tools and measurable training (i.e., Level 1 requirements) has been
provided to work groups and support personnel?
FPS tools and measurables training complete for IAA
None
IAA, and related support personnel complete; plant wide plan in place.
Assign the following points recognizing expansion. Calculate points by
multiplying 130 (100%) times the percentage of operators / employees who have
completed FPS tools and measurables training:
20% of operators/employees trained in FPS tools and measurables.
33% of operators / employees trained in FPS tools and measurables.
75% of operators/employees trained in FPS tools and measurables.
What is your plan to communicate issues of plant wide interest to all employees
(e.g., plant, work group or employee objectives and achievements as well as
other information of plant wide interest or importance, etc.)?
No documented plan exists; may be minimal communication

Communication exists, however no formal written plan; or plan exists, however
implementation may be inconsistent.
Plan with evidence of consistent implementation
Detailed strategy exists; evidence of implementation on a regular basis including
timely publication of relevant Work Group performance information.
Are plant objectives communicated to the work group level? (Calculate points by
multiplying the score times the % of production operators in work groups)
There is little or no evidence of plant objectives being communicated to the work

group level.
Plant objectives are communicated on a regular basis to the Work Groups.
Plant objectives and status are communicated on a regular basis to the Work
Groups.
Plant objectives and status are communicated on a regular basis to the Work
Groups.
What process do you use or are you planning to use to provide performance
feedback on a real time basis to Work Groups?
Performance feedback on a real time basis for the IAA
No plans
Plans documented /in place, e.g., part of roles and responsibilities of the
Steering Committee.
Implemented in IAA
Assign the following points recognizing expansion.
Implemented in IAA and expanded to up to 100% of work groups.
Calculate by multiplying 240 points (100%) times the percentage of
operators/employee in Work Group (reference level in 8.2.6) (deduct 10% for
each missing element below)
- Timely data
- Work group specific data
How do work groups participate in establishing continuous improvement

objectives which are aligned with the plant’s objectives? (Calculate points by
multiplying the score times the % of production operations in work groups)
Work groups do not participate in establishing objectives.
Yes, evidence that work groups participate in establishing objectives is apparent
in work areas
Yes, and using the FPS measurables to track progress.
Yes, and using the FPS measurables to track progress, and evidence indicates
objectives are being achieved
Yes, using FPS measurables to track progress; demonstrate that objectives are
achieved; and continuous improvement plans are evident.
Do work groups use FPS measurables, or other more work group specific
indicators (i.e.., elements of FPS Measurables) to track progress in making
improvements in their areas/lines?
(Calculate points by multiplying the score times the % of production operations in
work groups)
No apparent use of FPS measurables by work groups.
Beginning use of FPS measurables by work groups.
Work groups use FPS measurables to track progress in making improvements in
their area/line.
Work Groups make regular and effective use of FPS measurables in tracking
progress, and there is evidence of continuous improvement in their projects,
priorities and objectives.
Is the work group satisfaction survey used as a tool by the work groups to
improve their levels of satisfaction?
No, the Work Group Satisfaction Survey has not been used.
Work Group Satisfaction Survey has been launched, at a minimum in the IAA.
There may be little or no evidence that Work Groups are using results as an
improvement tool.
Work Group Satisfaction Survey has been launched in areas having work
groups, consistent with the guidelines. There is evidence that the work groups
utilize the data as a tool for improvement.
Work Group Satisfaction Survey used plant wide, on a regular basis, with
evidence groups use data as a tool for improvement
Is the Work Group Satisfaction Survey used as a tool by the plant leadership,
including Area Managers and Superintendents, to increase work group
satisfaction and effectiveness?
No, the Work Group Satisfaction Survey has not been used.
Work Group Satisfaction Survey has been launched, at a minimum in the IAA.
There may be little or no evidence that leadership is using results as an
improvement tool.
Work Group Satisfaction Survey has been launched in areas having work
groups, consistent with the guidelines. There is evidence that the leadership
utilizing the data as a tool for improvement.
Work Group Satisfaction Survey used plant wide, on a regular basis, with
evidence leadership uses data as a tool for improvement.
Are Work Groups involved in the SHARP implementation plan with a focus on
continuous improvement?
SHARP is not launched at this location.
SHARP launched at plant; however there may be little or no evidence of the
Work Groups involvement in safety improvement plans/actions.
SHARP launched at plant; strong evidence (e.g. minutes, information boards,
etc.) that areas having work groups are involved in continuous improvement in
safety.
Demonstrate how the work groups’ effective use of FPS tools are driving the
elimination of waste and continuous improvement in their objectives/projects and
the FPS measurables.
(Calculate points by multiplying the score times the % of production operators in
work groups)
No evidence of application of FPS tools and measurables.
FPS tools and measurables in use but not clearly connected to the work group's
objectives/projects/priorities
FPS tools and measurables in use and are clearly connected to the work group's
objectives/projects/priorities and the elimination of waste.
FPS tools and measurables in use and are clearly connected to the work group's
objectives/projects/priorities and are showing evidence of improved results
FPS tools and measurables in use with clear evidence of identifying and
eliminating waste and of continuous improvement over time in accomplishing
work group objectives/objectives/priorities
Describe how your work groups use their "Work Group Information Boards" and
discuss the kinds of information posted on the board.
work groups)
Boards do not exist in all areas having FPS work groups.
Boards exist in all areas having work groups; no, or minimal, understanding or
use by work groups
Boards exist in all areas having work groups; contain plant wide data, but not
necessarily work group specific
Boards exist in all areas having work groups; work group specific data posted;
may be minimal use or understanding by members
Boards exist in all areas having work groups; timely, work group specific data
posted, and used by work group members
Boards exist in all areas having work groups; good understanding of intent of the
work group board; information is timely and work group specific; evidence the
board is regularly used by the group to identify and implement continuous
improvement actions. The boards "tell a story of success."
Describe how effective your work group meetings are.
(Total points from list; maximum 220 points
Occur on regular basis
Follow standardized agendas
Develop and record minutes
Meetings are run according to established members' roles and responsibilities
Members receive support when it is requested

Focus on safety improvements
Focus on FPS measurables / elements
Focus on continuous improvement in FPS measurables / elements
Positive trend in measurables is evident
Receive and review timely, work group specific data and feedback on regular
basis
Members report satisfaction with the work group process
How has management’s role changed to be more supportive of groups in
establishing and accomplishing their objectives and less of controlling day to day
activities.
work groups)
Management directs production operators; is responsible and accountable for its
areas. Production operators’ responsibilities are largely limited to performing the
production tasks.
Management’s roles and responsibilities supporting a work group based
organization are developed. These roles provide for supporting and enabling the
work group members.
Mgmt. has been trained in order to enable them to function as advisors in
support of the WG based organization. For the most part, supervision continues
its performance of administrative and operating tasks (e.g., safety, quality, cost,
schedule, etc.)
Mgmt continues to lead/direct production operators; roles tend towards longer
range strategy planning. Production operators begin to assume responsibility for
administrative and/or operating tasks (e.g., safety, quality, cost, schedule, inv.,
etc.)
Management’s role is largely supportive/advisory towards the work groups as the
groups become responsible for administrative and operating tasks (e.g., safety
quality, cost, schedule, inventory, etc.).
Management’s role is to support those who add value to the products. First line
supervision supports the work groups through the group leaders as the work
groups are responsible and accountable for their areas, both administrative &
operating. Work group members & supervision can point to improved business
results and how they were attained.
How is the Work Group Satisfaction Survey being used to determine whether
work group members are more satisfied with their jobs?
Work Group Satisfaction Survey has been implemented on a widespread basis
and results are being reviewed by leadership.(Correlate points with level of 8.2.6)
Work Group Satisfaction Survey has been implemented on a plant wide basis.
Results are showing evidence that employee satisfaction levels are improving.
WG Satisfaction Survey has been implemented on a plant wide basis. Results

show evidence that employee satisfaction levels are improving. Leadership is
monitoring results and following up with analysis & action plans in areas where
results show concerns.
How have business results improved as a result of implementation of FPS and
Work Groups?
(Calculate points by multiplying the score times the % of production operations in
work groups)
Plant performance trends have limited connection to FPS or work groups.
Work groups have received plant objectives via policy deployment and have
begun to develop specific objectives for their area/line.
Work groups have received plant objectives via policy deployment, and have
begun to develop their own objectives for their area/line in support of policy
deployment; and are using FPS measurables to track progress.
There is widespread evidence of Work Groups using FPS tools and measurables
to eliminate waste and continuously improve results in their objectives/projects.
Overall plant performance shows substantial evidence of improved business
results.
SDQMC Area Commincation Board being filled out by Hourly folks each shift
TPM being completed on time in the station
Housekeeping and 5 S sheets being filled out properly in station
Employee has had a chance to provide solutions and ideas for 2007-2008
product launches from all shifts
Abesentism for (1) shift for this station
#PQI Suggestions/station
Worker Flexability Chart Fiiled out for Station
Does the plant implement and manage Information Technology efficiently, utilizing
standards wherever possible?
1
Are Airbus Production System Measurables applied in the IT area of the organization
such as 5S being evident in the file management structure of personal and public share
drives.
1 Not Done
Are Airbus Production System Measurables applied in the IT area of the organization
such as 5S being evident in the control and organization of licenses copies of software,
software manuals, etc for easy employee access and referenceing.
2
Not Done
1
Is their a Airbus Production System IT site in place that has all Airbus production
system deployment strategies, Airbus Production System Transformational Roadmaps,
Airbus Production System training modules, Airbus production system form/document
tool boxes, Airbus production system measureables, Airbus Production System
Implmentation Maturity Matrixs by Work Area and Airbus Production System sucess
and failure storeis into a single organizational web access location.
5
1 Not Done
Does the plant effectively use the Airbus Production System technology to access
Airbus Production System communications, documentation, training material and to
communicate Airbus Production System Issues?
5
1
Is their evidence that employees are using the Airbus Production System
communication system and use the system regularity for perfoming the the application
of lean practices in their work areas.
1
Are lean production system support web sites and lean production system suppliers
ready acessible through the web site where pre sourced suppliers are in place to
support indivdual team lean production system application objectives for items like
training videos, process area boards, visual managment signs and boards, etc.
1
Does the web site provide access to outside sources and knowledge basis of Lean and
Six Sigma information and resources, aka a library of sorts for the people to reference
in the organization.
1
Are manual books or electronic verisions of Lean Production System reference books
available at the plant site and at the coporate level for employees at all levels to
access?
5
1
JIT
A systematic process for servicing what is required, when it is needed, in the
amount required
Level Schedule
5 In machining or preparation areas with diversity:
5 Production is perfectly levelled to customer demand with zero inventory
5 Equipment should be able o produce unitary parts if requested (left/right

The schedule minimizes building of inventory above minimal security level
4
Focus is on reducing changeover time to decrease batch size close to
4 customer demand and on reducing lead time to delivery

The schedule is based upon an economic arbitrage between cost of
3 changeover and cost of inventory
3 Production is pulled from assembly line by Kanban

The schedule is based upon insuring machine uptime and minimizing
2 changeovers
1 There is no instruction on amounts of parts to be produced in a batch
1 Equipment might be idle for large portions of time
Continous Flow
All processes in value stream are linked together (1 x1) with minimal
5 tactical buffer WIP in between
Large sub assemblies have been linked to the main assembly line (1 x 1
4 coordination)
Focus on continuously improving set-up/changeover efficiency to deploy
4 continuous flow to rest of plant
4 All shift patterns are coordinated

The majority (>75%) of the processes follow 1x1 production techniques
3
and only variable WIP is present between processes
Inventory has been mapped along the value streams and root causes
3
identified
Production processes are located in the same general area and some
2 have been brought to a 1x1 coordination
Large amounts of WIP still separate a majority of stations and “batch”
2 production still occurs
Production processes are isolated with uncontrolled amounts of WIP
1 between operations
Products move through the production line in large batches, resulting in
1 long throughput times
TAKT
5 All work is done within the optimal Takt time
5 No parallel production of similar parts

At least 99 % of the work is carried out within specified Takt time on
4 average
Studies have been carried out to optimize operators density on each
4 station
4 Whenever in station, the product is worked on all the time

In machining areas: if not planned to be idle, machines are constantly
4 either working or in changeover phase
At least 90 % of the work is carried out within specified Takt time on
3 average
3 Line balancing of work packages is typically used to achieve Takt time

Inefficiency still exists in the form of excess production or under utilization
3 of stations (stations could integrate more work load)
2 Takt time is part of plant policy but other objectives might prevail
There are large deviations to Takt time especially in the form of under
2 utilization (large amount of time with no work performed at some stations)
Production pace is not planned but assumed to be a fixed function of the
1 current equipment
Line operates and adds/cuts hours or inventory to match customer
1 demand
PULL SYSTEM
Production is driven completely by “pull” signal from downstream
5 processes
Daily demands come from main assembly only and are drawn back up
the close sub assemblies using a simple pull signal system (i.e. Kanban
4 card)
4 Only high complexity components remain in a Push environment
4 Major parts are delivery pulled by main line
3 Pull system is predominant but not fully deployed in the plant
3 Capacity limits on WIP levels are strictly respected
2 A capacity limit or maximum WIP level is in place and mostly followed
2 Push is regulated through multiple schedules planning

Production flow is completely “push” based with no in-line control on
1 operations or production pace
1 Material enters and is pushed downstream on forecast only

Material flow or movement in the plant is dependent upon individual
pull signals (via Kanban etc) from downstream workstations as parts
or materials are consumed, adapting to changes in customer
demand requires changing only the production schedule for either
the final or pacemaker process.
5 100% throughout plant - no exceptions
4 Found in plant 75% coverage
1 No pull system in plant at all
Material movement throughout the plant is triggered by the
production operators / line feeders in the facility.
Material replenishment is triggered based on customer requirments by
5 EDI
Operators are using an Autonomous material replenishment system and
4
can demonstrate they have initiated improvements to the system
3 Operators are using an Autonomous material replenishment system
Operator is using a formalised process to procure material and
2 components required, with some involvement from supervision/
management
Operator verbally instructs support departments/up-stream processes of
1
need for more material
No operator involvement in material movement throughout plant. Material
1
replaced via works orders
Operators have been trained and can explain the operation of the
Kanban systems in the factory. (ie Production Instruction Kanban,
Replenishment Kanban, Card systems, two bin systems, Heijunka
boards etc)
Operators can explain completely the full operation of all different Kanban
5
systems throughout the factory
Operators can explain completely the system operation and all individual
4
tasks in the system they operate
Operators can explain an awareness of the system operation and explain
3
their involvement in the system they operate
Operators can display an awareness of the system operation where they
2
work
1 Operators not able to explain system operation
The production employees in the facility have a clear understanding

of Minimum / Maximum levels on parts at their workstation.
Production operators understand it is their responsibility to optimise
5 inventory levels at their workstation by communicating needs for
adjustments with planning / logistics
Production operators can influence the Min/Max levels at their work
4
station
Production operators have an awareness of how Min/Max levels at their
3
work stations are calculated
The production operators monitor the inventory levels at their workstation,
2
inventory is contained within Min / max
1 No understanding of Min/Max levels
The ERP system accurately reflects the stock level throughout the
plant. To verify this condition either:
A/ Review the accuracy of the last recorded stock count records if
completed within the last month.
B/ Review actual stockcount from the process flow analysis (or
cycle count) and compare with what the system says should be
present for Raw materials,Work in Prgress and Finished goods
5 Accuracy >96%
4 Accuracy >91% but <95%
1 Accuracy <75%
The employees have the overall opinion that the The ERP system
accurately reflects the stock level throughout the plant or use work
around methods or manual check and validation methods to verify
stock levels because the do not trust the data in the system
5
4
3
2
1
The employees have the overall opinion that the The ERP system
requires to many stock position transactional tracking transactions
that affect the accuracy of the data bbecuase employees are not or
do not have the time to enter the data manually or buy electronic
wand in a effective manner so they have deployed manual check
and data entry validation methods to verify stock levels because the
do not trust the technology for gathering data into the system
5
4
3
2
1
Packaging and material handling equipment throughout the facility
has been designed to support continuous flow processes. (ie right
size packaging, FIFO (First In First Out), no decanting operations,
double handling eliminated etc, etc)
5 Found in 100% of. the functions of the plant
4 Found in approximately 75% of the functions of the plant
1 Not normal practise anywhere in plant
There is an effort to level production schedules by spreading the
monthly customer demand evenly over the period, so that the daily
production volume for a part does not vary substantially.
Load levelling (Heijunka) production system in operation across

5 production facilities. Autonomous operation by operators with little
intervention from planning.
Weekly demand forecast is levelled to ensure a stable production rate
4 across the week. Evidence that there is a data driven approach to the
level of buffer stock is used.
Monthly demand forecast is levelled to ensure a stable production rate
3 across the month. Buffer stock is present to protect against demand
variabilty ‘spikes’ received from the ERP system
Operators and supervisors can Direct Data Link (DDL) to the ERP system
2
analyse stock levels and plan production accordingly
No effort made to analyse forecast demand and plan production
1 accordingly. (Solely reacting to Daily Call-in from production schedulers)
The production rate throughout a linked manufacturing system has

been defined around the TAKT time. If the process has a fixed cycle
time the facility may have to alter the run time accordingly rather
than slow the production rate.
Work levelling (Yamazumi) boards are present and used for the work
5 group to determine the production rate across the manufacturing system
Awareness of TAKT and work stations are levelled so that imbalance is

4 negligible. TAKT reviewed regularly by the production supervisors /
engineers etc, and work rebalanced accordingly
Awareness of TAKT and work stations are levelled so that imbalance is
3
negligible. TAKT not reviewed regularly to rebalance facilities
Awareness of the production rate (or TAKT) but no attempt to balance
2 work stations. (Clear imbalance but all stations producing under TAKT)
The production facility has an operation(s) running slower than the

1
required production rate (or TAKT)
Kanban quantities are reviewed so that the Re-Order points / Re-
order quantities, Min, Max and safety stock level are correct to the
current production rate.
Evidence than whenever the customer demand changes the Kanban

5
quantities are reviewed (typically once per day) and adjusted if necessary
Kanban quantities reviewed whenever the production lines are

4 rebalanced to ascertain new stock parameters. (Typically once per
month)
ABC analysis has been performed on the overall demand of all customer
3
orders and changes made to Kanbans
2 Safety stock is the only parameter to have been reviewed and amended
1 Kanban quantities are the same as when system launched
Changeovers in production are made to support the mix of customer
demand and not to support long production runs, WIP inventory
buffers, or daily short ship emergencies, etc.
Quick Changeover is observed as a key contributor to helping reduce

5
stock levels throughout the plant to support the mix of customer demand
Quick changeover is linked into production rate to produce in the smallest

4
batch size possible. Full understanding of frequency of manufacture
Quick changeover capability is evident but not being used to drive smaller
3
batch production
No evidence of quick change over, long production runs only but
2
recognition of max stock levels
Production supervisors schedule long production runs with no recognition
1
of WIP stock
Competitor benchmarking is perfromed using the
following methodology
6 Product Tear-Downs
5 Competitor Plant Visits
4 Third Party Studies
3 Public Financial Reports
2 Industry Publications & Trade Journals
1 Company Publications
Books
Define the # of Open ECN's, MCN's on Part #
that exisit in the plant today. ECN have a
direct affect on the porganization ability to
focus resources on continous improvement
activities and not in the management of ECN
no matter the diver for the ECN.
5 >10
4 >100
3 >300
2 >700
1 >3000
The design has been made flexible so that
the component can be Install on either the
LH/RH Side of Plane module that the
component is being installed on.)
Their is evidence of this design optimization

approach exisiting throughout different product
5 areas of the plant
Muiltple examples of this design optimization
4 approach exisit in the plant.
Limited examples of this design optimization
3 appraoch exsit in the plant.
Only a few examples of this design optimization

2 approach was evidenced in the plant
No evidence of this design optimization effort
1 exisit in any product areas of the plant
The design has made ever effort to reduce
the number of different Fastners types Used
to Install
Their or assembly
is evidence of thisthe part.optimization
design
the number of different # of Unique Fastener
Torques required to assembly the component
or the part.

the number of different # of Different Socket
Head Types used to assembly the component
or assembly to the final product
The design takes into consideration during
the design phase of the product an effort to
reduce how many Different # of Hand Tool
Type are Used to Install Part

The design takes into consideration during

the design phase of the product an effort to
reduce how many Different# of Unique Lift
Assist Used to Install or assembly the Part

The design system and approval process
insures that Product Engineering chossen
the lowest cost material for the part?

The design system fully requires the
optimized use of the CAE technology o insure
the lightest weight and thines material is
being utilized?

There is evidence that the Product design
staff and the supplier been challeged for
reducing the amount of DVPR testing and
requirements for the part or module.
The design review system insures that the

part been looked at for use on other
platforms to increase the potenital of lower
cost from a part volume prespective?

The product designer is required to
investigate and valaidate any potential
opportunities for supplier resourcing or
reduction programs occuring with this part to
reduce piece price?

The product design staff has evidence that
indivdual parts been evulated for
communization of the part supplier or
supplier manufacturing location.
The design staff has considered histroical
information on the cost of warranty currently
associated with this part-station?
5
4
3
2
1
The Design Team has designed commonized

locations for lift assist tooling, fastener
tooling, slave tooling and the lift points
assocaited with this part been made
flexiable/common for all products that run
through common manufacturing stations.

Evidence exisit that the design staff has

exhausted all opportunities for modularizing
the current design with other parts for this
product platform that could potentially be
outsourced to lower cost producer?

Is their evidence that a DFM-DFA has been
acomlished to compare the various product
models for communization opportunities
completed by Product Engineering?

Has a Pesign Engineering performed a BOM

complexity reduction matrix to compare the
opportiunities for component elimination or
communization between the various models
produced in this plant?

Does the organization systematically gather
customer needs and desires, and then
translate these customer inputs into
revisions, modifications, or other standards
for products / services?
5
4
3
2
1
Is their evidence that the Product team is in
constant pursuit to evaluate and shorten the
design processes for new products and
services?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the organization have control over

design and design modification control
processes, including control over variations
and defects in processes that are used for
producing and delivering products and
services?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the Product Design organization use a
systematic and standard approach to
evaluating designs so that it processes for
better quality, cycle times, defects,and other
operating performance attributes?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the Product Design organization

capture, maintain, and use key indicators for
business and support services?
5
4
3
2
1
How does the Product design organization
clearly communicate quality standards and
requirements to suppliers?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the Product Design organization have a

quality assurance process to ensure that
suppliers are meeting quality requirements?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the Product Design organization have a
cooperative relationship with its suppliers,
including reward programs, certification and
other policies that build long-term
relationships?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the product design organization audit

or evaluate its products and
services,including the systems and
processes that create and manage their
products and services for opportunities for
imrpvement? Can the organization provide
any evidence of this?
5
4
3
2
1
Is their a sound Product Design System in

place that optimizes under the authority of
the engineering director the ability to bundle
all technical communication with the
customer and suppliers in the frame of a
specific product development, including
product design, engineering, packaging,
technical spec., serviceability, structure,
NVH, exterior closure gaps, GD&T locator
schemes, dimensional tolerancing, digital
mock-up, prototype build, testing,
engineering schedules, open issues lists,
engineering action plans, revision levels,
BOM in an optimized approach. Is thier
evidence of a system that is used for this
optimization.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the product design organization have a

system in place toassist designers and
design engineers in application engineering
tasks to create and improve designs using
basic mechanical engineering formulas
(stiffness, sections, NVH…)
5
4
3
2
1
Does the Product Design team prepare

manufacturing process technical
presentations using Catia modeling and
Powerpoint, in coordination with Program
Management and make these visual models
available for use in the creation of Process
visual managment tools.

Is their examples of the Product Design staff
involving and supervising suppliers in
developing engineering solutions, in
coordination with Purchasing.
5
4
3
2
1
How involved is the Product Design team

involved with proactively and closely helping
supervise the design and progress of tools,
molds, assembly fixtures, checking fixtures
and equipment in terms of technical
performance, quality, cost and deadlines in
coordination with Purchasing and Quality
and the manufacturing plant location Point of
Use manufacturing experts.
5
4
3
2
1
Product Engineering has a system to isure
that manufacturing personal at the plant
floor level are aware of product design
technical goals, technical activitie, CAE,
tolerance studies, testing and tool build,
results and feedbacks

The Product Design team has evidence of the

use and review of the following Product
Design improvement opportiunities by use of
any of the following:
Use of Historical Quality Issues
Prototype Build or Test Changes or
Reduction Opportunities
Control systems in place to prevent Late
Design Changes and/or Unresolved Design
Issues
Incoprporation systems in place that identify

and use New Design or Process Technology
Content or Complexity design reduction
studies
Systems for addressing Compressed
Program Timing
Systems for intergating New Suppliers
Systems for setting Weight, Cost and Design
Labor hours Target Setting
Systems for Product Design Feasibility&
Design Optimization, & Packaging Validation
for early design concepts
Craftsmanship objectives for prottype and
production models.
System and clear roles an CAD
Responsibilities for file control, file chnages,
PDM, etc..
Systems in place to insure the minimum
amout of Testing, Verification & Check
Fixtures are need in the prototype and
production design phases of a new product.
5
4
3
2
1
The product engineering organization has a
strong and controlled method and system in
place for Product Change Approval


The product design engineering team have a
clear system in place to define who is
resposible for Surface Layout
Responsibilities, the plant or the supplier or
expected from the Product Design staff.
5
4
3
2
1
The product Design area has clear and
concise roles for who is respobible for the
development of product Service
Documentation and repair processes.
5
4
3
2
1
There is a standardized Product Development
System that clearly outlines for new
Products:
Prototype Due Dates:
DV Testing Complete
Production Intial Sample Approvals
Engineering Drawing Release
Run at Rate with Supply Base or Internal
Supply Base Dates:
Purchased Parts Production Part Approval
Process Documentation Dates:
Their is evidence of this knowlodge of the

product development system exisiting throughout
5 different product areas of the plant
Their is muiltple examples or evidence of this
knowledge of the product development system
4 exisiting through-out the plant.
Limited examples examples or evidence of this
Only a few examples or evidence of this
No examples or evidence of this knowledge of
the product development system exisiting
1 through-out the plant.
The Product Design Team has a strategy for

Minimizing the part count as each part brings
its own opportunities for defects and
assembly errors. The probability of
producing a perfect part decreases
exponentially as the number of parts
increases because the potential for error
propagates. Strategies to reduce the part
count include combining functions into one
part, or selecting a common part from parts
that perform similar functions.Direct costs for
material and labor are reduced along with the
part count. Indirect costs for purchasing
overhead, material handling, and inventory
are directly tied to the part count.
Their is evidence of this knowlodge of the
product development system exisiting throughout
5 different product areas of the plant
Their is muiltple examples or evidence of this
Limited examples examples or evidence of this
Only a few examples or evidence of this
No examples or evidence of this knowledge of
the product development system exisiting
1 through-out the plant.
The Product Design Team has a strong

system in place that valaidates and eliminate
separate fasteners by using snap-on
attachments, tabs, and quick-connects.
Product Designers are aware that eliminating
fasteners means eliminating parts, labor,
tools, potential ergonomic problems, and
potential defects.





Product Engineering follows defined and

established design guidelines and learn from
the mistakes of others through the use of a
best practice database system. Design
guidelines have been published for many
processes, including metal forming and
porcelain enameling. Design guidelines
reflect the collective painful experience of
others.
5
4
3
2
1
The Product Design team is required as part
of the management buy-off presentations to
use the concepts of modular assembly oin
sub-systems and major systems to reduce
the complexity of final assembly and also
improve serviceability.
Product Design engineers when designing

modules insure that an assembly sequence
starts with bigger parts on the bottom, and
smaller parts assembled on top - use gravity
to aid assembly.
The Product Engineering staff has set goals

for use of Standardize parts and use off-the-
shelf components. Engineers are encourage
to design parts that can be purchased off-the-
shelf from volume manufacturers. Engineers
understand that the Standardization of parts
removes the potential for misuse, provides
purchasing economies, simplifies material
handling, and may justify more frequent
deliveries and lower total inventory and that
having to trade up to a more expensive part
in order to standardize will typically out
weigh the cost associated with a non
standard component being placed into the
product design.
5
4
3
2
1
The Product Design staff has a product
grouping strategy that differentiates products
early in the design process so that Prouduct
Engineers can Leverage a common
"platform" of standardized parts and
subassemblies, eliminate mass
customization early in the process to reduce
cost, lower inventories, and improve
responsiveness with high variety.
5
4
3
2
1
Product Designers are required to evalaute the

design for existing process capability to insure
that designed parts are within the tolerances that
can be met at a Six Sigma level by current
process capability. .
5
4
3
2
1
There is evidence that the Product design team

has a system that insures the design helps Error-
proof manufacturing processes via improveed
part orientation through design so that parts
can be commonly orientated in a way that
optimizes the movcement of the assembly
labor hands and part placement orientation.


Product Design has a system in place to
attempt to make parts symmetrical so they
can be installed in any direction and are
designed to avoid left-hand - right-hand
assemblies to reduce assembly errors, and
inventory. If parts must be asymmetrical,
their is a system in place to insure the
product designer makes the difference in
parts obvious to avoid errors.
5
4
3
2
1
The Product Design Team has a system to insure

that simplify patterns of movement and minimize
axes of assembly so that no three-handed
assemblies, blind assembly is required in the
assembly process.
3
2
1
The Product Design Standard incoporates a
Design for Automation standard that provide for
flat, parallel gripping surfaces and to avoid thin,
sticky, or flimsy parts
5
4
3
2
1
Critcal to Quality Charterisitics include End-
product characteristic proven to be important
to the customer, along with hierarchical
reference number.
5
4
3
2
1
Significant Characteristic Number
Referenceare organized so that Significant
Characteristics within a hierarchy relates to
the corresponding CTQC's.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR allow for easy indentification of Adequate
designs that have been erroneously flagged in DV or PV
as a problem because:
Test hardware was not representative of production intent
Test not properly administered
Test inappropriate (i.e., overly stringent)
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR allow for easy indentification of designs
that are a result of Inadequate design - identified in
program-specific DVP&R as a potential issue during a
verifaction test.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR allow for easy indentification of designs

that are a result of Inadequate design or CAR written that
are a result of not identified in the program-specific
DVP&R - Problem occurred at launch or in field because:
Wrong requirements in program-specific Product
Defintion Requiremen Speificiations
Failure mode not identified in program-specific FMEA
Program-specific DVP&R not completed
DV failures were rationalized (i.e., didn't fully meet
requirements)
Test was not customer-correlated
Test environmental conditions were not representative
Test sample size inadequate
Test hardware was not representative of production intent
Test not properly administered
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR uses a Is/Is Not Analysis has been
performed (what, where, when, how big)?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CARdpocumentask if Prior experience has been
considered to determine if this problem has appeared
before?
5
4
3
2
1
The CAR Clearly Allows for Personnel to describe the

problem in terms of the following criteria:
What is the problem, or what is wrong? What “should
be”?
Where (which plant, which line, which piece of
equipment) is the problem? Where on actual piece of
equipment is the problem? How many units are affected
with the failure?
When was it first noticed? Date & time? When was it
noticed since then? Has problem occurred before?
Did the problem cause a line breakdown? A breakdown
duration?
How many hours did the plant loose because of the
equipment or system breakdown?
Are there any other Airbus Plants affected with the
failure?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR Specifed what to do for Interim action /
Containment:
What is the proposed interim action?
When will the action be completed? (If more than one

plant is affected with the failure, create a tracking matrix
summarizing every piece of affected equipment with
corrective action target completion dates)
Is the problem going to be fixed? Were any new problems

created by this action? Is the customer going to be
protected from any negative effects of the problem?
Does the CAR Ask for Root cause Using the 5 why
Approach
When you identify a potential root cause, ask “Why” to
five or more levels to carry the investigation to its lowest
level.
For example:
Possible root cause is A…
Why is A happening? Because of B…
Why is B happening? Because of C…
Why is C happening? Because of D…
Why is D happening? Because of E…
Why is E happening? Because of F…
Conclusion: F is root cause of problem.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR Discuss Permanent actions
Describe the proposed action
Provide an action plan to implement the corrective action
Specify a date when action will be in place
Does the CAR provide for Verification

Provide statistical evidence that action works (criteria,
indicators, test results)
Provide detection for any undesirable side effects
Specify effective date
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR system Sho howit will Control the Prblem
from Happening in the future?
What assurance do you have that the problem will not re-
occur? Describe control methods and give examples.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR Discuss Prevention Alternatives for

actions that might result from the implmnetation of the
CAR Root cause fixes by Identifing what potential
problem might be encountered with proposed corrective
action and specify improvements and processes that
would prevent problem from recurring.?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR Have Emergency Response Action: (ERA)

Actions applied to stop the internal or external customer
from receiving the problem (i.e. quarantine, tagging,
segregating, etc.). Also known as Containment.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR Specify Interim Containment Action: (ICA)

A temporary solution to protect the customer from the
problem. ICAs usually add cost to the process (100%
inspection, etc.) and is used to "buy time" until the ROOT
CAUSE can be identified and corrected.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the CAR Allow for Identifcation of Permanent
Corrective Actions: (PCA) Actions applied to prevent a
previously identified problem from recurring (new
training, visual aids, mistake proofing, etc.).
Does the CAR Specify How Continuous Improvement Will

be Used to Continue to Work on the Problem: Action
applied to a procedure or process that improves cost or
timing, simplifies the operation or prevents a perceived
problem from occurring.
The symptom(s) has been defined and quantified.
The customer(s) who experienced the symptom(s), and
the affected parties, when appropriate, have been
identified.
Measurements taken to quantify the symptom(s)

demonstrate that a performance gap exists AND/OR
priority of the symptom warrants initiation of the process.
The cause is unknown.
Management is committed to dedicate necessary
resources to fix the problem at the root cause level and
to prevent recurrence.
Symptom complexity exceeds the ability of one person to
resolve.
5
4
3
2
1
If a CAR system is in place can the Plant proivide the

precentage of reasons for all eaxisitng open CAR's. CAR
reflect a organization focus on continpous improvement
and also provide insite as to what functional
organizations are using the system to drive
improvement.
CAR Issue Reason
Quality Improvement%
Employee Satisfaction%
Safety/Environmental%
Quality System%
Customer Satisfaction%
Infrastructure%
Facility Planning%
Building%
Cost Reduction%
Continuous Improvement%
Preventative Action%
Corrective Action%
Internal Audit Review%
New Capacity%
Does he CAR system have a Quality Feedback System
for both Internal and External Customers
5
4
3
2
1
Has the facility defined and documented procedures and
methods to communicate both internal and
externalcustomer CAR's information to the Work Groups
on a timely basis, including:
Product and process metrics which correlate to internal
and external satisfaction?
Frequency for review of external and internal customer
quality information by work groups?
Requirements and timing for implementing preventative
and corrective actions defined?
Roles and responsibilities for work groups and support
activities defined and documented?
5
4
3
2
1
Where The Airbus Production System has been

deployed, has the facility implemented the CAR Quality
Feedback System throughout all plant areas to promote
timely communication of quality information between
internal and external customers on a timely basis?
5 Quality Feedback process implemented plant-wide.

Implemented in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the
4 plant.
Implemented in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to
3 75% of plant.
2 50% of plant.
Implemented in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of plant or
1 not done.
Where the Airbus Production System has been deployed,

how frequently do the Work Groups review internal
customer quality data?
5 Daily
4 Every other day
3 Weekly
2 Bi-weekly
1 Monthly
Where Air Bus Production System has been deployed,
can the facility demonstrate a process for translating
external customer quality data into information which
relates directly back to individual workstations and
provides information to the Work Groups on a regular
and timely basis?
4 plant
3 75% of the plant
2 50%
Implemented in IAA or less than or equal to 25% of plant or
1 not done.
Where Airbus Production System has been deployed,

does the facility encourage regular communications
and/or customer visits by Work Group members for:
5 Internal customers
4 External customers
3 Customer participation in Work Group meetings
2
1
Where The Airbus Production System has been
deployed, are the Work Group members knowledgeable
regarding both internal and external customer
requirements, current issues and concerns, and
application of process improvement tools to implement
preventative and corrective actions?
Work Group members knowledgeable of customer

5 requirements plant-wide.
requirements in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the
4 plant.
requirements in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to
3 75% of plant.
requirements in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to
2 50% of plant.
requirements in IAA, or less than 25% of plant or no evidence
1 of knowledge
Where Airbus Production System has been deployed, do
the Work Group Display Boards provide current
information on trends, status, and plans for internal and
external customer quality data or CAR's which relates
directly back to the workstations?
Customer quality linkage documented plant-wide.

plant
75% of the plant
50%
not done.
Has the facility defined and documented procedures and
methods to support timely exchange of information
between internal and external suppliers and Work
Groups, including:
Process for Work Groups to request a plant visit by
supplier?
Work Group requirements for documentation of
concerns, and meeting minutes with suppliers in logbook
or database?
Procedures for identifying and placing defective
materials in holding area by Work Groups?
Requirements and timing for implementing preventative
and corrective actions for suppliers defined?
Roles and responsibilities defined for work groups and

suppliers?
5
4
3
2
1
has the facility implemented the supplier Quality
Feedback System or CAR to support timely exchange of
information between suppliers and Work Groups to
assure the quality of incoming product, materials, and
services?
4 plant.
3 75% of plant.
2 50% of plant.
1 not done.
Has the facility trained their suppliers in the Quality
Feedback Process or CAR Process and requirements? IS
the Process Standardized through all of Airbus?
All suppliers have been trained in the CAR Quality Feedback

5 System.
Greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the suppliers
4 trained.
Greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the
3 suppliers trained.
Greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the
2 suppliers trained.
1 25% of suppliers or less trained or not done.
Where the Airb Bus Production System is deployed, how
frequently do the Work Groups review supplier quality
concerns and issues?
5 Weekly
4 Monthly
3 Every three months
2 Every six months
1 Yearly
can the facility demonstrate an ongoing process which
validates that the plant's support activities (e.g. Quality
org.) are actively providing assistance to the Work
Groups to support timely exchange of information
between the suppliers and Work Groups?
5 Process implemented plant-wide.

4 plant
3 75% of plant.
2 50% of plant.
1 not done.
do the Work Group Display Boards provide information
on the current status and plans for supplier quality
concerns and issues?
Supplier quality concerns documented plant-wide.
plant
75% of the plant
50%
not done.
Has the facility completed overview training for all plant
employees, operating committee and union leadership
members to support the application of the In Station
Control process, including:
Operator Instruction Sheets
Work Analysis Sheets
Capacity Analysis Sheets
Visual Factory
Process Control Boards
Error Proofing Analysis Sheets
Quick Changeover opportunities
Quality Feedback System - Int. / Ext. Customers
Quality Feedback System - Suppliers
5
4
3
2
1
Are Machines capacity independent of demand with Production
goal is to maximize equipment efficiency (maximize output)
which results in a High level of inventory required to manage
the system.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the Constraint operation identified within department and
managed with buffers to maximize efficiency/output which
causes Work in process inventory shifted to end of department
(line).
5
4
3
2
1
Can the Plant validate that all Manufacturing process running to
cycle time and that Production has a goal to maintain
established min/max production inventory level between
departments.
5
4
3
2
1
Are Support Component manufacturing Departments balanced
to produce at the same rate or set up to Produce to schedule
and produce to customer demand rate. Maximizing availability
is the goal not performance efficiency
5
4
3
2
1
Is Equipment acquisition timed to annual capacity forecast.
Manufacturing system designed to operate at =/- 20% change in
customer demand rate. Goal is to maintain a constant
production cost per unit.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the product mix system is designed based on
forecast demand, not on actual customer demand.
Total volumes aggregated. Run size is as large as
possible to avoid setup.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the product System is designed for production

plan based on forecast demand, not based on
actual customer demand. Run size is based on <1
month's forecast demand.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the product mix System designed for production
runs not based on actual customer demand. Run
size is based on <1 week's forecast demand.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the Product Mix System design not based on
actual demand. Every part can be produced every
day
5
4
3
2
1
Is the Product Mix System based on what is
consumed by the process stepo ahead customer
on a daily or shift basis and Changeovers are
triggered by upstream process consumption.
5
4
3
2
1
Is the product Mix System Based on being capable
of producing all part types each shift approaching a
batch size of one (1).
5
4
3
2
1
The plant in order to improve First Time Through has various post process
inspection utilized to insure quality. Repair loops and rework areas included in
layout to accommodate defects found through inspection.
5
4
3
2
Not Done
1
To improve First Time Thorugh the Plant uses In-line quality checks performed
and rework completed off-line. Use of successive checking devices. SPC used to
collect data on type and quantity of defects.
1 Not Done
The plant uses numerous Error proofing devices and visual factory solutions
implemented as solutions to improving First Time Through or to reduce Process
FMEA RPN.
5
4
3
2
1
The plant preforms all rework performed in station within customer demand rate.
Products/ components taken offline are scrapped.
1 Not Done
The plant appears to have a sound system in place
for controlling equipment records and data.
Information includes records of uptime, repair
history, and spare parts, machine prints and repair
and parts manuals.
5 Complete & Accurate
Organization in the final stages of getting control of
4 their maintenance documentation system.
3 Substantially Complete
Efforts being made to improve documentation control
2 systems
1 Non-Existent
Excluding new equipment installations and
construction projects, what percentage of
maintenance hours is unplanned, unexpected, or
emergency?
5 0%-10%
4 11%-25%
3 26%-50%
2 51%-70%
1 71%-90%
Does the plant maintenance department have and
follow a defined preventive schedule?
5 91%+ Coverage
4 31%-90% Coverage
3 11%-30% Coverage
2 1%-10% Coverage
1 No PM
Do equipment breakdowns limit or interrupt
production?
5 Occasionally
4
3 Often
2
1 Frequently
What is the overall average availability of plant
equipment?
5 96%-100%
4 91%-95%
3 76%-90%
2 0%-75%
1 Unknown
Is it apparent that maintenance checklist exists for
machinery and tooling?
5
4
3
2
1
Do maintenance trouble log exists and are they
posted at the machinery?
5
4
3
2
1
Are machine uptime and downtime control
characteristics tracked/controlled at each
machine?
5 96%-100%
4 91%-95%
3 76%-90%
2 0%-75%
1 Unknown
Does the plant have a documented Preventive
Maintenance Philosophy, that is supported by ALL
levels of the organization?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the maintenance process have a detailed
flow chart showing the maintenance operating
system that includes:
How work orders are generated?
How replacement parts are acquired?
How project work is accomplished?
How PM/PdM check sheets are developed and
enhanced?
How PM tasks are performed and analyzed for
effectiveness?
How training is accomplished?
How crisis/emergency maintenance requests are
processed and performed?
How breakdowns are performed?
How historical data is collected and analyzed for
continuous improvement?
How Safety, Environmental and Government
communicated to plant employees?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the TPM operating system been
communicated to plant employees?
5 Other support area employees
4
3 Production employees
2
1 Maintenance employees
Does management support a maintenance
management system (MMS) that meets the
requirements of the TPM activities and conforms
to corporate procedures and standards so that it
is part of a generic system across all Airbus
plants?
5
4
3
2
1
Does management encourage the use of the MMS
for reporting sub-standard or hazardous
conditions?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the plant completed the transition to the a
corporate Total Equipment Management System
TEMS including training of appropriate plant
personnel?
5
4
3
2
1
Is the Corporate TEMS system accessible and
properly utilized by indivdual Work Groups?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the plant have a maintenance organization
with defined role and responsibilities, that’s
integrated into the plant’s Operating and Airbus
Production System Steering Committee?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the plant have representatives from it's
maintenance organization integrated into the
plant's Airbus Production System Steering
Committee?
5
4
3
2
1
Are detailed roles & responsibilities, and level of

authority for all maintenance personnel, well
defined, communicated and updated as required?
Do all personnel involved in the maintenance
process and sub-processes understand their roles
and responsibilities?
5 100% of those interviewed understand?

4 50% of those interviewed understand?
3
2
1 0% of those understood
Is it the mainteance and production workers
opinion that the maintenance leadership provide
commitment and support to the maintenance
process through coaching and allocating the
resources to achieve the maintenance
organization’s objectives?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the facility leadership coach Work Groups
on the maintenance process and their
responsibility for proper maintenance of their
facility, processes, equipment, and tooling so that
maximum mainteance activities can be perfromed
by the production hourly staff and not the
mainteance staff?
5
4
3
2
1
Is the plant’s Safety Ergonomic and Environmental
individuals responsibilities been integrated into
the maintenance process to get problems resolved
in a timely manner and is the mainteance
department taking a leadership role in resolving
safety and environmental concerns?
5
4
3
2
1
Is TPM, safety, ergonomics & environmental
training provided for Work Group members &
personnel involved in the maintenance process?
5
4
3
2
1
Does maintenance staff perform safety risk and
environmental assessments?
5
4
3
2
1
Does maintenance staff participate in equipment
reviews for both new & rehabilitated equipment, as
well as equipment improvement reviews to ensure
that safety, ergonomic & environmental
compliance is not compromised?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the maintenace staff participate in any
accident investigation with Work Groups &
engineering to analyze, report findings &
implement corrective actions to remove accident
opportuities?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the facility provide the appropriate training
to support the maintenance process from a
machine technical and trades prespective and for
specific highly technical equipment?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the following training been incorporated into
the master plan for the Maintenance personnel?
Safety & environmental training
R&M Awareness
Maintenance processes training (I.e. leak tag &
repair process, PM task scheduling process, etc.)
Maintenance Management System, system users

training
Predictive tools training (I.e. infrared, vibration,
ultrasound, oil analysis, ferrography, and other
condition based analysis techniques)
Constraint identification process training

5
4
3
2
1
How is maintenance task training (specific to
individual facilities, equipment, processes &
tooling) being delivered to appropriate personnel
via any of the following means?
On-the-job training utilizing single point lessons
Formal classroom training

Self-paced interactive training
Awareness of equipment, component function,
using sectioned components
Hands-on technical training (I.e. Hydraulic,
pneumatic, lubrication, mechanical power
transmission, electrical, electronic, etc.)
5
4
3
2
1
Does facility leadership define, document, and
deploy a strategy with goals, objectives, and plans
for maintenance on an annual basis that is aligned
with the facilities 5 year business plan?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the Mainteance TPM Policy Deployment
process include goals & objectives for continuous
improvement of Preventive Maintenance?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the facility have defined maintenance
Measurables that they use to evaluate
maintenance effectiveness and drive the
maintenance process?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the plant have a set of measurables that
includes, but is not limited to, the following
categories?
% of PM (preventive maintenance) tasks that can
be performed without interruption of normal
manufacturing operating schedules?
Total maintenance cost per piece or unit of
production?
Process Capability CP/CPK Stabilized at or above
original design levels on all operational
constraints, by line of major product?
Total maintenance cost per piece or unit of
production?
Percent of PM tasks completed to schedule?
Percent of planned maintenance to crisis?
# of breakdowns?
# of minor stoppages?
MTTR (mean time to repair) of constraints, by line
or major product?
MTBF (mean time between failure) of constraints,
by line or major product?
Oil, utility & treatment chemical testing % (I.e. for
boilers, waste water, coolant
systems,manufacturing parts washers, process &
chilled water systems, etc.) usage?
Number of accidents involving maintenance
personnel?
5
4
3
2
1
Are the measurables trended, reviewed, and
reported monthly? Are the measurables moving in
a positive trend toward identified target values?
5 95% of Measureables moving in positive trend, OR

2 25% of Measureables moving in a positive trend, OR
1 No trend data is recorded
Are the maintenance Measurables having a
positive impact on the Airb Bus Production
System measurables?
5
4
3
2
1
Does leadership evaluate the maintenance operating
system for effectiveness on a regular basis, covering
the following:
Housekeeping - facility wide (fence to fence)?
PM inspections?
Checklists and routes?
Required repairs?
Lubrication?
Leak and TPM tags?
Equipment cleaning standards?
Predictive technologies?
5
4
3
2
1
Is there a maintenance communication system for
reporting maintenance measurables?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the facility identified keyed and catorgorized
equipment and is all the equipment listed and
clearly identified as production, production
support, health & safety, environmental protection,
and equipment with legal maintenance
requirements; including "Key" process equipment,
in the maintenance system?
5
4
3
2
1
Has there been a survey of all "key" plant
equipment to determine the applicability and
benefits of the various predictive techniques and a
predictive maintenance plan developed for
application?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the facility have a process that identifies
"key" components (and anticipated usage)
required to maintain machinery, equipment and
tooling and furnishes the information to the
appropriate material ordering activity as part of
the maintenance planning process?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the facility provide a valid components list
with key components highlighted to the the MRO
ordering activity that has been developed by a
Cross Functional team including the production
personal using the equipment?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the TPM planning & inspection process
include:
Process specifications design information (e.g.,
manufacturer's specifications)
Government regulations, operating
(environmental) permit/license, company
standards, Health & Safety losses, risk
assessment, critical analysis (e.g. FMEA, FTA,
etc.)
Manning resources identified.
Task optimization.
Historical maintenance data.
Clear maintenance material requirements
identified.
Opportunities to perform PM while equipment is
running.
Operator involvement in developing PM task list.
Predictive & condition based techniques.

5
4
3
2
1
In the TPM system are the appropriate
maintenance tasks and inspections identified and
documented, including; frequencies, priorities and
responsibilities.
5
4
3
2
1
Are maintenance records maintained according to
the established process?
Is the master list available, current & complete?
Is the maintenance recording process periodically

reviewed and improved?
Are the maintenance processes and procedures
considered when customer input is received?
Are maintenance records easily available to

employees?
5
4
3
2
1
To what extent is the current MMS (Maintenance
Management System) implemented and
operational in the plant and support areas?
Implemented and operating plant-wide to include

5 support areas.
Implemented and operating in greater than 75% but
4 less than 100% of the identified plant equipment?
Implemented and operating in greater than 50 but less
3 than 75% of the identified plant equipment?
The facility has a plan with a time line to implement?
1
Is a data collection process in place and used by
the Work Groups to gather data for equipment
management?
5
4
3
2
1
In what percentage of the plant is the data
collection process in place and used by the Work
Groups or maintenance personnel to gather data
for equipment management?
Implemented and operating plant-wide to include
5 support areas.
Implemented and operating in greater than 50 but less
3 than 75% of the identified plant equipment?
The facility has a plan with a time line to implement?
1
How effective are the Work Groups in using the data
being collected on the plant equipment.
5 Very (80 to 100%) effective?
4
3 Some-what (50 to 80%) effective?
2
1 Not effective at All
Are Mainteance records, reports distributed to
appropriate activities; e.g., safety engineer,
manufacturing engineer, PM Coordinator,
environmental engr., production, plant operating
committee, etc. to identify and manage
information necessary to drive continuous
improvement of the maintenance and the
manufacturing processes?
5
4
3
2
1
Is OEE tools being used to show effectiveness of
process flows in indivdual work areas and is
supported by the maintenance organization?
5
4
3
2
1
Has Training of the use of OEE data has been
delivered to maintenance organization to include
all skilled trades and maintenance leadership.
5
4
3
2
1
Are the roles and responsibilities forgenerating
OEE data for maintenance and production
personal fully developed?
5
4
3
2
1
Are OEE Calcualtions and trend improvements
visible on the flooring according to the TPM plan.
5
4
3
2
1
Does the plant have and use an operational
constraint identification process that focus on the
operational constraints and key /critical facilities,
equipment, processes and tooling?
5
4
3
2
1
Are plans for deployment of TPM and OEE plans
based on Work Groups identification of the plant's
operational constraints and key/critical facilities,
equipment, processes or tooling?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the plant's operational constraints for each
major area or product line been identified and has
the link to the value stream been identified?
5
4
3
2
1
Has the application of value stream mapping,
constraint identification, resulted in improvements
in facility product line throughput?
5
4
3
2
1
Is appropriate Data Collection and Analysis (e.g.
OEE) used by the facility to eliminate those
losses?
5
4
3
2
1
Is Cleaning Is Inspection practiced and stabilized
in the facilities support areas (e.g. mainteance,
tool room, powerhouse, waste treatment,
garage,etc.)?
5
4
3
2
1
Is their a Mainteance TPM Porcess in place that
focuses on Eliminate or Control the Sources of
Contamination and Hard to Reach Places
practiced and stabilized in the manufacturing
areas of facility?
5 100% implementation plant-wide
Implemented on greater than 75% but less than or
4 equal to 100% of plant manufacturing equipment.
Implemented in IAA and on less than or equal to 25%
1 of plant manufacturing equipment.
Is the Elimination or Control the Sources of
Contamination and Hard to Reach Places
practiced and stabilized in the support areas (e.g.
mainteance, shipping and receiving, powerhouse,
waste treatment, garage, tool room, maintenance
areas, administration bldg., etc.) of the facility?

Is Cleaning, Lubrication, Inspection & Safety
Procedures practiced and stabilized in the
manufacturing areas of the facility?
Work Group members should know the basic
fundamentals of their equipment, its systems and
components.
Technical resources teach operators about equipment
and process so they are able to detect and prevent
problems. Operators teach technical resources about
equipment, process and tooling operation, so they
better understand operating parameters in order to
assist with troubleshooting and improvements.
5
4
3
2
1
There is evidence that devices are implemented
on equipment to aid and facilitate inspections and
detect abnormalities.
5
4
3
2
1
Do work group perfrom Self Directed TPM
Inspections and create Procedures that are
practiced and stabilized in the manufacturing
areas of the facility?
5
4
3
2
1
Does the facility have a process that effectively manages the availability of
all non productive materials?
5 Fill rate for all Non Productive Materials is at least 96%
4 Fill rate for all Non Productive Materials is at least 93%
3 Fill rate for all Non Productive Materials is less than 90%
Does the facility ensure the availability of critical replacement parts for key
manufacturing equipment, critical health and safety equipment, and key
environmental equipment?
Fill rate for key replacement parts is at least 99%.
5
4
3
Fill rate for key replacement parts is less than 90%.
2
Fill rate for key replacement parts is less than 85%.
1
Are there regular meetings with the facility's users/customers of Non
Productive Materials to ensure needs for production and maintenance
support are met? Are customer satisfaction surveys conducted at the
production and mainteance operator level?
5 Reviews take place at least 2 times per year.
4 Reviews take place once per year
1 No reviews take place
Does facility have a process to manage non productive materials inventory

that includes the potenital outsourcing of the control of these materials?
1
Does facility have a process to manage non productive materials inventory
that includes all consumable material (usage in 6 months or more of last 12
month period) under all launched commodity suppliers is pay-on-use?
4
3
1
Does the plant or outside management source perform reviews of "Support"
inventory (usage in 1-5 months in the last 12 month period) for opportunities for
minimization.
5
1
Does the plant or outside management source perform reviews of "Just-in-
Case" inventory (no usage in the last 12 months) for opportunities for
minimization / elimination.
1
All items in the general stores inventory not to exceed a 12 month supply
based on usage? Critical unique long lead items may have a quantity of 1 or
1 set up.
1
Are all Expensed Material (stockpiles) on the shop floor is identified and are
Quantities of expensed material on the production floor are minimized with a
target of all expensed material on the production floor is less than 20 days
old.
1
Is Non prductive material supply shelf life and product deterioration are
considered as part of inventory control measures?
1
Is the Disposal of all obsolete materials is in compliance with all Corporate
safety, environmental, purchasing, and finance requirements?
1
Does the facility's material management process include effective plans to
reduce Non productive goods Material inventory and non prductive goods
total Cost through defined measurables for inventory optimization, Material
Usage and Total Cost Savings.
5 Sound Process and plans in place
Evidence that effort has been made in optimizing or outsource management or

4 control of non productive materials
3 Some optimization efforts in place
2 Inventory optimization of non productive material not a requirement
1 No plans in place
For each Non productive material item, has the facility developed a material
flow strategy including the installation of line-side, self-serve bins
direct/scheduled delivery to drop zone location shop floor material master
requisitioning roles and responsibiliy
1
Has the facility installed line-side, self-serve bins for low-value, high volume
use non productive materials used in the plant or a specific process, in
accordance with the production material flow analysis.
Line-side, Self-serve bins have been fully implemented in the plant, in accordance
5 with the material flow strategy.
Some evidence of Line side services bins are in place
4
Line-side, Self-serve bins have been partially implemented in the plant, in
3 accordance with the material flow strategy.
Application of line side self service bins in early stages of development and usage
2 in the plant
Not Done
1
Does the facility have a process to deliver non productive materials to drop
zones in the plant in accordance with the material flow strategy?
5 The delivery process is implemented plant-wide.
3 The delivery process is partially implemented in the plant.
1 The facility has no process for delivery.
Are Visual Factory Standards applied to drop zones?
1
Has the facility defined detailed roles and responsibilities of everyone
involved in the non productive material delivery process?
Detailed, written, specific roles and responsibilities are defined and

5 communicated.
4
Roles and responsibilities are generally defined and understood, but not written.
3
2
Roles and responsibilities are not defined.
1
Does the facility have a process to support emergencies, off-hours requests,
and non-standard requests of non prodcutive materials?
1
Has a plan for developing and deploying an automated non productive
materoial requisitioning system been developed?
1
Does the facility use a shop floor non productive material requisitioning
system that contains the following elements:
The requisitioning system is automated
A back-up requisitioning process in case of automated system failure
A method to assist new users
Assigned responsibility and authority of Non Productive Materials users,

including Work Group members, to requisition industrial material is defined
and communicated by the facility?
Users of specific material have authority to requisition what they need?
The facility does not utilize automated shop floor requisitioning.
1
How well does the facility utilize automated shop floor requisitioning?
At least 95% of general stores requisitions are through automated shop floor
5 requisitioning
4
Some general stores requisitions are through automated shop floor requisitioning.
3
1
Does the facility use master material requisitioning strategy to support
production requirements through order quantity and timing based on
production schedules and to support maintenance planning through
advanced ordering linked to the facility's maintenance MMS?
4
3
1
Does the facility have a lean plant wide approval process for the
procurement of Non Inventory Expensed Non Productive Materials (PN's,
AMEX, E-Commerce)
No more than one signature required for procedures that are less than or equal to
5 US$10000 or equivalent?
4
No more than 2 signatures for procurements that are greater than US$10000 or
3 equivalent?
2
No signatures required for procedures that are less than $2500 or equivalent?
1
Does the facility have a documented approval process for inventory
material-related processes and procedures, including Part Specification /
Part Set Up, Part Obsolescence identification and disposal, and stores
requisitions approval process that is limited to an approval processes
limited to one signature.
1
Do Work Group members have the authority to requisition what they need to
do their job or only supervisors.
1
Are signature levels reviewed at least once per year in terms of lean
principals and elimination of Non Value Added signatures? Reviews must
be approved from the Controller or Plant Manager.
1
Is their a exsiting list of non productive material commodities for the plant
that has been established and agreed to by Corporate Purchasing and the
activity responsible for purchasing Industrial Material in the plant or has a
commodity launch priority matrix has been developed?
1
Has the facility selected commodity suppliers for all commodities necessary
as determined on the commodity launch priority matrix.
Commodity suppliers for 100% of the planned commodities used in the plant have
5 been launched.
4
Commodity suppliers for at least 50% of the planned commodities have been
3 launched in plant.
2
The facility has had no activity to develop and launch commodity suppliers.
1
Do each of the facility's Non Productive Material Commodity suppliers meet
all safety loss control requirements if they are providing line side or in store
replishment and invoicing monthly on supplies replished on a daily basis?
1
Do each of the facility's commodity suppliers and preferred suppliers:
Provide technical support for commodity applications?
Provide technical assistance to support Work Group activities?
1
Do each of the facility's commodity suppliers and preferred suppliers:
Provide a review of new part set-ups?
Provide order processing that:

- Manage all inventory reorders?
- Manages expensed material orders?
Have an inventory control system that?
- Manages Min/Max levels?
- Manages obsolescence?
- Tracks transfer of inventory from facility to supplier?
- Reviews part specifications for duplication, elimination and
standardization?
5
1
Are there regular reviews with the Commodity Suppliers to ensure
production, maintenance, and engineering support needs and total cost
requirements are met?
5 Reviews take place at least 3 times a year
4 Reviews take place at least twice a year.
3 Reviews take place once per year
1 No reviews take place
Does the facility track total cost savings by commodity and by supplier?
1
Does the facility have a written, documented and implemented process to
track and return specified Non Productive Materials under warranty?
The warranty tracking process is written, documented, and implementation has

5 been fully completed.
4
The warranty tracking process is written, documented, and implementation has
3 been partially completed.
2
No warranty process activity.
1
Is the warranty return process linked to, or part of the TPM-Early Equipment
Management Failure Report, Analysis, and Corrective Action System
process?
5
1
Has facility defined detailed roles & responsibilities in the Non productive
material warranty process?
Detailed, written, specific roles and responsibilities in the warranty process are
5 defined and communicated.
4
Roles & responsibilities in the warranty process are generally defined and
3 understood, but not written.
1 Roles and responsibilities in the warranty process are not defined.
Is the trend of non productive industrial material costs over time tracked and
is it improving due to improved warranty utilization?
5 Warranty costs are tracked and reviewed with an established frequency?
3
Warranty costs are improving?
2
1
Has the facility implemented a plant-wide, formally defined and written
perishable tool management system (manual or automated) for heavy
maching operations.
5 Perishable tool management system is defined and implemented plant wide

4
Perishable tool management system is defined and partially implemented
3
Perishable tool management system is defined but not yet implemented
2
1 Not Done
Does the scope of the facility's site-specific perishable tool management
system cover the following elements:
Acquisition and set-up of tools?
Disbursement of tools?
Repair/dress/re-sharpen?
Replacement?
Disposal/Disposition?
Tracking?
1
Does the facility maintain tool set-up and bill of material information or
Quality Process sheets or Operator Instructions for each workstation?
1
Are tool inventories tracked and inventory improvement opportunities
reviewed on a periodic basis in terms of:
- Improved control of tool usage?
- Increased tool life?
- Improved Warranty tracking?
-Driving the tooling process towards lean?
5
4
3
2
1
Do tooling Engineers and Suppliers work with the TPM activities in the
analysis of tooling losses and assist in improvements?
4
3
1
Is the trend of perishable tooling costs over time decreasing over time due
to improved control of tool usage, improved tool life, and/or improved
warranty tracking?
1
Is the facility in compliance with the Company standards for Non productive or
productive Materials requiring material use restrictions such as MSDS sheets, etc..
1
Is the facility in compliance with the Company standards for Non productive
Material requiring:
5 A health, safety, and environmental review / approval on all materials?
4 Storage of hazardous or regulated materials?
3 Transportation of hazardous or regulated materials?
2 Inventory of all managed materials used? (product usage report)
1
Does the facility have a process for the review and approval of new Non
Productive Materials to assess environmental impact?
1
Are records of managed liquid materials maintained by the facility for the
following:
Quantities purchased and used?
Tracked using MSDS Tracking system or equivalent system?
Tracked by using area?
1
Has the facility completed training for all appropriate personnel (consistent
with extent of implementation in facility) to support the application of the
Non Productive Materials process including?
Warranty return process training?
Shop floor requisitioning training?
Master material requisition training?
Regulatory and Company Requirements Compliance training?
1
Using Policy Deployment, has the facility established quantitative goals for
the full implementation of the Non Productive Materials process?
1
Does the facility have a documented process to collect, analyze, and report
Non Productive Materials process measurables, including, but not limited
to :
Inventory?
Costs (inventory & expense).
Total Cost Savings from CMS's?
Material usage?
Fill rate?
Impact on Mean Time to Repair?
Non productive material user Customer Satisfaction Survey?
1
Does the Non Productive Materials portion of the Airbus Production System
rollout plan include an organizational structure and adequate resources for
implementation as follows:
1
There is a system in place to insure that the indivdual stations
work range of motion for hands should be within shoulder width
and the height limited between the midstomach and the shoulders.
5
4
3
2
1
The wasted motion system analysis includes the elimination of
obstacles that block optimal path of hand movements.
5
4
3
2
1
The wasted motion system analysis includes elimination of three-
dimensional motions in favor of simple, straight (2 dimensional)
movements.
5
4
3
2
1
The wasted motion system analysis includes eliminate mid-air
regripping and rotating of objects.
5
4
3
2
1
work that requires paths of hands to cross one another (supporting
of parts, hammering motions).
5
4
3
2
1
operations requiring operator to support part and uses fixtures in
these cases.
5
4
3
2
1
machine wait time or perfroming other operator functions during
machine wait times.
Evidence seen in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the
4 plant.
3 plant.
Evidence seen in Intial application area or less than or equal to 25% of
2 plant.
1 Not Done

operations that require repeated bending or strain on the back.
5
4
3
2
1
having to reposition parts to appropriate heights, adjusting to the
operator.
5
4
3
2
1
The wasted motion system analysis includes the optimization of
positioning part racks and tools along the path of optimal hand
movement; minimize distances form operator.
4 plant.
3 plant.
2 plant.
1 Not Done
arranging parts and tools in the sequence that they are used by the
operator.
4 plant.
3 plant.
2 plant.
1 Not Done

arranging parts and tools in set locations and in a set orientation.
4 plant.
3 plant.
2 plant.
1 Not Done
facilitating the handling of small or thin parts, allowing them to be
picked by the operator one at a time.
5
4
3
2
1
fixtures designs to optimize part visibility and accessibility.
5
4
3
2
1
arranging locating operations to remove the necessity for rotating,
making it easy to load.
5
4
3
2
1
The wasted motion system analysis includes the eliminate of
operations that require excessive attention from the operator;
incorporate the usage of sensors.
5
4
3
2
1
visual checks that require studying of gauges or turning of the
operator's head.
5
4
3
2
1

illuminationwork areas for operations requiring visual checks.
5
4
3
2
1
The wasted motion system analysis includes the eliminate of
switches that require full attention of operator; configure to allow
simultaneous work with pressing of switch.
5
4
3
2
1
the position switches along the path of optimal hand motion
minimizing distances.
5
4
3
2
1
making operations continuous, where switches control multiple
operations.
5
4
3
2
1
any fastening operations to require only a maximum of 1.5 turns,
when tightening manually.
4 plant.
3 plant.
2 plant.
1 Not Done
Supply Chain Management
A systematic practices to improve the efficiency and quality of the supply
chain process
Transportation
Transportation needs are managed through a few framework contracts,
5 defined at central level
A selected number of transportation companies work in a partnership
4 mode
A large(e.g. openofbook
amount partsprofit sharing) is consolidated across parts
transportation
suppliers within a well defined process (geographical logics, request
4 frequency, ….)
Consolidation allows to deliver parts corresponding to a smaller
4 production time
Some transportation needs are managed though framework contracts,
3 defined at plant level
Consolidation takes into account supplier types or geographical location
3 to optimize collection (“milk round”)
Some consolidation is done across suppliers flows to have transporters
2
bid on larger business
1 Transporters selected ad hoc for each specific need
1 Each supplier plant is treated as a specific flow
Demand Management
Most parts are delivered to the plant in batches corresponding to a
5 production time window much lower than Takt time and consolidated
across several suppliers
5 Parts are 100% delivered in reusable packaging
4 Most parts are delivered in reusable and standardized packaging

4 Packaging allows direct delivery to border line
When needed, sorting parts according to production sequence is carried
4 out by supplier
4 Parts are requested in a pull mode

4 Packaging integrates operators access requirements
3 Limited amount of parts are delivered in reusable packaging
3 A majority of standardized packaging
3 Some parts are requested in a pull mode

Changing parts of packaging in the plant might still occur but it is mostly
3 performed to sort parts according to production sequence
2 Few packaging are reusable
2 Double handling is still common
2 There are some procedures to define packaging but they are loosely
implemented
1 There is no packaging guidance (ad hoc packaging selection)
Inventory Management/Material Control
5 Most part are delivered directly from trailer to assembly line
5 Inventory accuracy is 100%
5 There are no missing parts

There is at maximum one intermediary storage from trailer to assembly
4 line
4 Storage limit is respected

4 Inventory accuracy higher than 95%
4 Parts displacements tracked through systems like bar codes of RF tags

Rare occurrence of missing parts (and in majority of cases issue can be
4 corrected within Takt time
4 All Tools, jigs & fixtures in the right place

Continuous improvement program to reduce inventory levels, lost and
3 damaged goods
3 All shop floor storage is planned and has a dedicated and identified place
3 Audits to check that storage is in the right place
3 Inventory accuracy higher than 90%

Limited occurrence of missing parts (and in most cases problems can be
3 corrected within plant lead time)
2 Improvement initiatives to reduce % of missing parts involving suppliers

All shop floor storage is planned but location are not always clearly
2 identified
2 Tools, jigs & fixtures have a location (but it is not always respected)
There are excessive number of handles and large amounts of in-process
1 storage
1 Non planned storage is frequent
1 Tools, jigs & fixtures left all over the place

Incoming Quality from External Supplier
Quality has been fully pushed back to source, quality is insured before
5 parts come in
Quality reaches 6 sigmas level ~ 3.4 default per million for incoming parts
5 and material
Quality reaches level ~ 100 defaults per million for incoming parts and
4 material
4 Quality gates and procedures are applied to all suppliers / parts

Preventive approach: quality insurance team to be sent to supplier to
4 prevent problems with new parts or new process
Quality checked internally on samples and only for some
3 suppliers/products
3 Quality gates at source for some but not all incoming products
3 Proactive approach: team to be sent to supplier to solve problems
2 Quality on incoming parts is checked for all suppliers
2 Quality checked only on samples for most reliable suppliers
2 Procedures describe reaction in case a default is found on a part

High share of pre-production quality work - and possibly even double
1 checking
1 No quality gates at source / embedded in production process
1 Some procedures exist to define quality tests
What is the average number of suppliers for each raw material or 2.5+
purchased item?
1.6-2.4
1.3-1.7
1.2-1.4
1.0-1.1
On average, how often, in months, are items put up for re-sourcing? 1-11
12-17
18-23
24-36
36+
What portion of raw material & purchased parts comes from qualified 0%
suppliers with no need for incoming inspection?
1%-10%
11%-30%
31%-70%
70%-100%
What portion of raw material and purchased items is delivered directly to 0%
the point of use without incoming inspection or storage?
1%-10%
11%-30%
31%-70%
70%-100%
What portion of raw materials and purchased parts is delivered more than 0%
once per week?
1%-10%
11%-30%
31%-70%
70%-100%
CPE FSS IMPLEMENTATION CHECKLIST

No. ACTION TIMING
Start End
%
COMPL.
COMPL.
DATE
1. Complete CPE FSS Training (contact
PRUSECKA to schedule).
KO SI ______ ______
2. Source all non-core commodities to recognized
Full Service Suppliers (FSS) based on prior
program performance (Metrics).
KO SC ______ ________
3. Select key FSSs (as consensed with purchasing)
to be involved and to provide benchmarking in
the initial Pre <SI> Targets Process.
KO SI ______ ________
4. Ensure TAs (Target Agreements) are developed
with supplier involvement/consensus and as part
of the FPDS target cascade process.
SI PA ______ ________
5. Develop SOWs (Statement of Work) using the
reliability, CAE/C3P, and service guidelines/
checklists (available on FSS web site). SOW
Workshops are also available.
SI PA ______ ________
6. Select Ford DMs (Decision Makers/PMT Leaders)
and System Engineers based on the appropriate
skills required.
SI PA ______ ________
7. Verify that DMs & System Engineers have attended FSS
training. Confirm that FSSs have the skills or training plans
as identified in the collocation guidelines and sourcing letter.
SI PA ______ ________
8. Insure that the FSS process overview, DMs./
System Engineer/FSS List, and FSS roles &
responsibilities are cascaded to the entire team.
SI PA ______ ________
9. Implement and utilize FSS metrics (performance &
relationship).
SI J#1 ______ ________
10. Capture and forward Lessons Learned and Process
Issues to the Global FSS Department (TCUPP).
Ongoing N/A ________
_________________ _______________________ __________
CPE Name Vehicle Program Date
Revision 5.0 Dated: 8/24/1999
CPE FSS IMPLEMENTATION WITNESS DOCUMENTS (Attachment to
CPE Checklist)
No. ACTION DOCUMENTATION
METHOD
VERIFICATION BY
1. Complete CPE FSS Training CPE FSS Training List Peter Ruseckas
x08201
2. Source all non-core commodities to
recognized FSS based on prior program
performance.
Program Commodity Sourcing Plan. VC Purchasing Manager
3. Select key FSS to be involved and to
provide benchmarking in the initial
Pre<SI> Targets Process.
Target Team Roster. VI Supervisor
4. Ensure TAs are developed with supplier
involvement/consensus as part of the
FPDS target cascade process.
Signed Target Agreement on file w/
PMT.
FSS Program Specialist
5. Develop SOW using the reliability,
CAE/C3P, and service
guidelines/checklists. SOW Workshops
are also available.
Signed Statement-of-Work on file
w/ PMT.
6. Select Ford DMs & System Engineers
base on the appropriate skills required.
Program Team Organization Chart. FSS Program Specialist
7. Verify that DMs & System Engineers
have attended FSS training. Confirm that
FSSs have the skills or training plans as
identified in the collocation guidelines
and sourcing letter.
Ford Employee - EMS record.
FSS - Training Plans
Ford - HR review EMS
FSS - Ford DM or FSS
Project Manager
8. Ensure that the FSS process overview,
DM/System Engineer/FSS list, and FSS
roles & responsibilities are cascaded to
the entire team.
Team training attendance record
and team meeting/all-hands
agendas/minutes.
9. Implement and utilize FSS metrics
(performance & relationship).
Completed metrics on file w. PMT. FSS Program Specialist
10. Capture and forward Lessons Learned
and Process Issues to the Global FSS
Department (TCUPP).
Lessons Learned added to the report
with GFSS.
Revision 5.0 Dated: 8/24/1999
Many organizations have adapted EDI to enhance modern technology

efficiency and increased profits. Benefits of EDI include:
· Reduced cycle time
· Better inventory management
· Increased productivity
· Reduced costs
· Improved accuracy
· Improved Business relationships
· Enhanced computer service
· Increased sales
· Minimized paper use and storage
· Increased cash flow
I.1.1
Supplier's quality system is third-party certified to the QS-9000 or TS 16949 (full
compliance to TS16949 by December 14, 2006) requirements.
4/22/03:: Added the words "(fu

I.1.2 December 14, 2006) "
Existing Supplier's environmental system will be certified to ISO 14001 by July 1,
2003. Non-Q1 suppliers must comply to ISO 14001 requirements prior to Q1 award
or Q1 reinstatement.
4/22/03: Added this Expectati

I.1.3
Supplier's quality manual contains processes for all areas of the site assessment.
The quality manual is updated as needed to drive statistically valid continual
improvements in the supplier's quality system. Supplier's Senior Management Team,
including representatives from Manufacturing, Quality, Engineering, and Human 4/22/03:
I.1.4
(1) Was originally Expectation
Nonconformances identified in internal audits are not repeated.
(2) Changed wording from "S
areas of the site assessment. T
continual improvements."
4/22/03:
(1) Changed wording from: "
audits are not repeated."
I.1.5
Supplier has a documented process to identify and regularly update customer
expectations, objectives, and requirements.
I.1.6
Supplier has a documented process to identify and regularly update internal 4/22/03: Added Expectatio
expectations, objectives, and requirements.
I.1.7
Supplier has a documented process to translate internal and external expectations, 4/22/03: Added Expectatio
objectives, and requirements into QOS measurables.
4/22/03: Added Expectatio

4/22/03: Added Expectatio
I.1.7
Supplier has a documented process to translate internal and external expectations, 4/22/03: Added Expectatio
objectives, and requirements into QOS measurables.
I.1.8 4/22/03: Added Expectatio

Supplier has a documented process to assign targets and objectives to each QOS
measurable.

Supplier has a documented process to assign chosen measurables to appropriate
management levels for review, follow-up, and improvements.

Supplier utilizes action plans to drive statistically valid continual improvement of
chosen metrics and are tracked at QOS review meetings.
4/22/03:
I.1.11 (1) Changed wording from:
Supplier's management team holds monthly QOS performance review meetings with the above metrics are tracked a
representatives from Manufacturing, Quality, Engineering, and Human Resources. (2) Was original Expectatio
Improvement actions are taken by cross-functional teams that include all levels of the
organization. 4/22/03:
(1) Was original Expectation I.
(2) Changed wording from: "S
meetings; supplier's Manageme
Manufacturing, Quality, Enginee
these reviews"
I.1.12
QOS reviews include a review of all applicable Ford SIM metrics, key process
metrics, and customer satisfaction metrics.
4/22/03:
(2) Changed wording from: "
and customer satisfaction metric
I.1.13
Metrics monitoring customer satisfaction that are related to supplier manufacturing
are understood and tracked.
4/22/03:
(1) Changed wording from: "F
(2) Was original Expectation I.
4/22/02: Wording change from
******
4/22/03:
(1) Deleted Expectation: " --
(2) Was part of original Expec
******
4/22/03:
(1) Deleted Expectation: "
(2) Was part of original Exp
******
Support Systems
The systems or processes that form an infrastructure that provides stability and standardization for
the production unit
5S
5 Formal 5S improvement activities are planned according to improvement targets and audits are performed
by management (including plant manager periodically)
5
Operators carry out improvements on existing 5S
5
All line packaging are reusable and returnable
Discipline is high in the shop floor and 5S principles are applied in the non production areas (offices,
4
conference/team rooms, etc.)
4
Daily audits are carried out across the entire plant (including offices)
4
Results from audits at 90% in line with 5S rules
4
Operators clean their own area and feel responsible for 5S enforcement
3
Clean, organized work areas
3
Basic shadow boards are in place
3
Locations for material are clearly marked and respected
3
Scrap/ rework/ excess material clearly separated
3
Daily audits are performed by team leaders
Workplace looks more organized, but it is difficult to determine what is needed and there are few markings
2
to identify proper locations
2
In general, the cleanliness level is low
1
No workplace organization on the shop floor. All areas are generally disorganized and dirty
1
It is not clear what is/ is not needed
1
No plans to improve
5S
Are unneeded equipment, tools, furniture, etc. present in the area?
Are any Red Tagged items more than 3 weeks old?
Are personal belongings properly stored?
Are aisle/walk ways and workstations clearly marked and identified?
Are jigs, fixtures, tools, equipment, & inventory properly identified and in their correct locations?
Are items put away after use?
Are there max. and min. indicators for supplies?
Are cleaning materials easily accessible & properly stored

Are equipment and work station kept clean and free of oil, grease and debris?
Are designated walkways/stairs free of dirt, oil, grease and dust?
Are lines, labels and signs clean and unbroken?
Are display boards used, organized, current and tidy?
Are employees dressed appropriately and prepared?
Have specific cleaning tasks been assigned?
Are trash bins and scrap/recycle containers emptied on a regular basis?
Is the 5S program discussed at Key Indicator/Crew Meetings?
Are the tools in place to sustain the 5S program?
Overall, is the area maintaining 5S rules and disciplines?
All items not necessary for performing work are removed from the workplace, only tools and products are present at
work stations.
All cleaning equipment is stored in a neat manner, handy and easily available when needed.
All floors are cleaned and free of Debris. Oil and dirt, Cleaning of floors is done routinely.
No out dated or soiled announcements are displayed. All bulletins are arranged in a neat and orderly manner.
Fire houses and emergency equipment are un obstructed and stored in a prominent easy to locate manner. Stop
Switches and breakers, lock out points are easily identified and color coded. Lock Out tagout procedures are present
on machines.
Work in Progress, tools and other material are not left to sit directly on the floor. Large items such as tote bins are
positioned on the floor in clearly marked areas.
Aisles and walkways are clearly delineated and can be identified at a glance, lines are straight, at right angles with no
chipped or soiled paint.
Aisles are free of material and obstructions, nothing is ever placed on the lines and objects are placed at right angles to
the side lines.
Storage of boxes, containers and material is always neat and at right angles. When items are stacked, they are never
crooked or in danger of toppling over.
All machines an equipment are painted and keep clean by routine daily care. There are no places, material handling
equipment or machines in the work area more than 2 meters high that are not painted and looking clean.
Machines are cleaned and unsoiled by daily care. Glass windows and work surfaces are keep clean and polished.
Controls of machines are properly labeled and critical points for daily maintenance checks have been marked and
identified such as gage settings, fluid levels, etc. Equipment checklist are maintained at each machine.
Nothing is placed on top of machines, cabinets and equipment. Nothing l4eans against the walls or columns. Guards
and deflectors are used to keep chips and off-fall from falling on the floor.
Only documents that are necessary to the work area are present at each work station. All documents and binders are
neatly stored in a centralized location in a orderly manner.
All documents are labeled clearly to its contents and responsibility for control and revision. No unlabeled
binders/Documents are present. Obsolete documents have been removed for each work station.
Tools, jigs and fixtures are arranged for quick tool change and stored in a way that they are keep cleaned and free of
any risk of damage.
Tools, Jigs, fixtures are arranged so they can be easily changed over when set-ups are made, thus facilitating SMED.
This included gages and tools used for quality purposes.
Are arranged, divided and clearly labeled for every component and item that is placed on the item. Min max levels are
established and documented at the storage location. Color coding of different part numbers is used.
Are arranged and kept free of unused objects, including files and documents. Tools and fixtures are cleaned before
being placed in storage.
There is a disciplined system of control and maintenance to assure that each of the above it6ems is maintained at the
highest possible level. It is the responsibility of management to maintain this system.
Verify that all shifts are using correct
work practices
Are Operators fully trained on all shifts?
Are Visual Work Instructions available?
Do the Operators know the acceptance
standards?
Are the specified Tools, Sequence and
Methods being used?
Verify clean and orderly workstations
Is the workstation clean and organized?
Is the workstation well-lighted?
Confirm that there are no safety hazards or
awkward ergonomics.
Verify that all Equipment and Tooling is in proper
working order and calibrated.
Is there a documented PM program, and are
the PM checks being completed?

If the output of the machine is charted, what
does the chart indicate?
Confirm process to ensure that defects are not
passed on to next step in process.
Is there a means to identify defects?
Is there a means to stop production or otherwise
correct defects?
Make the CHECK process part of the daily
routine.
Continually verify the operation every shift using
the CHECK process. CONSISTENT ATTENTION
IS THE KEY TO SUCCESS.

All items not necessary for performing work are removed from the workplace, only tools and products are present at
work stations.
All cleaning equipment is stored in a neat manner, handy and easily available when needed.
All floors are cleaned and free of Debris. Oil and dirt, Cleaning of floors is done routinely.
No out dated or soiled announcements are displayed. All bulletins are arranged in a neat and orderly manner.
Fire houses and emergency equipment are un obstructed and stored in a prominent easy to locate manner. Stop
Switches and breakers, lock out points are easily identified and color coded. Lock Out tagout procedures are present
on machines.
Work in Progress, tools and other material are not left to sit directly on the floor. Large items such as tote bins are
positioned on the floor in clearly marked areas.
Aisles and walkways are clearly delineated and can be identified at a glance, lines are straight, at right angles with no
chipped or soiled paint.
Aisles are free of material and obstructions, nothing is ever placed on the lines and objects are placed at right angles to
the side lines.
Storage of boxes, containers and material is always neat and at right angles. When items are stacked, they are never
crooked or in danger of toppling over.
All machines an equipment are painted and keep clean by routine daily care. There are no places, material handling
equipment or machines in the work area more than 2 meters high that are not painted and looking clean.
Machines are cleaned and unsoiled by daily care. Glass windows and work surfaces are keep clean and polished.
Controls of machines are properly labeled and critical points for daily maintenance checks have been marked and
identified such as gage settings, fluid levels, etc. Equipment checklist are maintained at each machine.
Nothing is placed on top of machines, cabinets and equipment. Nothing l4eans against the walls or columns. Guards
and deflectors are used to keep chips and off-fall from falling on the floor.
Only documents that are necessary to the work area are present at each work station. All documents and binders are
neatly stored in a centralized location in a orderly manner.
All documents are labeled clearly to its contents and responsibility for control and revision. No unlabeled
binders/Documents are present. Obsolete documents have been removed for each work station.
Tools, jigs and fixtures are arranged for quick tool change and stored in a way that they are keep cleaned and free of
any risk of damage.
Tools, Jigs, fixtures are arranged so they can be easily changed over when set-ups are made, thus facilitating SMED.
This included gages and tools used for quality purposes.
Are arranged, divided and clearly labeled for every component and item that is placed on the item. Min max levels are
established and documented at the storage location. Color coding of different part numbers is used.
Are arranged and kept free of unused objects, including files and documents. Tools and fixtures are cleaned before
being placed in storage.
There is a disciplined system of control and maintenance to assure that each of the above it6ems is maintained at the
highest possible level. It is the responsibility of management to maintain this system.
Visual Management
5
Visual management is totally widespread both in support services and production units
5
The complete plant is “self evident”
5
CoE information centre visible to everyone
4
Team boards are widespread and include support areas
4
Information centres summarize business performance
4
Single point lessons(1) visually show target conditions of work place
4
Part of visual displays updated by operators
3
Team boards in production areas clearly show production status and can be understood within 5 minutes
3
It is visible if the production is having a good day or a bad day
3
Team issues and status are clearly visible on team boards
3
Inventory levels (min/max) and locations are clearly marked
3
Colours are used to help understand production areas
2
All dangerous operations are clearly marked
2
All safe walkways clearly marked
1
Virtually no examples of visual management beyond basic forms, e.g., basic signs, marked aisles
Erro Proffing and Qualitry
There is a formalised quality feedback process that allows operators to receive feedback from both
Internal and external customers. (such as a Quality Operating System (QOS))
Defective items are immediately detected when they occur in the production process. Very seldom does a bad part make
it to a downstream process or to the customer with a lot of suspect parts in between requiring additional inspection
(Check Rework loops and Hold areas for examples of defects)
A Quality system exists to address supplier quality issues in the production process.
Workers understand the basics of error proofing
There is a formalised system in place for either production operators or specific error
proofing teams to analyse defects
and identify error proofing opportunities.
Evidence exists to prove that error proofing devices have been implemented to eliminate the top production defects
(Internal / External) for each work area in the plant.
Error proofing devices that have been installed have been visually identified and are monitored for effectiveness
and maintained in a sound working condition.
Error proofing has been applied to production support processes to eliminate defects in
safety, maintenance,
gauging and material supply. (e.g. Parts bins are colour coded, part kitting, part orientation in
packaging, etc)
TPM
All managers and operators know the aspects of TPM.
All employees have knowledge of & there is adherence to safety regulations relative to their work area.
There are planned maintenance schedules for all key equipment and tooling, including lubrication plan
Machine productivity, breakdown and repair are recorded and analysed to identify improvements
There is a There is a formalised quality feedback process that allows operators to receive feedback from both
Internal Internal and external customers. (such as a Quality Operating System (QOS))
and
external
customer
CMMS
s. (such
as 5 a The CMMS is widely used both by maintenance and production to track performance and improve TPM
Quality
Operatin
5
g System Most modules of the CMMS find some application (e.g. >10 for SAP and Maximo)
(QOS))
5
The CMMS is kept up to date most efficiently through links with OEMs and Software supplier server
4
The system covers all equipments within the plant
4
System data are used to improve preventive maintenance (new routines of preventive maintenance)
4
Main users are maintenance staff but equipment operators are also able to use CMMS basic functions
There is a system to register numerical data regarding failures and maintenance operations for most
3
equipments
3
The system is used to monitor preventive maintenance
3
System data are used to improve preventive maintenance (optimization of frequencies)
3
Equipment performance charts are produced, analyzed and result in actions
2
Equipment failures and maintenance operations are duly registered on paper and displayed on equipment
2
Use of data is not practical and limited to post failure analysis of past events history
1
There is no complete tracking of equipment failure, neither of maintenance operations
TPM and Capacity Utilization
5
A maximum of maintenance is planned (at least 90% is planned)
5
Average OEE more than 85% over scheduled working hours
5
PM (oil analysis, vibration analysis, etc.) is done wherever sensible
5
PMs are continuously improved through kaizen activities
5
There is a high degree of operator involvement in checking and calibrating tools
5
Basic reactive maintenance is also performed by operators (short & easy repairs)
4
Equipment failure rarely impacts production
4
Majority (70-80%) of maintenance activities are planned
4
A large part of first level operations are performed by operators
4 All equipment failures (>10mins) have a quick response followed by root-cause problem solving with high
involvement of production and maintenance
4
There is a full failure statistics database
3
OEE is measured consistently
3
All equipment have PM plans with checklists/ checkpoints posted
3
Most PMs are based on time frequency
3
Team members are responsible for basic PM activities
3
Equipment uptime is charted vs. established targets
3
SPC charts are posted on equipment
2
Planned vs. unplanned maintenance ratio is measured
PM plans in place for some selected pieces of equipment, but majority (~70%) of maintenance activity is
2
for unplanned activities
2
Only maintenance technicians work on machines
2
Little information available on downtime/OEE
1
Frequent equipment breakdown with no downtime/OEE information
1
Machines are dirty and there is no PM schedule or checklist
Change Overs SMED
5
All changeovers are timed within single minutes
5
Changeover tools like SMED are used extensively
Detailed processes exist for all equipments Changeovers are completed by workforce closest to the
5 4
machine
5
4No test pieces required following changeovers
4
4Large scale activity ongoing to optimize changeovers
4
4Changeovers carried out by operators (not by functional departments)
4
4Changeover processes are documented, detailed, accurate, & followed
3
4Policy to reduce changeovers times is clear
3
4All major changeovers are mapped
3
4Video is used to analyze changeovers
3
4Test pieces are minimal
3
4Processes are generally but not always documented, detailed, accurate & followed
Workforce close to the machines can perform some changeover functions, but a major part is done by
3 4
maintenance
2
4Little use of changeover optimization tools like SMED
2
4Changeover times are monitored
1
4Changeover times over 2 hours on average
1
4Changeover make up large part of machine downtime
1
4The affinity with changeover optimization tools like SMED is low
1
4Detailed procedures for changeovers do not exist or exist but are not followed
1
4Changeovers are still mainly the business of the maintenance / engineering force
Problem Solving
5
Problems are seen as an opportunity to improve
5
Targets are set to find problems within process
5
Operators and functional teams work together to solve problems using a variety of problem solving tools
5
Some operators can lead PDCA problem solving work groups
4
All problems are reviewed and appropriate teams are assigned to solve them
4
Cross functional teams use more advanced problem solving tools
4
Local issues are dealt by operators using 5 whys
4
A knowledge management system created to capture problems and corresponding solutions
4
A structured process of problem solving relying on facts and figures is taught to all staff
4
Problem issuer validates that problem has been solved and can be closed
Status of problems is displayed on team panel (problem, date of issuance, different steps of solving
4
progress, person in charge)
4
A plant unique database of issues tracks status of all problems
3
Cross functional teams are formed to solve major incidents using 8D, PDCA.
3
Problem solving training carried out for team leaders
3
There is a robust escalation process (clear deadlines before escalating)
3
Major issues are solved
2
Issues are raised by team and escalated to get a solution
2
Major problems are analyzed for root cause and counter measures are put in place by support team
2
Simple problem solving tools are used sporadically (e.g. Brainstorming)
1
Majority of problems are captured after an abnormality occurred
1
Quick superficial “fixes” are deployed
1
Root source analysis is not carried out
1
Problems constantly reoccur
KPI
Balanced scorecard system is in place, with targets shared by plant, and broken down to departments and
5
individuals
5
KPIs are available in real time
5
Local KPIs can be consolidated at plant level in an automatic way
5
There is an alert when some areas experience large deviations to normality
4
All areas, including support function have KPIs
4
Each team uses KPIs covering safety, quality, costs and productivity
4
Most of the KPIs can be directly affected by team effort
4
KPIs are displayed on team boards
4
Most KPI s are updated daily
4
All KPIs have an angled line target, refined annually
4
Some operators fill in some KPIs
4
Personal objectives are linked to KPIs
4
Team incentives are correlated to KPIs
3
There is a clear message from senior management to develop and install relevant KPIs
3
KPIs have deployed down to each production team and have been standardized (but not all of them)
3
Most KPIs are updated monthly or weekly
3
KPIs include service level agreements to internal or external customers
Only some KPIs and incentives exist, yet they widely differ among production areas and are independent
2
from each other (no linked system)
2
Plant KPIs are in place
1
No KPI system tied to plant performance
1
Overall cost or/and units produced are the only measures used
5.3.2 If The condition

product of product
or product is visibly
packaging checked
is visibly whenititisismarked
damaged received.
with “Hold”
tags and segregated in the hold area for a Quality Control Technician, or QC Associate
5.3.4 If suspected tonon-conforming
assess. Followraw 5.6 material parts are detected a Production
of this procedure.
Associate will inform a Team Leader. The Team Leader will assess the condition of the
5.3.3and The
parts condition
whether or notofit raw material parts is visibly
is a non-conformance. checked
If not, during
the parts theput
will be production
back into
process.
production, or if there is a non-conformance, mark them with a “Hold” tag and
segregate them in the hold area for a Quality Control Technician, or QC Associate to
assess. Follow 5.6 of this procedure.
5.3.5 If the non-conforming raw material is contained to a limited number of parts, it
will be dispositioned as rejected material. It shall be identified as such by completing a
5.3.5.1
reject If theattaching
tag, non-conforming raw material
it to the part(s) is from
and placing it Assembly and itFollow
in a reject bin. is dispositioned
5.7 of thisas
rejected material it shall be tagged and procedure. identified as such by being placed in a Red reject
bin and having dimensions/comments written on the tag, and taken to the QC Dept.
Each part has a computer tracking file of rejects by supplier where the quantity of
rejects and the pertaining issues are recorded for data entry. Follow 5.7 of this
5.4 W.I.P. or completed parts detected procedure.with non-conformances, shall be removed
5.4.2
from Ifthethe rework/repair
main productioncannotprocess, becontained,
immediately andcompleted,
segregatedthe non-conforming
into the appropriately parts
are to be placed into acoloredYellow bin bin (ifBlue,
we know rework/repair
Yellow, or Red). can be completed to
5.4.1
produceIf the
annon-conformance
acceptable part. Ifisrework/repair
minor and easily reworked/repairable,
to produce an acceptable part it may
is be
questionable, place parts in a Blue hold bin for inspection and disposition by QC,re-and
immediately repaired and placed back into the production process after being
inspected
identified withand confirming
a yellow thatlisting
hold tag the non-conforming characteristics
reasons, lot number, date, shift,areand
corrected.
originator,
for later processing.
5.4.3 If the Reworked
the non-conformance parts
non-conformance is will be re-inspected
is non-repairable
not repairable, it by a
it will QC
will be Technician/Associate
be dispositioned
dispositioned as as
5.4.3.1 If before being returned to the as
production inventory.
rejected/scrap material. It shall be identified by completing a reject hold tag listingtag
rejected/scrap material. It shall be identified such by completing a reject hold the
listing
reasons,reasons, attaching
and placed it to reject
in a Red the part(s)
bin andandhaving
placingtheit in a Reddimensions/comments
affected reject bin. Follow 5.7
written on it. Each non-conformance of this
partprocedure.
shall be documented in the Non-Conforming
material Log Book in the QC Office where the quantity of rejects and the pertaining
5.4.4 If issues are recorded forisdata
the non-conformance entry.
major Followmany
or affects 5.7 of this aprocedure.
parts, Team Leader and a
Quality Control Technician or QC Associate shall be notified, and they will notify
managers and decide the severity of the situation/occurrence.
5.4.5 If the non-conformance is major or affects many parts, the production process
shall be interrupted, investigated, traced by lot number, and the following steps taken.
All finished goods that may be affected by the non-conformance will be contained and
segregated, then put into the hold area, and identified with a hold tag listing reasons.
which are suspect will be isolated for inspection
verification.
5.5.5.2 If there is a possibility of a non-conformance reaching the customer, the
customer shall be notified immediately by the Quality Control department to explain the
occurrence, and provide the material identification and quantity information.
Quantities of product that appear to be composed primarily of non-conforming parts

will be rejected and scrapped after QC evaluation, when MSC is at fault, or rejected and
The Quality Control
returned Department
to the will be responsible
supplier directly without anyfor assigning
sorting and training
activity.
Associates or temporary workers for sorting purposes for MSC issues. For Supplier
issues, a Quality Control Technician/Associate will contact the Supplier with the details.
The Supplier will then disposition scrap on site, return or arrange for temporary
workers to come to MSC and sort the non-conforming product. The Supplier will be
charged results
Product inspection directlywill
by be
therecorded
temporaryonagency forDocumentation
a Sorting the costs incurred.
Form (QC-SD-
004). The Sorting Documentation Forms will be filed in the supplier binders or in the
5.6.2.3 All totes, baskets, or skids ofMSC
goodsection.
sorted parts will be marked with an “O.K.
Sorted” tag and the original product lot tags, label/container number and put back into
storage or production.
Health and Safety

§ Safety Monitor checklists are completed.
§ Job Safety Analysis has been performed.
§ Appropriate Personal Protective Equipment is used.
§ Pedestrian and transportation aisles are unblocked.
§ Utility/air hoses routed off of walking/working surfaces.
§ Safety showers and eye wash stations are properly located in area.
§ Chemical use, labeling, storage & application methods are documented.
§ Chemicals & protective material are kitted.
§ Flammables are stored in appropriate cabinets or designated storage rooms.
§ Accident prevention signs are displayed as appropriate.
§ Guardrails are in place.
§ Preventative maintenance for chemical exhaust/dust is maintained.
§ Hoists, scissors jacks, etc. are used in material handling.
§ Constant lifting has been eliminated or minimized.
§ The need for stairs or ladders has been reduced or eliminated.
§ Routine operations are designed to avoid crawling stooping or overreaching
All managers and operators know the aspects of TPM.

There is no understanding of TPM
There is a basic awareness of TPM – can describe the difference between preventive and productive maintenance
There is a basic awareness of TPM – as above plus can describe the 6 major losses
There is a thorough awareness of TPM – can describe the differences between preventive, improvement and predictive maintena
All managers and operators understand the complete aspects of TPM – can describe all functions & goals
Note: If only half the management & operators know the aspects of TPM the score should be halved
Note: Definitions of functions & goals.

Productive maintenance in which everyone is involved eg the designers, the suppliers of production materials and installations/m
plus the users (production and maintenance) and supporting services.
Functions:
· Product Design including suppliers of components
· Process/installation design including suppliers of installations
· Production/maintenance.
· Supporting departments eg. Engineering, personnel and IT
Goals:
1. Zero faults
2. Zero interruptions
3. Zero accidents
4. Maximum cost efficiency
All employees have knowledge of & there is adherence to safety regulations relative to their work area.
There is no knowledge of safety regulations and Safety lock-out procedures do not exist
There is a third party audit system in place, employees have some awareness of safety regulations
There is a third party audit system with evidence of findings and countermeasures
There is a team leader audit system with evidence of findings and countermeasures
There is evidence of regular safety self-audits for all areas
There are planned maintenance schedules for all key equipment and tooling, including lubrication plan
There are no planned maintenance schedules
There are checklists indicating 'what' is to be maintained
There are checklists and technical descriptions indicating 'what',' interval' and 'where' items are to be maintained
As above, plus: task preparations containing 'work method', tool specification and planned time
to maintain allocation, defined person responsible
Analysis of post execution of maintenance tasks is carried out to enable continuous improvement of standards. Recors are availa
Machine productivity, breakdown and repair are recorded and analysed to identify improvements
There are no records of downtime
There are records of downtime but no analysis is performed
There are records of downtime, analysis is carried out & some action plans established to
improve the efficiency & quality of the different production processes but no goals
There are goals & action plans established to improve the efficiency & quality of the different
production processes but no trends
There are trends, goals & action plans established to improve the efficiency & quality of the
different production processes
There is a managed spares stockholding for each equipment type.

There is no managed spares stockholding
There are spare parts stocked
There is a spare parts inventory and re-order control
There is a well defined policy for management of spares stockholding
High use spare parts are stored adjacent to point of use and there is consignment stock
following ABC analysis on usage and cost. FMEA risk management is available for spares
Note: ABC are Runners, Repeaters, Strangers
Operators perform and analyse simple maintenance tasks according to designated check sheets and standards on a
daily basis
Operators do not perform any maintenance tasks
Operators perform maintenance tasks with basic training
Operators are subject to maintenance skill matrix review based on standards.
Operators perform & monitor maintenance activity time and abnormalities are recorded
Operators perform & monitor maintenance activity time, record, analyse abnormalities and trends are available
The maintenance performance is continually monitored. I.e.% Preventive Maintenance

plan achievement, response times
to analyse a problem, the number of analysed items and number resolved.
There is no performance monitor
Performance is monitored
Action plans are available but no trends
Action plans and trends are available but goals are not defined
Action plans and trends are available to reach well defined goals
The equipment maintenance performance is regularly monitored e.g. MTBF/MTTR, and

resources allocated
in response to trends.
There is no performance monitor
Performance is monitored
Action plans are available but no trends
Action plans and trends are available but goals are not defined
Action plans and trends are available to reach well defined goals which lead to predictive aspect of maintenance
Note: MTBF, Mean Time Between Failure / MTTR, Mean Time to Repair (or Rectify)
Changeovers schedules are communicated to enable adequate preparation of tools, materials and people.
No/late communication
Verbal communication with no standard notice provided
Verbal communication with standard notice
Written communication with standard notice but not posted by the equipment
Written communication with standard notice posted by the equipment
Changeover time and abnormalities (including schedule adherence) are visibly tracked and countermeasur
No changeover times are tracked
Overall changeover time is tracked, but not visually displayed
Overall changeover time is tracked and visually displayed
Overall changeover time is tracked and trended against a target
Every changeover time is recorded with internal, external times identified and abnormalities are consequently subje
Teams have received training in Quick Changeover procedures and are actively improving methods.
No team in place
One team in place, carrying isolated activities
QCO teams in place, carrying activities on their specific processes
Fully trained cross-functional multi-level QCO teams across the factory, carrying regular activities and improving ch
Fully trained cross-functional multi-level QCO teams across the factory, carrying regular activities and improving ch
Changeover activities have been subject to detailed process analysis techniques such as motion, time stu
and video-taping
No analysis has taken place
25% of original constraint changeovers have been subject to process analysis
All original constraint changeovers have been subject to process analysis and the new constraint have been identif
As new changeover procedures are developed, they are standardised and replicated in other areas of the p
New QCO procedures remain isolated to their initial application area, no standard has been developed
New QCO procedures remain isolated to their initial application area but standards have been developed
New QCO procedures have been replicated to ONE other application following standards
New QCO procedures have been replicated to all similar applications following standards
New QCO procedures have been adapted to all appropriate areas following standards
All tooling, equipment and materials required for the next production run are prepared in advance as per d
process and located close to point of use and highlighted when ready.
No documented procedures in place
Procedure in place but not adhered to (tooling, equipment and materials not prepared in advance or located close
All tooling, equipment and materials prepared in advance (through custom and practice rather than procedures) an
Tooling, equipment and material prepared as per procedure but not located close to point of use
All tooling, equipment and materials prepared in advance as per documented, located close to point of use and hig
When not in use, all dies, fixtures and change over tools are stored in a neat, orderly fashion and are maint
good working condition.
Tools and fixtures not maintained between use
Tools and fixture prepared (cleaned, maintained, repaired) only when required for usage
Tools and fixture are prepared in advance but storage method and location not controlled
When not in use, all dies, fixtures and changeover tools are stored in a neat, orderly fashion and maintained in goo
As above, plus: there is a system in place to identify tools ready to go, including low utilisation tools (e.g. red/ambe
Special tools, fixture & equipment have been designed/implemented to reduce changeover time - where co
Changeover time have been reduced on existing machine using standard tooling
Fixtures have been rationalised to minimise number of tools required, standard tools still being used
Specialist tools have been made for changeovers
Design have been changed so that no tools are required
Design have been changed so that no tools are required and this has been replicated across similar machines
There is an effort to level production schedules by spreading the monthly customer demand evenly over th
The production rate throughout a linked manufacturing system has been defined around the TAKT time. If t
Kanban quantities are reviewed so that the Re-Order points / Re-order quantities, Min, Max and safety stoc
Changeovers in production are made to support the mix of customer demand and not to support long prod
Changeovers schedules are communicated to enable adequate preparation of tools, materials and people.
Changeover time and abnormalities (including schedule adherence) are visibly tracked and countermeasur
Teams have received training in Quick Changeover procedures and are actively improving methods.
Changeover activities have been subject to detailed process analysis techniques such as motion, time stu
and video-taping
All tooling, equipment and materials required for the next production run are prepared in advance as per d
process and located close to point of use and highlighted when ready.
When not in use, all dies, fixtures and change over tools are stored in a neat, orderly fashion and are maint
good working condition.
Special tools, fixture & equipment have been designed/implemented to reduce changeover time - where co
61+
29-60
What is the average overall setup time (in minutes) for major equipment? 16-30
10-15
0-9
0%
1%-6%
What portion of machine operators have had formal training in Rapid Setup techniques? 7%-18%
19%-42%
43%-100%
Not at All
Informal
Tracking &
Review
To what extent are managers and workers measured and judged on setup performance?
To what extent are managers and workers measured and judged on setup performance? Setups
Tracked,
Performanc
e In Job
Description
Is a changeover for alternate products a part of the system requirements?
Are part prints or other materials required for the changeover defined?
Has a changeover plan been developed and documented?

Is there a time estimate and procedure list for changeovers seen in the plant
application areas of SMED?
5 Quick Changeover implemented plant-wide.

1 Implemented in IAA or less than or equal to 25% of plant or not done.
Are there Test Plan opportunities as a result of the system build

requirements?
Can subassemblies or components be cycled or run independent of full
system operation?
Does risk assessment demand special Test Plans for some components
or subassemblies?
Are there any opportunities to eliminate infant mortality failures through
early operation of components or subassemblies?
Does the Run - off Plan include reliability focused criteria?
Have any critical maintainability issues been included in the Run - off
Plan?
Have maintainability measures been estimated and tested in Run - off?
Is their any evidence that plans exist to add any of the standards listed below to reduce die
change time frames.
5 Add heels to all dies to standardize die heights and press location points.
4 Standardized Die Plates to achieve standardized die height and press location points.
3 Standardize bolt holes and sizes.
2 Purchase Air Wrenches to speed bolting/unbolting process.
1 Standardized Clamps and dies.
Is their any evidence that plans exist to any of the improvement standards listed
below to reduce die change time frames.
5 Store Dies at the Press.
4 Die Racks for storing new and old dies.
3 Revolving Die Cart/Table for holding new and old dies.
2 Moving Tower for staging multiple dies at the press.
1 Standardizing of Die heights
Ideas to Speed the Setting/Adjusting of Ram Heights (15% of remaining Changeover Tim
1. Standardize die heights by use of die plates or engineering changes.

2. Use of Numerical Controls for Ram Adjustments.
General Improvements:
1. Clean work area with no oil/grime accumulation on Press.

2. No Oil Dry on floor and press.
Quick Changeover
Has the facility deployed a Quick Changeover process, which includes operator
participation in the identification of applications?
5 Quick Changeover implemented plant-wide.
Where Airbus Production System is implemented, are the Work Group members,
supervisors, and superintendents knowledgeable regarding Quick Changeover
techniques, applications in their work area, and impact on measurables?
5 Quick Changeover techniques and knowledge apparent plant-wide.
Work Group memebers knowledgable of Quick Changeover applications in IAA, or less
than 25% of the plant.
Work Group members knowledgeable of Quick Changeover applications in greater than
25%, but less than or equal to 50% of plant.
50%, but less than or equal to 75% of plant.
75% of plant.
Work Group members knowledgeable of Quick Changeover applications plantwide.
Can the Work Groups provide a list of existing and potential Quick Changeover
applications (i.e.- line survey), along with any baseline data applicable to each
operation, process, or support system?
5 List of applications documented plant-wide.
4 List of applications provided in greater than 75% of the plant.
List of applications provided in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the
3 plant.
List of applications provided in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the
2 plant.
List of applications provided in IAA, or less than 25% of the plant orWork Groups cannot
1 provide a list of applications.
Do the Work Group Display Boards document plans, timing, and responsibility for
existing & potential Quick Changeover applications, based on the priority established by
measurables, with the goal of increasing equip. availability and/or reducing downtime?
Not Done
Implemented in IAA or less than or equal to 25% of plant.
Do the Work Groups monitor changeover times for existing applications on an ongoing
basis, in order to monitor progress and identify potential new techniques and/or
improvements?
Changeover times not monitored.
Changeover times monitored in IAA, or less than 25% of the plant.
Changeover times monitored in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of the
plant.
Changeover times monitored in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of the
plant.
Changeover times monitored in greater than 75% of the plant.
Changeover times monitored plant-wide.
Do the Work Groups update, create and maintain current information on relevant Quick
Changeover applications on the required reference documents, including QPS Sheets,
Work Analysis Sheets, Capacity Analysis Sheets, Control Plans, and Job Aids?
Reference documents current in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of plant.

Reference documents current in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of
plant.
plant.
plant.
Reference documents current plant-wide.
Do the Work Groups apply Quick Changeover applications equally effectively to non-
traditional applications in both production and non-production areas (e.g. assembly
areas, production tools, maintenance)?
Not Done
Implemented in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of plant.
Implemented in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of plant.
Non-production Quick Changeover applications implemented plant-wide.
As new changeover techniques are developed, are the best practices standardized and
replicated throughout other areas of the plant?
Not Done
Best practices captured and replicated in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of plant.
Best practices captured and replicated in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to
50% of the plant.
Best practices captured and replicated in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to
75% of the plant.
Best practices captured and replicated in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the
plant.
Best practices captured and replicated plant-wide.
Where FPS has been deployed, are changeovers scheduled in advance and
communicated with the Work Groups so that all operators know the day's schedule for
changeovers.
Not Done
Implemented in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of plant.
Schedules communicated plant-wide.
Can the Work Groups demonstrate true optimization of both internal and external
activities and all aspects of setup are streamlined for all changeovers, such that
equipment availability is maximized and downtime is minimized?
5 Internal and external activities optimized plant-wide.

4 Implemented in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
3 Implemented in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of plant.
1 Implemented in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of plant or Not Done.
Can the facility demonstrate the use of Quick Changeover techniques to support
the mix of customer demand (e.g. Batch of One philosophy), resulting in
changeovers occurring within the specified Customer Demand Rate?
5 Changeovers take place within Customer Demand Rate plant-wide.

4 Implemented in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
1 Implemented in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of plant or not done.
s, materials and people.
cked and countermeasures are developed.
es are consequently subject to corrective action processes
proving methods.
activities and improving changeovers methods

activities and improving changeovers methods, and training new teams
uch as motion, time study
onstraint have been identified and targeted
ed in other areas of the plant.

en developed
been developed
ared in advance as per documented
advance or located close to point of use)

ather than procedures) and located close to point of use
ose to point of use and highlighted when ready
ly fashion and are maintained in

ion and maintained in good working condition
ation tools (e.g. red/amber/green tag status)
ngeover time - where cost effective.
ross similar machines
r demand evenly over the period,so that the daily production volume for a part does not vary substantially.
round the TAKT time. If the process has a fixed cycle time the facility may have to alter the run time accordingly rather than slow t
Min, Max and safety stock level are correct to the current production rate.
not to support long production runs, WIP inventory buffers, or daily short ship emergencies, etc.
s, materials and people.
cked and countermeasures are developed.
proving methods.
uch as motion, time study
ared in advance as per documented
ly fashion and are maintained in
ngeover time - where cost effective.

ning Changeover Time):
gineering changes.
dingly rather than slow the production rate.
Total Cost
F&T
Operations facilitized at maximum forecasted capacity and
complexity. Requirements based on maximum allowable operating
pattern with equipment satisfying requirements for the least cost. Life
cycle cost not considered.
Facilities procurement decision supported by Life Cycle Cost
analysis. CPMT uses VA/VE analysis to determine variable (product
content) versus investment tradeoffs.
Life cycle analysis used in equipment acquisition process. Equipment
reuse is considered in acquisitions. Investment cost optimized due to
reduced buffer size.
Standard machines designed with less complexity. Many of the
machines processing batch size is greater than one unit. Equipment
acquisition timed to capacity growth curve.
Project funded for single piece flow processes at min. customer
demand rate. Standard equipment which is less complex,
reconfigurable and right sized for production requirements is
purchased. Warranty not purchased with equipment.
Equipment acquired using life cycle costing to minimize total cost.
Long term partnerships developed with equipment suppliers leads to
standard equipment. Facilities investment is optimized. Warranty
costs are eliminated.
Material Inventory Cost
Spare part investment based on supplier recommendations without
use of historical data. Spending limited by program budget.
Partnering with the Commodity Management Supplier (CMS), a
spare part strategy is developed based on R&M analysis. Spares are
purchased based on analysis and limited by program budget.
R&M process used to minimize spare part requirements. Plan for
spare part maintenance process developed regardless of ownership.
Majority of parts are paid for when used.
Standard machines allow for use of standard interchangeable spares.
Procurement timing plan developed with CMS. Allocation for spares
procurement contained by plant business plan.
Spares reduced to minimum levels through R&M strategy
Standard spares carried by suppliers. Spares strategy updated based
on change in customer demand.
Labor Content
Operations manned at maximum capacity and complexity.
Requirements based on maximum allowable operating pattern with
contingency. Indirect labor allocated as a percentage of direct labor.
Labor cost per unit is inversely proportional to volume.
Workload analysis performed to determine appropriate level of
indirect labor consistent with internal logistics plan and maintenance
requirements.
Workload analysis performed to determine appropriate level of
indirect labor consistent with internal logistics plan and maintenance
requirements.
Manning estimated through simulation and tested on prototype floor
with SE team and the effected workgroup.
Workgroups will lead effort to determine manning requirements using
trial build process. Fluctuations in work content due to complexity
absorbed by varying manning levels.
Labor cost per unit is constant at varying levels of demand. All non-
value added tasks have been identified and reviewed for elimination.
Advanced Process Quality Planning
Product designed without input from
operations. Quality is "inspected in."
Minimal use of quality planning tools
(FMEA, DCP). Scrap and rework is
considered in capacity planning.
Product team appropriately staffed per

PDS timing and requirements. Product
Team utilizing design and process FMEA.
Some design changes made to reduce
process RPN.
DCP reaction plans include predictive

machine adjustments based on quality
data. Process improvement plans
implemented to reduce process variability
(CpK). Quality is inspected in but does
not interrupt flow.
Equipment quality performance allows

sequential production with controlled
buffers. In process error detection planned
based on history of similar equipment.
Product quality allows sequential

production with controlled buffers.
Quality inspections planned based on
history of similar equipment. Product
quality is not effected during or as a result
of changeover.
Product quality is not effected by

fluctuations in customer demand. Capacity
planning assumes zero defects and error
occurrence due to prevention strategies.
Program staffing determine by

engineering and operations management.
Minimal ergonomic considerations in
initial installation. Layout assumes
independent operators rather than work
groups.
SE team staffed with hourly workgroup
members. Health, safety and ergonomic
design requirements developed for each
station. SE team develops plant based
training requirements to launch the
program. QPS draft development led by
hourly SE team members.
Workload balanced to cycle time. Process

control boards, visual factory, team
meeting area, and lean layout principles
including work loops implemented where
applicable to allow work groups to
manage their process.
Workload balanced to customer demand

rate. Process control boards, visual
factory, and lean layout principles
including work loops implemented where
applicable to allow work groups to
manage their process.
Work group members and facilities are

flexible. Change overs documented using
QPS. Change over can be completed
within customer demand rate time to
support complexity.
Work group members and facilities are

flexible. Change over can be completed
within customer demand rate to support
complexity. QPS drafts developed for a
range of customer demand rates.
Perfrom Value S
Value Stream Map Raw M
Value Stream Map Supplier In Bo
Value Stream Map Suppl
Value Stream Map From our Fa
Value Stream Map Organizations B
Value Stream Indivdual Component or C
Identify Value Added vs Non-Value A
Identify Waste and
Use Six Sigma to ID and Eli
Identify areas of
Identify areas of excess invent
Identify wast
Identify areas where parts or
Investiage opportunities for transpo
Investiage opportunities for transportation im
Investiage opportunities for transportation improv
Investiage opportunities for transportation impro
Ideintify areas were
Re-layout of Process to elimin
Re-layout of Warehouse to Process to
Identify long set-up time
Identify Incapa
Ideintify areas of p
Identify areas of Po
Idenitfy areas where L
Ideintify areas where Lack of A
Ideintify areas where P
Identify areas where Inconsisten
Ideintify areas where ineffective Pro
Identify areas where lack of W
Work on Project to improve
Work on Project to im
Work on Project to reduce supplier lead time
Identify Type of T
Training on the need for Cont
Training on Total Prod
Training on the Valu
Training on 5 S
Training on Was
Training on E
Training on SMED
Training on Pro
Training on Time Study a
Training on Theo
Training on Quality Management Sys
Training on using cre
Training on Employee Involvement with simpl
Training on J
Training on Internal K
Training on External K
Training on Downtime Red
Training on E
Training on On
Training on Use of S
Training on Ide
Training on W
Training on Using and Implm
Training on implmenting A
Training on EH & S System (Id
Idenitfy areas for Just In Time
Production and non
Evalute current pull
ID opportunity for improving m
Investigate possibility for smal
Identify opportunities for o
Identify area for eliminating Mu
Ideintify opportunities for creating
Identify Opportunities for creating
Analyize if Production
Identify area to convert packagin
Identify area to convert packagin
Identify area to Increa
Identify area to imporve
Identify areas to improve
Identify Areas Autonomation
Does the machine have automatic o
Analyize if the the machine stops when an
Identify the process or machines
Ideintfy iof the machine can send def
Identify means for detection of defective
Identify the processes capability to br
Analyize Design Poka Yoke, Design Visual Poka Yoka, Proc
Evaluated Pokayoka effectiveness aga
Evaluate Pokayoka ability to tops flow without m
Determine for provide low co
Identify where Pokoyoka ideas have been m
Determine if the pokayoka is simp
Determine if the Pokayoka can be
Determine if the Pokayoka w
Implement Peopl
Work Group area Board with Takt Time, Standard WIP
Work Group boards For Materials: Kanban;
Work Group boards For Machines: Andon; broken dow
Investigate the need f
Rate machines ability to detect abnorm
Rate if machine abnorma
Quantify if quantity abnormality leads to
Quantify if the machines detect the requi
Identify Effectiveness of
Run each product every day in t
Run mixed model sequence when w
Total Quali
Identify if Quality Control requires the participation of a
Identify if excessive Quality Co
Idenitfy effectivness of Quality Control Data recording, data ret
Define the use of or implement the use o
Identify area where product val
Identify area where protoy
Identify area where the product de
Identify areas where the CAD, FEA and simulation are
Identify effectivenes of
Timing of setups (inc
Timing of packagin
Timing of human
Best combination of worker and machine to achieve outp
Verify or establish and clarify th
Develop for specific area Quality, Quant
Identify Takt tim
Create or Identify th
Identify Sta
Perfrom a Takt Tim
Define customer time period co
Define customer net operating time is total available tim
Idenitfy allmanual operations, walking, inspec
Idenitfy if opportunities to eliminate waitin
Define sequence of activities that each wo
ID Standard W
Specify the minimum number of pieces of inventory
Automatic operations require standard WIP to enable the
Identify if no standard WIP is r
IdenitfyOpportunities for Tool Ch
Lower setup times = more frequent setups =
Define and record typ
Define necessary ite
Idenitfy what components nee
Idenitfy what components n
Idenitfy what components ne
Define and establish a plan for Setu
Define and separate inter
Convert internal to
Reduce all remaining a
Define operating conditio
Establish methods of Preheat-Cool down m
Standardize necessary change over funct
define with the tool change that tools or materilas replace a
Idenitfy the opportunity for the
Identify the opportunity for pre
Define the list of i
Define parallel operations that can b
Identify the opportunity for improve clamping
Identify the opportunity to eliminate all ad
Identify the opportunity to autom
Define where and enforce Tools, die
Define or implment the use o
OVERVIEW OF SOME OF THE CONTINUO
Time Observ
Process Cap
Standard Work Co
Standard W
Setup Reduction O
Spaghetti
Set-up time Reductio
Extrenal Set-u
Pre-Post Kaizen Documentation
5S Area Evalu
Visual Contro In
Kaizen Target Progre
Process Capa
Cycle Time Versus
Red Tag and Red
Wip and Inventory
Workplace La
Measureable Re
Downtime Rec
Spare Parts Tr
Lean Asses
Mistake Proffing
Worker Flexia
House Keep
PFMEA-Contr
DPMO
Reliability and Maintain
Tool Chan
Takt Time Reo
PM Check off and
Supplier Au
House Keep
Quality Chart Genera
Fishbone D
SIPOC D
House of Qua
5 Why Ana
House Keep
TYPICAL KAIZEN WO
Quick and Crude is bette
First try improvements with
Improve up
Base analysis on
The germ of the next action
This leads to quick a
Standard Approach for P
Observe current process by timing and
Analyze Current P
Develop Process Capacity Table
Create Cycle Time vs
Finalize KAIZE
Determine desire
Revise layout and n
Establish sta
Run full production and v
Develop new cycle tim
Develop new Standard W
Develop new Stan
Implement new Visual M
Kaizen
Keep an open m
Maintain a pos
Never leave in a si
Create a blamele
Practice mutual re
Treat others as you
One person, one vot
No such thing as
Understand the thought pro
Review samples produced on production process
Is the basic appearance of the sample parts acceptable?
From the team's experience with the prototype vehicle

builds, do the parts fit and function in the expected
manner?
Design Status
Does the supplier have appropriate knowledge and
capability to access WERS and PDGS, as necessary, at
both the Engineering and Manufacturing locations?
Have all required Job #1 engineering changes been
incorporated?
Are there changes planned for post-Job #1

implementation that may threaten support of the Launch
Ramp Plan (Rate of Climb) or ongoing production DPV?
Review the drawings. Are all Ford Released drawings
and specifications complete and will parts be produced to
the Engineering Release level indicated on the drawings?
Have recyclability issues been addressed and are parts
identified appropriately?
Review of DVP&SOR. Have all tests been satisfactorily
completed?
Are appropriate plans in place to close all open AIMs,

WERs, Quality, or other concerns?
Perfrom Value Stream Mapping
Value Stream Map Raw Material to Finished Goods
ue Stream Map Supplier In Bound Material to Finished Goods
Value Stream Map Supply Chain to Organization
lue Stream Map From our Facility To Customer Point of Use
Stream Map Organizations Big Picture Goals-Objectives-Vision
am Indivdual Component or Complete Assembly Distances Travelled
Value Added vs Non-Value Added Activities in the Value Stream
Identify Waste and Scope of Project
Use Six Sigma to ID and Eliminate Defective Products
Identify areas of Over Production
dentify areas of excess inventories-Inbound, outbound, wip
Identify waste of motion
dentify areas where parts or products are over processed
iage opportunities for transportation improvement from supplier
rtunities for transportation improvement from Dock to Manufacturing Line
ities for transportation improvement from manufacturing line to shipping dock
unities for transportation improvement from shipping dock to customer dock
Ideintify areas were waiting is occuring
Re-layout of Process to eliminat walk and travel (Distance)
ut of Warehouse to Process to eliminate walk and travel (Distance)
Identify long set-up time reduction opportunities
Identify Incapable Processes
Ideintify areas of poor maintenance
Identify areas of Poor Work Methods
Idenitfy areas where Lack of Training exisit
deintify areas where Lack of Adherence by operators exsit
Ideintify areas where Poor Supervisory Skills
ntify areas where Inconsistent Performance Measures exisit
fy areas where ineffective Production Planning/Scheduling exist
dentify areas where lack of Workplace Organization exisit
Work on Project to improve Supplier Quality/Reliability
Work on Project to improve Supplier Cost
t to reduce supplier lead time is less than ten times the value adding time
Identify Type of Training Required
Training on the need for Continuous Improvement Culture
Training on Total Productive Maintenance
Training on the Value Stream Mapping
Training on 5 S Implmentation
Training on Waste Identification
Training on Eroor Proffing
Training on SMED External-Internal
Training on Process Mapping
Training on Time Study and Takt Time generation
Training on Theory of Constraints
on Quality Management Systems( Ideintify System to Trainin on)
Training on using creativity before capital
loyee Involvement with simple visual communications, regontion, awards:
Training on JIT Systems
Training on Internal Kanban Pull systems
Training on External Kanban Pull Systems
Training on Downtime Reduction and Identification
Training on Error Proofing
Training on One Piece Flow
Training on Use of Spaghetti Diagrams
Training on Identify Waiting
Training on Workcell set-up
Training on Using and Implmenting Lean Meaureables
Training on implmenting Automation in Processes
Training on EH & S System (Identify Specific Training Area)
enitfy areas for Just In Time Improvement Opportunities
Production and non production goods
Evalute current pull production systems
D opportunity for improving machines in order of processes
nvestigate possibility for small and inexpensive equipment
Identify opportunities for one piece flow production
dentify area for eliminating Multi-process handling workers
tify opportunities for creating easy moving/standing operations
ntify Opportunities for creating U cell layout, counter clockwise
Analyize if Production paced to Takt time
ntify area to convert packaging from expendable to retunrable
ntify area to convert packaging from returnable to expendable
Identify area to Increase packaging density
Identify area to imporve truck packing density
Identify areas to improve packaging stackability
dentify Areas Autonomation Exisit and Does Not Exisit
he machine have automatic or manual Visual Control capabilities
e the machine stops when an abnormality occurs - Shut Down the Line
tify the process or machines ability to make defective product
iof the machine can send defective product to the next operation
ans for detection of defective products within the process and stop it
the processes capability to bring defective products to the surface
Design Visual Poka Yoka, Process Visual Poka Yoka and Equip,ent Hardware Pokayoka
d Pokayoka effectiveness against recurrence : never malfunctions
ka ability to tops flow without making, sending or missing defective products
Determine for provide low cost pokayoka idea's solutions
Pokoyoka ideas have been made with shop floor wisdom and ingenuity
ermine if the pokayoka is simple, durable and easy to maintain
ermine if the Pokayoka can be widely used in other processes
Determine if the Pokayoka will impair process operability
Implement People Visual Control
with Takt Time, Standard WIP, Work Sequence, Safety, Quality, People objectives
ards For Materials: Kanban; work in process, sequence, timing, quantity
Machines: Andon; broken down? still making rejects? tools changed as scheduled?
Investigate the need for Andon application
chines ability to detect abnormalities themselves and alert humans
Rate if machine abnormality leads to breakdown
f quantity abnormality leads to insufficient material; over production
he machines detect the required timing (numbers) and alert humans
Identify Effectiveness of Production Smoothing
n each product every day in the proportion to the overall mix
xed model sequence when work loads/product vary significantly
Total Quality Control
requires the participation of all employees and all departments in Quality Control.
dentify if excessive Quality Control inspections are occuring
ntrol Data recording, data retention and data reporting to support each process or product.
use of or implement the use of control charts, scatter diagrams, etc..
entify area where product validation testing can be reduced
Identify area where protoype builds can be reduced
ify area where the product development cycle can be reduced.
CAD, FEA and simulation areas can reduce product or process development cycle.
Identify effectivenes of Standard Operations
Timing of setups (including tool changes)
Timing of packaging boxescontainers
Timing of human quality checks
and machine to achieve output with minimum labor, space, inventory and equipment.
erify or establish and clarify the guidelines for manufacturing
r specific area Quality, Quantity, Cost, Staffing, Inventory and Safety
Identify Takt time/cycle time
Create or Identify the Work Sequence
Identify Standard WIP
Perfrom a Takt Time Determination
efine customer time period consistentency (shift, day, week)
rating time is total available time, less breaks, clean-up, other scheduled downtime
al operations, walking, inspecting, unloading/loading, machines, gauging
portunities to eliminate waiting waiting for machine auto cycle to finish
ence of activities that each worker performs to complete one cycle time
ID Standard Work in Process
umber of pieces of inventory required to conduct the work sequence on demand
e standard WIP to enable the man to be separated from the automatic machine cycle
dentify if no standard WIP is required at manual operations
fyOpportunities for Tool Change Over and Setup Reduction
mes = more frequent setups = smaller batch sizes = shorter leadtimes =
Define and record typical setup process:
Define necessary items for tool change
Idenitfy what components need to have exchanging parts
Idenitfy what components need to have adjustments
Idenitfy what components need to have positioning parts
e and establish a plan for Setup Reduction Improvement Stages
Define and separate internal and external activity
Convert internal to external activity
Reduce all remaining activity in tool change
Define operating conditions prior to changeover
hods of Preheat-Cool down molds, assemble tools & chucks externally
necessary change over functions functions sucjh as material changes
at tools or materilas replace are fewest possible parts; minimize/eliminate adjustments
denitfy the opportunity for the use intermediary fixtures/jigs
dentify the opportunity for presetting tools; positioning dies
Define the list of internal activities
parallel operations that can be perfromed during the tool change
ortunity for improve clamping mechanisms: one turn/one motion methods
opportunity to eliminate all adjustments: numerical settings vs "feel"
ntify the opportunity to automate activities where appropriate
where and enforce Tools, dies stored in work place-place of use
Define or implment the use of tool boards - visual control
F SOME OF THE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT TOOLS TO BE USED
Time Observation Form
Process Capacity Table
Standard Work Combination Sheet
Standard Work Layout
Setup Reduction Observation Form
Spaghetti Diagrams
Set-up time Reduction Observation Form
Extrenal Set-up Check List
e-Post Kaizen Documentation Reporting Forms-Newspapers
5S Area Evaluation Sheets
Visual Contro Inventory Sheet
Kaizen Target Progress Reporting Form
Process Capability Forms
Cycle Time Versus takt Time Sheets
Red Tag and Red Tag Log Sheets
Wip and Inventory Analysis Sheets
Workplace Layout Sheets
Measureable Reporting Sheets
Downtime Recording Sheets
Spare Parts Tracking sheets
Lean Assesment Tools
Mistake Proffing effective Sheets
Worker Flexiability Sheets
House Keeping Forms
PFMEA-Control Plan forms
DPMO Forms
Reliability and Maintainability Check Sheets
Tool Change Plan
Takt Time Reocrding forms
PM Check off and Tracking Sheet
Supplier Auidt Forms
House Keeping Forms
Quality Chart Generation Tools and Forms
Fishbone Diagrams
SIPOC Diagrams
House of Quality Diagrams
5 Why Analysis Tools
House Keeping Forms
TYPICAL KAIZEN WORKSHOP PROCESS
Quick and Crude is better than slow and elegant
First try improvements with the knowledge available
Improve upon results
Base analysis on the facts (data)
The germ of the next action will sprout from it (Kaizen)
This leads to quick and elegant solutions
Standard Approach for Performing Kaizen Event
current process by timing and value stream mapping the operations
Analyze Current Process for Waste
velop Process Capacity Table or Standard Operations Form
Create Cycle Time vs Takt Time Bar Chart
Finalize KAIZEN objectives
Determine desired manning level
Revise layout and new work sequence
Establish standard WIP
Run full production and validate affect of change
Develop new cycle time vs Takt time chart
Develop new Standard Work Combination Sheet
Develop new Standard Work Layout
Implement new Visual Management Systems
Kaizen Rules
Keep an open mind to change
Maintain a positive attitude
Never leave in a silent disagreement
Create a blameless environment
Practice mutual respect every day
Treat others as you want to be treated
One person, one vote - no position/rank
No such thing as a dumb question
Understand the thought process and then Just Do It!
Sequence
Capability to produce by FIFO
Age of parts in inventory is uncontrolled. Many uncontrolled inline buffers. Non-sequential
offline repair process. Non-sequential part flow within batches.
Buffers are designed with FIFO capability.
In-process inventory stored at machine or process. No standard container sizes. Large in

plant inventories designed to be managed with stable internal logistics system. FIFO.
Standard bin sizes but quantities not in standard increment of time. External logistic plan
developed and sequenced to production with some lineside delivery.
Part quantities at each station sized in one standard increment of time.
Part quantities at each station determined in multiples of takt time.
Type of Container Used for Parts in Station (Circle One)

Has Contianer Been Optimized for Density and Small Lot Sizes
Has Container been evalauted for commization potential for DS-ND-NM Models
# of Different Containers for the same part type located at Station
Ergonomic Issues Exsit with Container
Has a Plan for this Part in Terms Line Side Storage and Delivery Frequency and method been
Optimized for Station
Dock Delivery Windows, Dock Location Benn Optimized for Station
Part Delivery Been Optimized for Lowest Possible Inventory Movement, FIFO and In House Storage
Level for density impact been evaluated?
Is The Part Squenced in?
Is Part Delivered JIT or live unload?
Material Idenitifcation and Visual Management in Place for Warehouse and Station?
Has the Logisitical Delivery Plan of the Part Been Optimized for Cost Reduction in terms of
Opportunities for transportation mode and truck cubing?
Planned Mode of Delivery (Circle One)
Are the proper # of Returnabe Containers with the appropriate supplier, product mix, transportation
mode, DCX warehouse Standard Deviation allowances have been included to insure consistent use
of Returnable Containers
Has a detialed total cost anlayais been performed to determine the optimal packaging method
disposable versus retunrable?
Does a current state value stream map of the part exsit that defines optimal internal/external supplier
inventories and optimal production locations in terms of transportation cost versus piece price?
Has the Material EPDB been evaluated for accruacy in terms of supplier lead times, min/max orders
allowed, optimal method of release to supplier and does this data match with packaging and logisitical
plans and assumptions?
Capability to develop specifications for the purchase of machines. Specification package
knowledge includes machine mechanical design standards, machine electrical design standards,
Print documentation standards, Pneumatic Design Standards, Hydraulic Design Standards,
Ergonomic Machine Design Standards, Machine Noise Control Standards, Machine PLC Logic
and Documentation Design Standards, In bound Product Design packaging Standards,
Outbound
Capability Product
to develop Design packaing Standards,
manufacturing processes Material
from eitherHandling
defined Conveyor
or undefined Design Standards,
Capability
EquipmenttoGeneral read product design Standards,
Specification prints and interpret
Robotic the Safetycritical characteristics
Standards, Operator ofproduct
the
Safety
designs.
product
from those prints.
Standards, lockoutThe andEngineer should beInable
tagout standards. to propose
addition design must
the engineer criteria betocapable
the Cadofdesignerdeveloping
prior to beginning the design of the product. The
all these specification's into small package for special machine designs that areAdvanced Engineer should be meeting
application
frequently
specific. with the CAD designer to insure all product design's are capable of being tooled. The
Advanced Engineer should work with the Product Engineer to minimize the number of critical
characteristic's to check and to have the largest tolerance possible on those critical
characteristics. The advance engineer should be well knowledgeable of Design for Assembly and
Design for Manufacturing Concepts and should train the CAD designer in those concepts.
Capability to read any machine mechanical, electrical, pneumatic, hydraulic, or other unique
machine design print or PLC logic printout. The Manufacturing Enginner should have the ability to
used those prints on the floor with the required hand tools to perfrom troublshooting of
Capability
manufacturing to develop
equipment fromor scratch
tooling. or using vendor equipment outlines a plant floor layout using
AutoCAD Version 14 or higher which shows the manufacturing process and all inbound and
outbound material flow. The Engineer should also be knowledgeable of how this manufacturing
process effects material flow in the plant from the receiving dock to the shipping dock. All stored
Capability
in process to define and
inventory for allcost out the and
in-bound packaging
outbound for product
all inbound and be
should outbound packaging
well understood.
associated
Ability to work with their specific
with commidity process.
component This would
purchasing include estimating
buyer tobased reviewon the pieces/container,
allacomponent supplier
The ability
containers/skid,to obtain preliminary
the logistics plan,equipment vendorofquotations
the calculation containers or skids list of assumption's
needed in the that
system
quotations
concerning to analyze
in-process the labor
quality content,
checks thatequipment
the engineer and tooling
will assume cost and assumptions
that the manufacturing the to
support
supplier the logistics
haswillincluded plan, whether the container is disposable or returnable,
into their piece price. The enginner should define with the quality engineer if returnable, the cost
equipment
of the returnable perform.
containers, the cost of the tool to make the returnable container, the proposed
all required gaging or quality checks required for the in-bound component based on supplier
supplier
suggestions. of theThisreturnable
information or non returnable
should help the container,
buyer get theprice
logistics plan how
reductions fromthe it'sreurnable
supplier base
conatiner
and eliminate after SOP supplier pricing and quality issues by resolving these enginner
will be returnable to either the component supplier or our plant. The issues prior should
to the
know what the standard container/pallet
supplier getting sourced with the production component. sizes exist in the plant today so the new produce
inbound/out bound containers can fit into the manufacturing plant pre-engineered material
Capability to workand
storage locations withcontainer
the Quality sizeEngineer
constraints.to define
If theall manufacturing
container equipmentthe
is non returanble in process
check capabilities at the conception of the manufacturing
enviromental engineer should be informed to make adjustments waste stream reduction process. The Advanced Engineer with
the assistance
expections. of the Product and Quality Engineer should be able to define all the required off-
Capability
line qualitytocontrol
obtaintestingfrom the equipment
equipment cost,suppliers
equipment all utility
layout requirements
and equipment for their
capacitymachineloadingsuch as
ventilation,
associated chilled
with thewater, testing process
equipment. water,The compressed
Adavncedair, electrical
Enginner power
should alsodrophave requirement,
a detialed gage
steam
plan to insure that any supplier gage check methods are not being repeated at the requirement.
requirement, nitrogen or CO2 gases, natural gagses and fresh air make-up
Any special structural
manufactuiring location requirements
where the component such as pits, partfoundation
is to be used. or building column or roof supports
should also be identified with cost defined. The Advanced engineer should also have an idea how
the plant communication
Capability to understand basic system will be effected
accounting practices withfor theequipment/tooling
implementation ofdepreciation, a new product into
the plant
understand and the
our cost
customers to add capability
equipment/tooling to this system.
funding The Advanced
responsibilities Engineer
associated should
with our bepiece
able to
Capability
summarize tothis
work with Sales
information to Cost
the Estimating
Plant enginner to develop
so the all component
Plant Engineer material
can develop cost, a layout
prices and the ability
equipment/tooling costto internal
developora with list ofcomponent
product, manufacturing
suppliers and and prototype
expected profitassumptions
margins made
in the
showing
with our all planned
product utility
quotation drop locations.
proposals. The This
Engineerdocument should can bebeableused to to estiamte
manage T- out equipment
Accounts to
quoting process
installation of a new product. This is currently refered to as the CAA form. to support the
control line cost.
item by The Plant
line itemEngineer
all tooling should be able
and capital to define
expenditures if existing
associated utilities
with the
new
implementation of a new product and be responsible to insure that the projectsupply
line exist in the new planned manufacturing area and where those utility locations
expenditures come
exist. If the current utilities are over utilized the plant
in or at budget. The Engineer should be made aware of how over expenditures will effect Engineer should be able to define thepiece
specific
price and equipment
profit margins required for the facility
associated with the upgrades
product they and the arecost associated
attempting with these upgrades
to launch.
so the captial
Capability expense
to define cost can
material be built
handling flowinto our piece
racks for inboundprice analysis.
component Theand Engineer
outbound should be
finished
aware
goods of any special
associated withplant environmental (clean
the manufacturing process. roomTheorengineer
temp and humidity
should havecontrolled
the ability to specify
requirements
any required storage associated with the manufacturing
racks/shelving associated with process or testing
the project. Theequipment
engineer should and build be this
ablecost
to
into theirthe
specify captial
type estaimte.)
of conveyor system required for handling parts transfer such as blue steel gravity
Capability to coordinate with equipment and utility installation contractors for the installation of all
roller conveyor,
equipment. I.E., chain on edge,pipe
iron workers, flat fitters,
belt chain,
welders,monorail,
cranepower and free,
operators, invertedmachine
millwrights, power and free,
repair
powered roller, gravity roller, zone conveyor, plastic chain,
specialist, laborers, masonaries, plumbers, heating and cooling specilist, sheet metal workers, automated storage and retrieval
systems,
etc... elevator systems, pick and place transfer systems, palletized transfer systems, belt
conveyor, slotted belt conveyors, conveyor buffering systems, conveyor parts storage systems
and other such types of conveyance systems. The engineer should be knowlagable of how and
The
why Advanced
these different Engineer typesshouldof conveyor be knowledgeable
systems are used of lean and manufacturing concepts such
their typical applications. Any as
Single Minutes Die Exchange Systems, Kanban pull
knowledge of the cost differences per foot for the conveyor types would also be helpful.systems, Hoshin, standard work combination
sheets, operator/machine time study methods, operator/machine line balancing methods, Theory
of Constraints manufacturing concepts, 5 S systems, product display boards and shadow boards,
identification systems for all equipment and tooling, Total Productive Maintenance Systems,
computerized maintenance and MRO inventory management systems used in the plant.
manufacturing
conforming in-boundprocess should be well
components or non defined prior toinquoting
conforming processproduct
goods piece pricing.
or finished The are
goods
Adavanced Enginner should get copies of all MSDS sheets of raw
updated to insure proper inventory control in the MRP system of all scrap, components scrap materials to be used in theiror
manufactring
finished goods related to the product to be manufactured. The Engineer should work withthe
process and yearly estimated usage of these materials should be given to the
Enivormental
warehouse Engineer.The
manager to Adavnced
insure that Enginner
adequate should
storage notifyexist
space the in Health
the and Safety
current department
warehouse ( if a
Since
of any so manyHazardous
special of our component
Material parts
Trainingare stamped
required parts
for the the Advanced
handling of theEngineer
raw shouldor
materials be
warehouse
aware concept
andwaste
knowledgeableis used) for all inbound
of progressive and
stamping finished
die goods
concepts, components.
stamping Any additional
press tonnage's and
materials
storage devices by product.The
or facility Adavnced
modifications Engineer
to support theshould get copies
implementation and notification of when
how
any stamped
enviromental parts material
permit waste is calculated.
application's have been In addition
requested and manyofofthis
sinceexpected ourproduct should
components
approval dates.
be
are
The
included
injection with the the
molded newengineer
product should
piece price.
be An example ofofthis
knowledgeable may be
internal and the need toinjection
external add an molding
Advanced
addtional Enginnerand
shipping should obtain
receving from
dock orthenonEnviromental
conforming Engineer
parts any storage
location cost associated
point. mold with
capabilities such as molding
preforming pollution modelingmachine
studies tohnnage capabilities,
that the goverment may lbs. per hour
require the injection
for permit approval. The
machine can process,
Enviromental Enginnertype shouldof plastic
informmaterial
the Adavnced the injection
Engineer mold machine
if any special is capable
pollution of processing
control
The
and Adavnced
the
equipmentinjection engineer
molding
that should beshould
equipment be aware
incoporated into of
material how
their asset's
process
capital are discarded
settings for the
expendiutre in to
themeet
specific
plan's manufacturing
product it is
goverment
operation,
regulationshow
processing. Thestripped
Engineer parts fromhave
should those assets
strong are re-entered
knowledge into the
of whether thespare
moldsparts crib if they
are cooled or
can workdesigned
heated, on otherfor equipment
quick changein thecapability
plant andor hownot,spare
whatparts
the toolfrom special
design machines
standard are
is so all molds
eliminated
running fromsupply
at our the spare
baseparts
can becrib. The Engineer
brought in house, should be and
the size able type
with of
thecavities
assistance
and of their
tooling and equipment
runners/tool, if the tool suppliers
perfroms an to estimate the number
insert molding of spare parts
or overmolding required
process. and the cost
The enginner should
estimate
know howfor thethose
part spare
will beparts.
degated from the injection molding process through the tool or off-line
trimming machine or manual trimming process. The Engineer should be able to give the injection
molding supplier some % of the regrind material scrap and gate material that could be used in a
finished goods injection molded component. The Advanced engineer should be aware of how he
expects the plastic part to be gauged with the Quality Engineer and define this to the injection
molded components supplier.
The Engineer should have a good understanding of plating, priming and finish coating processes.
He should be aware of the difference between copper, zinc or galvanized coatings how the
applied via dipped, sprayed on, powder coated, stationary spray guns, HVAC Bells or robotic
spray gun applied to the part surface. The engineer should be aware of how these finishes are
measured for quality purposes.
Requirements for Sr Process Engineer

Engineering Degree
5 - 7 years experience
Significant manufacturing support experience in a multi-plant, multi-national environment
coordinating projects involving various functions and plants
Project management and team leading experience
MS Office - Word, Excel, Access, Project, Outlook. AutoCAD is a plus.
Good verbal skills required to communicate instructions and present ideas, concepts, and
solutions to all levels of employees, Customers and Suppliers.
Good written skills are required to issue instructions and present ideas, concepts, and solutions
to all levels of employees and to Customers and Suppliers via letters, memos, graphs, charts,
etc.
Quality and six sigma experience is preferred.
Job Tasks
Provides Process Engineering support to manufacturing for all sensor and control product lines.
Works within the QS9000 Quality System and supports the Automotive Industry requirements.
Develops and maintains effective production techniques, labor and material standards for new
and existing product lines.
Uses Lean Manufacturing techniques to develop new processes. Includes the theories of one
piece flow, just in time, waste elimination, part travel minimization, standardized work, 5S,
inventory reduction, kanban, SMED, poka yoke, work cells, takt time and visual management.
Prepares original process definition for products, designating tooling, equipment and processes
to be used. Provides documentation such as PFMEA, Process flow chart, Router info, project
status reports, time studies, manpower planning charts, requisitions and Station Instructions.
Designs production tools, jigs, fixtures, etc. Orders these items, offering suggestions for their
construction. Approves the final design and coordinates their evaluation and implementation into
production in the appropriate production areas
Recommends and implements design changes to products, tooling, and equipment to improve
yields, performance, and reduce costs. Provides recommendations regarding manufacturability
and processing feasibility.
Travel to Customers and Suppliers as necessary and represent the company’s interests. Assists
with the finding and development of new sources.
Justifies and purchases capital equipment to achieve capacity, cost and quality goals.
Successfully transfers assets to the Manufacturing plant.
Is involved in the preparation of labor, tooling and equipment cost estimates for new products.
Reviews and evaluates new methods, processes, and materials to further the state-of-the-art in
manufacturing
Recommends efficient plant layouts with good material flow
Prepares work station designs with good motion patterns, ergonomic construction, environmental
consciousness, regulatory compliance and good safety practices.
Provides Manufacturing Engineering support in the activities of New Products Team.
Recommends the development of manufacturing tooling, processes, and techniques through the
pre-production phase.
May supervise one or more analysts/engineers on a project basis
Provides direction to Manufacturing and technical Engineering professionals, and clerical support
personnel
May be involved in documentation reviews and sign for Process Engineering. Participates in
Design Reviews.
Responsible to maintain revision control as appropriate on all documents under Process
Engineering jurisdiction.
Train personnel in the new processes, procedures, and in the use of tooling and equipment.
Advise Design group of new tooling and equipment concepts which my have application now or
in the future.
Keep current on trends and developments in the process, tool and equipment industry.
Participates in Continual Improvement projects, evaluating new methods, cost reduction
opportunities, productivity improvements, and reductions in cycle time and variation.
Has the facility implemented and maintained an Environmental Management System consistent with the Ford Environmental S
certified to ISO14001 by an external third-party? If not, see the Guideline and Assessor instructions.
Have all Improvement Notes, and Nonconformance's identified in the most recent cycle of External Third Party ISO14001 Audi
certification) been addressed/managed? (e.g., Corrective Action Requests or equivalent documents have been prepared and i
Have all Improvement Notes, and Nonconformance's identified in the most recent cycle of Plant Internal System Audits and Co
Assessments been addressed/managed (e.g., Corrective Action Requests or equivalent documents have been prepared and i
Are any of the improvement notes, or nonconformance's identified in the most recent cycle of Internal or External Audits repea
earlier audits?
Repeat issues are identified but plant does not have an adequate effective plan to prevent recurrence.
Repeat issues are identified but plant has appropriate corrective action planned or in place;
No carry-over issues identified.
Has the facility reviewed all applicable Environmental Aspects from the current Corporate Environmental Aspect List in its EMS
Has the Environmental Quality Office been contacted to review significant new or proposed international, national, or local req
plant?
Does the facility have access to and follow the Ford Automotive Procedures (FAPs), Company Standards, and EQO regulatory
their facility?
Has the facility communicated to EQO and Division/Operations (where applicable) on a timely basis regarding any significant c
or non-routine information requests received from external agencies since the last Ford Production System (FPS) assessment
Have all neighbor/ community environmental concerns or complaints been properly addressed (managed)?
Does the facility EMR and Environmental Engineer subscribe to the EQO "Notices and Announcements" subscription service (
Does the facility have a process for prompt notification of Facility Management, (and as appropriate Operations/Division Mana
Quality Office (EQO)) when significant potential regulatory non-compliance issues are identified?
Does the facility have a process to review reports prior to submittal to external agencies for accuracy of the data or information
indication of deterioration in performance or changes in facility processes?
Are Permit Teams formed to develop a strategy to secure permits, licenses, certificates, registrations, etc. in a timely manner (
Is the EMR or designee notified on a timely basis regarding projects which affect the facility that are prepared elsewhere (e.g.
Does the EMR or designee receive notification of environmental control equipment malfunctions and breakdowns in a timely m
actions taken (e.g., corrective repairs, notification to authorities, etc.)?
Does the Environmental Management Representative and/or environmental engineer participate in facility emergency respons
environmental impacts?
Is the EMR or environmental engineer contacted promptly when managed materials are spilled, released or leaking?
Does the EMR or designee make notifications to off-site authorities where appropriate to protect the environment or to meet go
when environmental emergencies occur?
Does the facility contact Central Station or the Environmental Quality Office promptly (within 24 hours) when reportable environ
emergency situations occur?
Does the facility coordinate the EQO and Operation/Division (where applicable) regarding clean-up requirements and mitigatio
environmental incidents and emergency situations occur?
Does the facility have a process, including established roles and responsibilities to review materials used for the first time at th
potential environmental impacts?
Has the facility identified a list of materials, hazardous substances, or chemical substances which must be controlled (e.g., pro
regulated) or monitored at the facility to meet governmental requirements, company objectives or environmental management
Managed Materials")?
Has the documented list of Environmental Managed Materials been communicated to the Industrial Material (IM) activity and th
Flow (SMF) coordinator (and/or other affected departments)?
Has the facility established and implemented methods for tracking or recording the usage of the identified managed materials?
Has the facility evaluated methods and where appropriate prepared plans to control/reduce the purchase, storage, inventory, a
environmental managed materials
Has the Environmental Management Representative or designee developed, documented and maintained facility specific com
Include applicable information from the Environmental Compliance Assurance Program guidelines (Global and Country Specif
available)), published by EQO.
Include applicable information from local governmental requirements and site-specific requirements such as facility equipment
certificates, etc?
Has the facility updated the facility-specific compliance documents annually based on:
Assessment findings;
Revisions to compliance assurance program guideline;
Changes to or additions/revisions to environmental regulatory requirements; and
Process or facility changes
Does the facility have a list of required routine reports to governmental agencies which includes required due dates for reportin
Has the Environmental Management Representative (EMR) or designee planned, scheduled and implemented (conducted or d
assessments for environmental regulatory compliance at least annually?
Does the plant evaluate need for and conduct internal regulatory compliance assessments more frequently for areas with high
or due to regulatory revisions or previous assessment results?
Has the Environmental Management Representative conducted Quarterly (or more frequent) meetings to review open complia
documentation, with facility management?
Has the facility completed and submitted a report of open significant potential regulatory compliance issues to EQO and Opera
by January 15?
Does review of the plant's annual compliance assurance self-assessment and supporting Environmental System elements ind
significant compliance issues?
System elements require improvement in content or application to prevent significant compliance issues (e.g., potentially signi
were not identified by the plant, or CARs were not written or implemented to address the issues)
System elements are adequate to identify potentially significant compliance issues and, if appropriate, CARs have been written
adequately resolve the issues.
System elements are robust to assure compliance; none or only minor potential issues were identified or observed.
Is the facility Environmental Management System integrated with the facility Quality System into a single system?
Does the facility integrated Quality/Environmental System utilize the applicable Ford Automotive Procedures (FAPs)?
Has the facility included all applicable environmental programs from the current Corporate Environmental Control Plan into its
Does the facility utilize the environmental metric trends to make changes in objectives, targets or management programs?
Do the environmental-related process metrics show improvements or control (as appropriate) since the last FPS assessment?
Are the management programs adequate and appropriate to address the identified significant aspects, promote prevention of
improvement?
Are the facility environmental metrics reported into the corporate EUWM database and is the reporting up-to-date (previous ca
Does the facility demonstrate continual improvement in its environmental performance since the previous FPS assessment (or
Has the facility environmental emergency plan been tested (e.g. a spill drill conducted or actual response performed) and revie
year?
Is the environmental emergency plan integrated into the overall facility Emergency Plant?
Are the facility's Environmental Work Instructions included in QPS operator instruction sheets in areas where FPS is implemen
Has the facility identified environmental equipment that requires preventive maintenance and/or calibration?
Has the facility communicated the requirements for environmental equipment preventive maintenance and/or calibration for the
office?
Are environmental equipment preventive maintenance and/or calibration requirements scheduled and coordinated by the PM/F
Have required environmental equipment preventive maintenance and/or calibration requirements been completed and recorde
control procedure) since the last assessment?
Work Group members (or other appropriate floor operating personnel) have incorporated key environmental -related process c
instructions, and collect/monitor associated metrics.
Some Work Groups monitor key process characteristics. (<10%)
A majority of Work Groups monitor key process characteristics (>50%)

All Work Groups monitor key process characteristics.
Are FPS Visual Factor concepts applied to identify location of environmental documents and records?
Environmental Display Boards:
Are central environmental display board(s)) used to post information on environmental performance, key characteristics, enviro
information?
Are Work Group display boards used throughout the facility for communication of environmental key characteristics, metrics, p
environmental issues?
Has a review of training needs been conducted since the last FPS assessment to identify any new environmental training need
documented and communicated to the training function or other appropriate personnel?
Does the EMR or designee participate in evaluation the effectiveness of environmental training in on-the-job application(s).
TECHNICAL INFORMATION AVAILIBILITY
1. Are actual drawings available for production ?(Within 1 Hour)
2. Are all Technical regulations available ? (Within 1 Hour)
3. If supplier is design responsible has a DFMEA been used to develop
the PFMEA ?
QUALITY SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION
4. Is a process Flow Diagram available and is it acceptable ?
5. Is there a process FMEA available and is it acceptable? (Logical)
6. Has a control plan been developed, properly filed does it predict
logical problems?
7. Is there direct correlation (common numbering scheme)
between the Flow Diagram, PFMEA, Process Control Plan ?
8. Have all operations that effect KPCs and KCCs been identified
on the Flow Diagram, PFMEA and Control Plan ?
9. Do the Flow Diagram, PFMEA and Control Plan identify operations
for rework, labeling, scrap, gaging/inspection and shipping ?
10. Are all “Current Controls” listed on the PFMEA detailed on the Control
Plan ?
11. Are process controls in place in the Control Plan to address the high
Risk Priority Numbers (RPNs) in the PFMEA? (A focused plan on high RPN’s)?
QUALITY SYSTEM PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
12. a.) Are controls in place to ensure only acceptable incoming material
is released for production ?
b.) Is there control activities for suppliers in the tiers?
13. Is the workplace properly configured (adequate space, light etc.) ?
14. Are all tools and gage available and properly identified ?
15. Are understandable operator instructions visible at each operation ?
16. Do all gages have operator instructions attached to the gage and are
they clearly visible ?
17. Is there a plan for preventive maintenance on tools and equipment
and is it followed ?
18. Do process control instructions correspond to the control plan?
19. Are the described tests and inspections actually performed as stated ?
20. Are operators aware of KPCs/KCCs when related to their job ?
21. Where the Control Plan calls for SPC is the data properly recorded ?
22. Are out of control points noted with the corrective action taken ?
23. Where the Control Plan calls for SPC which of the following exists ?
Normal Variation
Special Causes
24. Where the Control Plan calls for SPC does the data make sense; are
reasonable control limits shown; do people act based on the data?
25.Does packaging and material handling protect parts from damage ?
QUALITY SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION BY MANAGEMENT
26. Are instructions for handling Work In Process (WIP)well
documented and followed?
27. Are out of control conditions managed ?
Are Action Plans followed
Is responsibility for implementation of action plans assigned and
do people understand their responsibility ?
28. Are problems quickly communicated to people who can help ?
29. If more than one shift, does information get passed across shifts ?
30. Does the support system respond to the operator ?
31. Are the standardised measures effective ?
30. Cost of Errors (Money)

Are all quality items (customer concerns, PR/Rs, warranty etc.)
tracked back through the PFMEA and control plan to determine where
the system failed ?
Lean Layout
Process focus layout. Machines arranged in process sequence by department. Space protection for additiona
capacity. Inter-operation unload points and buffers used to decouple machines from the system. Value added
process time averages < 10%.
Process focus layouts with departments grouped to reflect product family sequence of operation. Parallel
processing occurs. Non linear material flow path.
Product focus layout. Point of use docks are included. Material flow path is linear. Strategic buffers planned for
constraint operations and finish goods inventory. Productive constraints used to control inventory and increase proce
flow.
Production oriented flow defined. Process systems located close together. Layout enables process mgt. by work grou
Traffic and visual impediments removed (4' - 5' foot high site line). U/S shaped cells sometimes used.
Product focused manufacturing systems designed with machines/stations close together. Monument machines integra
into the flow of the parts. Buffers designed base as Standard work in process (SWIP) requirements based on
complexity.
Product focused linked manufacturing systems designed for single piece flow. No machine foundations are required
Machine and support system design allows for easy relocation and re-arrangement.
Layout & Handling
What portion of total space is used for storage and material handling?
What portion of the plant space is organized by function or process type?
How would you characterize material movement?
How would you rate overall housekeeping and appearance of the plant?
How would you rate overall housekeeping and appearance of the plant?
How well could a stranger walking through your plant identify the processes and their sequence?
Finished goods packed into containers which are portable by the operator (maximum 22 pounds) and which represent no more than 10 minutes of production
Products are moved to the end of line finished goods storage by the last person on the line
Finished goods storage placed close to the last operator on the line
FIFO management of the finished goods inventory
Empty finished goods containers accessible by the last operator without travel
Possible to store all the finished goods at the end of line (not counting the shipping inventory)
Lean Manufacturing Design Concepts Implementation

Is the Facility Design Team (ME's) trained on FPS and Lean Manufacturing?
Are the FPS Principles, Objectives and Measurables known and understood by the Facility Manufacturing Engineers?
Is the Facility Design Team (ME’s) trained in Value Stream Mapping?
Does the facility have a plan which links the Project Review and Approval Process to the Future (Lean) State environment?
On external new projects, building expansions or Facility re-modernization:

Is there Facility personnel participation in Lean Manufacturing Design (LMD) once site selection is determined?
Is there evidence that LMD principles were considered for processes, equipment and tooling towards the Future (Lean) State
environment?
Was input from the Facility Work Group activities available to engineering to drive improvement in LMD?
When dealing with internal projects:
Is there evidence that the Facility has applied Lean Manufacturing Design principles for all internal projects or process
rearrangements towards the Future (Lean) State environment?
Was input from Work Group activities used as a source to drive improvement in LMD?
In order to ensure that all Lean Manufacturing Design guidelines and elements are considered by the ME's:
Are the Facility ME personnel knowledgeable about their own organization's Lean Design Measurables Matrix?
Is there evidence that the Facility is using its own organization's Lean Design Measurables?
Is there evidence the changes reflect improvement in the Facilities lean metrics?
Project Review and Approval Process
Has the project review and approval process been applied to all internal projects affecting the facility in the last 12 months?
Does the project review process include documentation and appropriate sign-off for impact on:
Safety/loss control
Environmental aspects
Ergonomic considerations
Energy use
Reliability and maintainability
Lean manufacturing design
Life cycle cost
Relevant regulations, codes, and industrial standards?
Future State Map
Does the project review and approval process require input and sign-off by all affected areas, including input from specialists a
employees with experience related to the process, job, etc. being reviewed?
Does the project review and approval process include reviews for potential changes at defined intervals during the project from
concept through launch?
Does the project review and approval process include a follow-up system to ensure all identified risks are acceptably controlled
prior to start-up?
Is management approval of a project contingent upon execution of the facility's project review and approval process?
Supplier/Contractor Selection Process
Does the facility's supplier/contractor selection procedure require review of the supplier's or contractor's ability to meet:
The facility's health and safety requirements, including ergonomics?
The facility's environmental compliance requirements, including method statements?
The facility's manufacturing feasibility requirements?
The facility's reliability and maintainability requirements?
Does the facility's supplier/contractor selection procedure require consideration of performance records?
Does the facility maintain supplier/contractor records of performance in terms of manufacturing feasibility, health and safety, an
environmental compliance?
Are the facility's supplier/contractor performance records kept up to date?
Contract Review Process
Do Requests for Quote (RFQ) include requests for method statements when applicable?
Does the facility's contract/purchase order review procedure require verification of supplier/contractor understanding prior to
contract acceptance?
Pre-contract review activities cover the following requirements:
* Environmentally significant aspects of goods and services
* Method statements
* Contract Obligations
* Organizational procedures and work instructions
* Regulatory requirements
* Facility monitoring and level of control
Verification is documented and signed off by supplier/contractor.
Does the facility's contract review procedure require regular reviews of compliance during the performance of the contract and
define the frequency of reviews?
Upon completion of the contract, does the facility conduct a work-site inspection?
Are all contract review activities documented and maintained in accordance with the retention process and local document con
process?
Are all contract review activities documented and maintained in accordance with the Ford Global Information Standards (GIS)
records retention process and local document control process?
Reliability and Maintainability
Does the plant have a point of contact?
Are the roles & responsibilities defined for the point of contact?
Is the point of contact trained in R&M engineering?
Are the facility's R&M objectives for the acquisition of new machinery and equipment developed through the Value Stream map
and are they driving towards the Future (Lean) State environment
"Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Specification" used by Central or Plant Engineering for Equipment acquisition?
An R&M specification is included in equipment acquisitions.
The Corporate Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) Specification for Manufacturing Equipment is included in equipment acquisiti
Is a tailored R&M matrix used in connection with the R&M specification identified in 4.5.5?
* A tailored matrix is used.
* The R&M tailored matrix (ref. Appendix A of the "Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) Specification for Manufacturing Equipm
is used with the Corporate R&M specifications
Does the tailored R&M matrix contain the following elements?
1. MTBF requirements (10)
2. MTTR requirements (5)
3. Useful life requirements (5)
4. Design Internet
5. Environment
6. "Top Ten" Analysis
7. Problem Resolution
8. How many additional techniques are required in the R&M Program Task?
(0)__ 1-2__(15)__ >2__(30)__
9. How many additional techniques are required in the R&M Program Task?
(0)__ 1-2__ (15)__ >2__(30)__
10. How many additional techniques are required in the R&M Continuous
Improvement Tasks?
(0)__ 1-2__ (15)__ >2__(30)__
What plant data/input used when establishing the R&M elements listed in 4.5.7?
Does the supplier's R&M plan address the tailored R&M Matrix?
Have design improvements been made by the supplier to address the "top 10" problem?
Have a majority of the problems been addressed by design improvements rather than by process improvements or controls?
Was the reliability assessment within 10% of the MTBF requirement?

Was an equipment problem log used to capture failures encountered during run-off?
Is the problem log maintained from run-off to Job #1?
Have root causes been identified for failures from run-off through Job1?
Have the majority of the failures been identified for root cause?
More root causes are identified than open issues for the failures.
Do suppliers take corrective action to address/eliminate the failures identified in 4.5.14 which are due to design deficiencies an
failures resulting from the build and install process?
Do plant floor personnel involved in the R&M process understand their roles & responsibilities and are their experiences used
acquisition engineers in the specification, design, build, test, install, and launch of new equipment?
1. Manufacturing Engineering, Plant Support or Production Engineers
2. Operators (work group)
3. Maintenance personnel
In the acquisition of new equipment, does the facility utilize a data collection and feedback system which is made available to t
appropriate engineering personnel? This data and information must be pertinent to the
equipment performance, tooling and changeovers which enables the use of a tailored matrix and FMEA's in the design of
equipment.
Does the facility utilize a data collection and feedback system in support of the launch of new equipment by utilizing a Failure
Reporting, Analysis, and Corrective Action System (FRACAS) to track failed equipment components
for use in root cause failure analysis.
Review the reliability growth plots on newly launched equipment for increasing positive slopes to verify the implementation of a
effective continuous improvement process.
Does the FRACAS system support warranty return/exchange through the Industrial Materials process?
Is the Corporate R&M process applied in the rebuild and reuse of equipment?
Is the FAME/FAP 2-200 Equipment Forecast and input up to date?
Does the facility follow established work practices in the decommission of equipment?
Is the Corporate R&M process applied to equipment whose primary purpose is health and safety, and environmental protection
Energy Management
Does the facility energy coordinator or designee track the amount and type of energy being used by operations/ functional are
within the plant?
Does the facility report monthly energy usage data on a quarterly basis to Ford Land, in a hard-copy report or electronically us
the Ford Energy Utilities and Waste Metrics (EUWM) Web site?
Does the facility conduct reviews with management of energy management objectives and targets at least Quarterly?
Has the facility met their energy management objectives and targets for last year?
Has the facility identified and implemented specific actions to increase energy efficiency?
Process Layout
Does the physical manufacturing process correspond to
the Process Flowchart and the Process Layout?
Operator Instructions and Quality Control Measures

Are operator instructions and visual aides available at all
necessary locations?
Are quality control activities being carried out as

described in the Control Plan and are all necessary
measurement tools available (gages, SPC, etc.)?
Are customer approved acceptance standards (boundary
samples) available and are they representative of true
production material?
Plant Cleanliness and Work Environment
Is the level of cleanliness and the work environment
appropriate for the commodities being produced? Does
it send a positive message to the workforce regarding
management's commitment to a safe and quality
oriented work environment?
Plant General Category
For the parts or products involved in this launch,
are they:
• A new part or product (different from your normal
commodity "type") (y/n)
• A new process? (y/n)
• New people involved? (y/n)
• A new plant constructed OR major facility re-arrange
for this commodity? (y/n)
If "yes" for 2 or more, are extraordinary training and
prove-out plans in place, including a review of lessons
learned?
Response
71%-100%
46%70%
30%-45%
16%-30%
0%-15%
71%-100%
46%70%
30%-45%
16%-30%
0%-15%
Pallet-size (or larger) loads,

long distances (>100'),complex
flow patterns, confusion, & lost
material
Mostly tote-size loads, bus-
route transport, & intermediate
distances
Tote-size or smaller loads,

short distances (<25'), simple &
direct flow pattern
Messy, Filthy, Confused
Some dirt, Occasional Mess
Spotless , Neat, & Tidy

Impossible to see any logic or
flow sequence.
Most processes are apparent

with some study. Most
sequences are visible.
Processes and their sequences

are immediately visible.
Data Storage and Transfer
Matrix
Provides information without "logging in"

Information can be seen by a group simultaneously
Info can be viewed at multiple sites simultaneously
Visually identifies a part/box/line/instrument/product
Notifies many parties "instantly"
Notifies many parties reliably
Required physical presence of involved parties
Provides opportunities for feedback
Can be sent short distances reliably (on site)
Can be sent long distances reliably
Can be easily copied
Can be easily redistributed
Can be handed to another person
Can be affixed to a container
Can be compiled and sorted or graphed
Can contain physical samples and examples
Can be color coded for rapid interpretation
Can contain multiple forms of communication
Can easliy be stored electronically
Can be protected from edit
Can be filed
# of pieces of equipment needed to produce the customer demand in that
Machine
Machines operation
Cycle Amount of time it takes to perform the required process(es) with in one cycle
Time Time the machine
excluding caninterfaces
all operator not cycle due to operator interfaces - for example
loading, unloading. This does not include lost time because an operator
Operator L is not available
Number of end items produced in one cycle - for example in a basket washer
Pieces per Percent of available
or multi cavity moldsoperating time the machine can not cycle due to a failure
of the machine. NOTE: if a process is not decoupled, all upstream and
Machine D downstream processes must account for the associated downtime.
Cycles lost to defective parts created or not fully completed by this machine
Cycles Los expressed as a percent. These losses can be reworked
Cycles lost to defective parts created or not fully completed by this machine
Cycles Lostexpressed as a percent. These losses can not be reworked
Operating time lost on this process as a result of changing the system to
Changeoveproduce a different part. Do not include time if used during non productive time.
Duratio Time of one changeover; good part to good part
Freque Number of changeovers performed during available operating time, per day
Time lost in a process as a result of changing consumable tooling or
Consumablreplenishing consumable material sources.
Duratio Amount of time for one occurrence

Effective
Machine
Freque Number of occurrences per day
Cycle The calculated nominal/average machine cycle time including losses
Time (Downtime, Changeover, Consumables)
Data represents the calculated average throughput of this process, based
Effective J on all occurrences discussed above.
QPS: Work Analysis Sheet/Work Balance Charts

Where deployed, do the Work Analysis Sheets contain all the required fields, including:
Job Identification and Date?

Customer Demand Rate?
Line Rate?
QPS Sheet Number?
Sheet of Sheets?
Step Number?
Work Steps
Time Elements (Manual, Automatic, Walk)?
Operation Time?
Total (time)?
Where deployed, do the Work Balance Charts contain the following information,
including:
Work Group or area name?
QPS-OIS Sheet Description under each cycle of work (time column)?
Work Elements?
Time scale?
Times for each element defined?
Appropriate Color Coding to distinguish between Value add and Non value add?
Where deployed, do the Work Analysis Sheets graphically identify the distribution of the
operator's work steps and complete the following information: (% Implementation/100 X
Nr. Pts. Possible = score)
Work steps?
Time elements?
Total time?
Pilot of time elements for each component?
Line Rate?
Where deployed, do the Work Balance Chart graphically identify the distribution of the
operators work steps and show the following information: (% Implementation/100 X Nr.
Pts. Possible = score)
Work element description.
Each element of work displayed to time scale.
Customer Demand Rate
Each element of work identified as Value or Non Value Add
QPS-OIS sheet description under each cycle of work.
In application areas where Work Analysis Sheets are fully deployed, do the Workgroups
analyze work steps for value added content as part of the process used to identify
continuous improvement opportunities?
Implemented in less than or equal to 25% of the plant.
Process implemented plant wide.
Has the facility deployed Work Analysis Sheets to the plant floor for all production
operations?
Implemented in less than or equal to 25% of the plant.
Process implemented plant wide.
Where deployed, are the Work Analysis Sheets available for review by the Work Group
members?
Sheets available to Work Groups in IAA, or less than 25% of the plant.
Sheets available to Work Groups in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of
the plant.
the plant.
Sheets available to Work Groups in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
Sheets available to Work Groups and accessible plant wide.

Where deployed, are the Work Analysis Sheets updated and reflect the most current
work steps and times documented on the Operator Instruction Sheets?
Work Analysis Sheets are current in the IAA, or less than 25% of the plant.
Work Analysis Shetts are current in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of
the plant.
Work Analysis Sheets are current in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of
the plant.
Work Analysis Sheets are current in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
Work Analysis Sheets are current and reflect the information on the QPS-Operator
Instruction Sheets plant-wide.
In conjunction with engineering personnel, do the Work Group Leaders participate in the
development of the Work Analysis Sheets?
Implemented in IAA or less than, or equal to 25% of the plant.
In conjuction with engineering personnel, do the Work Groups utilize the Work Analysis
Sheet, in conjunction with the Operator Instruction Sheet, to analyze operations for
continuous improvement opportunities.
Can the facility demonstrate an ongoing process which defines the frequency and
responsibility for the review of the Work Analysis Sheets for continuous improvement
opportunities?
Work Analysis Sheets are regularly updated in the IAA, or less than 25% of the plant.
Work Analysis Sheets are regualarly updated in greater than 25%, but less than or
equal to 50% of the plant.
Work Analysis Sheets are regularly updated in greater than 50%, but less than or equal
Work Analysis Sheets are regularly updated in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of
the plant.
Work Analysis Sheets are regualarly updated plant - wide.
Do the Work Groups utilize the Work Analysis Sheet, in conjunction with the QPS -
Operator Instruction Sheet, to rebalance workloads among Work Group members?

Are all operations fully balanced to the customer demand rate.
QPS: Capacity Analysis Sheet
Where deployed, do the Capacity Analysis Sheets contain all the required fields,
including:
Date, QPS Sheet Number, Part Name / Department / Area/ Line Number?
Machine / Required / Open Capacity?
Machine Name & ID Number?
Manual Load Time?
Automatic Cycle Time?
Graph showing manual load time / Auto. Cycle time?
Total Elapsed Time for Cycle?
Number and Time Required for Tool Changes?
Calculations?
Where deployed, do the Capacity Analysis Sheets graphically identify the types of
machines within the Work area, including the following information: (for each
subquestion % Implementation/100 X Nr. Pts. Possible = score)
Manual Load Time?
Automatic Cycle Time?
Plot showing type of machine being studied?
Calculation of Open Capacity?
Calculation of Machine Capacity within area?
Has the facility deployed Capacity Analysis Sheets to the plant floor for all production
operations?
Implemented in greater than 75% of the plant, but less than 100% of the plant.
Capacity Analysis Sheets implemented plant-wide.
Where deployed, are the Capacity Analysis Sheets available for review?
Sheets available to Work Groups in IAA, or less than 25% of the plant.
the plant.
the plant.
Sheets available to Work Groups in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
Sheets availble to Work Groups and accessible plant-wide.

Where deployed, are the Capacity Analysis Sheets updated and reflect the most current
processes and capacities?
Capacity Analysis Sheets are current in the IAA, or less than 25% of the plant.
Capacity Analysis Sheets are current in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50%
of the plant.
Capacity Analysis Sheets are current in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75%
of the plant.
Capacity Analysis Sheets are current in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the
plant.
Capacity Analysis Sheets are current plant-wide.
Where deployed, do the Work Group Leaders participate and provide input into the
development of the Capacity Analysis Sheets to the engineering personnel?
Process implemented plant - wide.
Can the facility demonstrate an ongoing process which defines the frequency and
responsibility for the review of the Capacity Analysis Sheets for continuous improvement
opportunities or for changes in customer demand?
Capacity Analysis Sheets are regularly updated in the IAA, or less than 25% of the
plant.
Capacity Analysis sheets are regularly updated in greater than 25%, but less than or
Capacity Analysis Sheets are regularly updated in greater than 50%, but less than or
Capacity Analysis sheets are regularly updated in greater than 75%, but less than or
Capacity Analysis Sheets are regularly updated plant-wide.
Do the Capacity Analysis Sheets reflect the impact of all required periodic activities (of
known duration) on machine capacity?
Periodic activities are documented in IAA, or less than 25% of plant
Periodic activities are documented in greater than 25%, but less than or equal to 50% of
the plant.
Periodic activities are documented in greater than 50%, but less than or equal to 75% of
the plant.
Periodic activities are documented in greater than 75%, but less than 100% of the plant.
Periodic activities are documented plant-wide.

Do the Work Groups utilize the Capacity Analysis Sheet, in combination with the FTPM
process, to identify the processes which slow the entire system due to capacity
constraints and/or create a bottleneck?
Process Implemented plant-wide.
Do the Work Groups utilize the Capacity Analysis Sheet to proactively develop and
document plans, with support from engineering personnel, to correct capacity issues
withing the work area and align capacity with customer demand?
Plans developed plant-wide.
I. R&M Programmatic Tasks
1. Supplier R&M Program Plan
2. Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Analysis
3. R&M Reporting Requirements
4. R&M Design Reviews
5. Formal R&M Evidence Book
6. R&M Program Review (6 months after Job 1)
II. R&M Engineering Tasks
1. Equipment Characterization (Design Intent & Environment)
2. Top Ten Problems and Resolutions
3. Machinery Failure Mode & Effects Analysis (MFMEA)
4. Electrical Stress Analysis and Design Margins
5. Mechanical Stress Analysis and Design Margins
6. Thermal Analysis
7. Applications Engineering
8. R&M Testing and Assessment
9. Design for Maintainability
10. Ford Total Productive Maintenance
III. R&M Continuous Improvement Tasks
1. Failure Reporting, Analysis and Corrective Action System
2. Machinery and Equipment Performance Data Feedback
3. Things Gone Right / Things Gone Wrong (TGR/TGW)
Operational Metrics
Sq/ft for Process
Sq/ft for Warehouse
Crew Size (Operators/Shift)
Enviromental Health and Safety Issues (# of Issues)
Area 5 S Rating
Takt Time
Changeover Time in Minutes
Visual Controls (# of Items)
Sales/ Sq ft
Quality Metrics
Number of Supplier Supporting Process-Product (#)
Average Supplier PPM Rating
Customer Warranty Returns (PPM)
Quality Level (PPM or DPMO)
End of Line Rejects (PPM)
Customer Compliants (# of)
Cpis a measure of potential process capability. It is the ratio

of the six-sigma spread of a process distribution to the
tolerance of that distribution. The process must be stable in
order to assess Cp. Cp gives the maximum process
capability (Cpk) if the process is centered exactly in the
middle of the tolerance.
Cpk - Cpk is a measure of the actual process capability. It is

calculated by dividing the distance of the process mean to
the nearest tolerance limit by 3 standard deviations of the
process. Again, the process must be in control before
assessing Cpk. See the Statistical Process Control section
of the Toolbox for additional help on this subject.
Customer Satisfaction may be measured directly by survey
and expressed as a percentage, such as Percent of
Customers Completely Satisfied, or as a rating.
Defects Per Unit - Total number of defects identified on all

units divided by the number of units. This metric gives a
better measure of quality than First Pass Yield because it
captures all defects. Care must be taken to capture "hidden"
rework and repairs that may take place up the line or prior to
the reporting point.
First Pass Yield - Percentage of units that meet

specifications without any rework or repair. This is a
commonly used measurement, but has dubious value for
two reasons: A) rework and repair is often "hidden" - takes
place up the line but is not recorded, and B) multiple defects
occurring on a single unit are not captured.
Defects Per Million Opportunities (DPMO) - Defects per
opportunity is used instead of defects per unit to facilitate
more direct comparisons between processes with varying
levels of complexity.
Parts Per Million Defective (PPM) - Parts Per Million
Defective is the number of defective parts (or operations in a
service example) out of each one million parts or operations.
The calculation is straightforward: Number of Defects /
Number of Units (or Operations) x 1,000,000.
Survey Complaints (TGW's) per Unit (or per 1000) - The

number of complaints, or "Things Gone Wrong" reported on
a customer survey, divided by the total number of units
included in the survey responses. This metric may also be
expressed as complaints per 100 units, 1000 units, or even
1,000,000 units.
Warranty Percent of Sales - Warranty dollars paid during a
period divided by the net sales for that same period.
Warranty Claims per Unit - Total number of warranty claims
(not dollars) received during a period divided by the number
of units sold during the same period.
Inventory and Material Control Metrics
Wip Inventory (Processed Units)
WIP Inventory (Raw Units)
Walking Distance /Shift (Ft/Shift All Operators)
Part Travel Distance (Ft/part)
Order Fullfillment Lead Time (seconds)
On Time Delivery (OTD)%
Dock to Dock (In Hours)
Inventory Turn Rate (# of Turns)
Productivity Metrics
First time Through (FTT) %
Build to Schedule (in %)
Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) %
Value Added-Non Value Added (VA/NVA Ratio)%
Personnel Involvement Metrics
Number of Accident Free Days (in Days)
Average % of Absenteeism
Average % of Multi Skills Capbility With Process-Product
Average # of Suggestions/Person
Internal Logistics
Logistics planning done independent of process planning. Overall plant flow not
considered. High Bay storage used with central receiving and shipping areas.
Material stored in all available floor locations as near as possible to the point of use.
Plan for every part using lineback principle. Line side min/max. inventory levels
established taking into consideration constraint operations. Finished goods and rough
stock inventory levels determined.
Standard material handling routes planned per time based replenishment cycle.
Lineside flow racks utilized. Returnable dunnage included in planning similar to
production parts. High volume low density (call) parts managed as required.
Material handling QPS developed. Min/max. levels based on customer demand rate
for a std. amount of time (e.g.. 2 hours inventory lineside). Finished goods inventory
between processes sized based on complexity and response time.
Smart Card /Call system utilized with Market place. Call triggers planned with
process design. Production instruction cards triggering upstream processes. Some
products capable of supporting In-Line Vehicle sequencing (ILVS).
Standard inventories adjusted with volume requirements as a result of schedule

leveling.
Inventory
For the categories of Finished Goods, Work-In-Process (WIP) and Purchased/Raw Materials, what portion of middle
and upper managers can state from memory the current turnover and the purpose of each type?
What is the overall inventory turnover, including Finished Goods, WIP and Purchased/Raw material?
What is the ratio of Inventory Turnover to the industry average?
Scheduling/Control
What portion of work-in-process flows directly from one operation to the next without
intermediate storage?
What portion of work-in-process is under Kanban or Broadcast control
What is the on-time delivery performance?
Are parts storage areas at each operation labeled to show part numbers stored at that
location?
Is First In/First Out maintained at each operation?
Are Min/Max quantities displayed at each operation's part storage location?
Is the operator working ahead?
Is Work In Process minimized? (If operations are not bottlenecks, is one piece flow being
utilized)
Frontal storage of components should not increase the distance between workstations
Components are stocked directly from a small train by the driver, with little walking for the driver
Operator replaces empty containers with full ones without any travel by the operator (or anyone else)
Inflexible Equipment
Functional Layouts
Poor Quality
Inappropriate Scheduling
Response
0%-6%
7%-55%
56%-80%
81%-93%
94%-100%
0-3
4-6
7-12
13-24
25+
<=1.0
1.1-2.0
2.1-4.0
4.1-8.0
8.1+
Response
0%
1%-10%
11%-35%
36%-85%
86%-100%
0%
1%-10%
11%-35%
36%-85%
86%-100%
0%-50%
51%-70%
71%-80%
81%-95%
95%-100%
►Long, expensive setups

►Large Batches
►Inappropriate Layouts
►Excessive Handling
►WIP Queues
►Disconnects
►Poor Quality
►Angry Customers
►High Scrap & Rework Costs
►Unpredictable Schedules
►Complex Systems
►Inaccurate Inventory Records
►Large Queues
►Long Lead Times
2D
See Two-Dimensional Symbol
Alphanumeric
A character set that contains alphabetic characters (letters), numeric digits (numbers), and usually other ch
ANSI
American National Standards Institute
Autodiscrimination
The ability of a bar code reader to distinguish automatically between two or more symbologies (e.g. Interl
Bar code symbol

An array of rectangular bars and spaces that are arranged in a predetermined pattern following specific rul
Carrier
The party that provides freight services
Character
In a bar code symbol, the smallest group of elements that represents one or more numbers, letters, punctua
Code 39
For the purposes of this guideline, Code 39 (also known as Code 3 of 9) shall be the symbology as specifi
Code 128
For the purposes of this standard, Code 128 shall mean the symbology as described in ISO/IEC15417
Compliance Indicator
A specified character or string of characters indicating that the message that follows complies with an indu
Container
A receptacle for shipping goods; examples are palletboxes, totes, and racks. (See also Pack, Package
Customer
In a transaction, the party that receives, buys, or consumes an item or service
Customer Part Number
The part number as defined by the customer
Data Element
The smallest named item of information that can convey data, analogous to a field in a data record or a wo
Data Element Separator

The special character used to separate data elements in a data format
Data Identifier (DI)

A specified character (or string of characters) that defines the general category or intended use of the data
Decoder
An electronic assembly, that translates the proportional electrical signals from a scanner into recognizable
D-U-N- S®
Data Universal Number System, a 9-character company identifier assigned by Dun & Bradstreet to unique
ECC (Error Correcting Code)

A technique used at the byte level to detect and correct data transmission errors. Supplemental bits introd
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)

The computer-to-computer exchange of formatted data between trading partners.
EDI Message Data

The data communicated between business trading partners in a standard format and syntax, e.g., ANSI AS
Element
A single bar or space in a linear or stacked symbol or a single cell (module) in a matrix symbol (not the sa
Element Width
The thickness of an element measured from the leading edge of an element to the trailing edge of the same
Error Correction
A method used to correct erroneous data produced during the transmission, transfer, or storage of data
Error Correction Level

An indicator of the number of characters used in a two-dimensional symbol commonly referred to as “EC
Error Detection
The automatic determination that a decoded message's content is incorrect. Error detection will keep the t
Error Detection Characters

Symbol characters that are reserved for error detection. These characters are calculated automatically from
Goods
A term that refers to raw material and/or produced parts
VGSDB code
Global Supplier Data Base code, a 5-character company identifier assigned by UCCS. It is used to identify
Highlighting line
A horizontal divider line(s) placed above and/or below building block or blocks. Highlighting lines are ea
Human Readable Interpretation

The human readable letters, digits or other characters representing the data encoded in/and printed along w
ID
Abbreviation for Identification
Item
A single part or material purchased, manufactured, and/or distributed
Label
A card, strip of paper, plastic, card stock or metal that is marked (by printing or some other means) and a
Labeller
A term to identify the organization responsible for the labelling of a container or unit load
Labelling Area
Area on the label available for printing
VLicense Plate
NOTE: Ford Motor Company will not require the use of this label element by suppliers at this time.
A license plate is assigned to a transport unit by its issuer. Any license plate issuer shall be authorised by a
A license plate number:
a) SHALL start with a string of characters, the issuing agency code (IAC), assigned to the is
b) SHALL conform to a format specified by the issuing agency;
c) SHALL be unique in the sense that no issuer re-issues a number until a sufficient period o
d) SHALL contain only numeric and upper case alphabetic characters
SHALL not contain more than 22 characters;
Like Parts
Same part/item number
Linear Symbol
A one-dimensional bar code Symbol, such as Code 128
An array (linear sequence) of variable width rectangular bars and/or spaces, arranged in a predetermined p
Lines Per Block (LPB)

Units of measure defining the height of text characters (see appendix D for examples and approximate con
Lot
A quantity of homogeneous material either manufactured or received.
Manufacturer
Actual producer or fabricator of an item; not necessarily the supplier in a transaction
Master Load
A multiple pack or unit load of common items (sharing a single part number), such as a pallet
Master Load Label

A label used to identify and summarize the total contents of a master pack.
Master Pack
A unit load containing common (like parts) items.
Mixed Item Pack

A pack containing items with different part/ item numbers
Mixed Load
A multiple pack or unit load of mixed items (different part numbers), such as a mixed-container pallet
Mixed Load Label

A label used to designate mixed item, shipping packs.
Multiple Pack
A pack containing smaller packages of items
Normative
Establishing a norm or standard.
Non-Standard Quantity Pack

A pack containing variable quantities of like items
Pack, Package or Load

A container that provides protection and containment of items plus ease of handling by manual or mechan
Pallet
A platform to hold unit loads, permitting stacking of materials and the movement of the materials as a sing
Part
An identifiable item that has a unique name and/or number assigned to it.
Part Number
A unique code that identifies a part, assembly, component or kit
PDF417
A stacked 2D symbol use in the AIAG B16 Global Transport Label Standard for the Automotive Industry
Quantity
On a label, the marking that indicates the number of parts or items or the amount in any other unit of meas
Quiet Zone
Areas free from interfering markings surrounding a bar code symbol and, in particular, preceding the start
Also referred to as “light margin” or “clear area”.
Reader
A device consisting of a scanner and a decoder
Scanner
An electronic device to collect and convert reflected light from the elements (e.g. bars and spaces in linear
Serial Number
A string of numeric or alphanumeric characters in the issuer’s information system used for uniquely identi
Shall/Should
In this document, the word “SHALL” indicates a requirement and the word “SHOULD” indicates a recom
Ship From
On a transport label, the address of the location where the carrier will return the shipment if the container
Ship To
On a transport label, the address of the location where a carrier will deliver the shipment
Shipping Pack / Container

A pack or container used for shipping items from one plant to another and can be any of the packs describ
Shipping / Parts Identification Label

A label used to identify the contents of a shipping pack
Standard Quantity Pack

A pack which always contains the same quantity of like items
Supplier
In a transaction, the party that provides or furnishes an item or service
Symbol
A graphic array of light and dark elements that forms a complete scannable entity
Symbology
A standard means of representing data in bar code form; each symbology specification sets out its particul
Syntax
The way in which data are combined to form messages; syntax also includes rules governing the use of ap
Tag
A label that is hung from an object, usually with a wire placed through a reinforced eyelet in the label/ tag
Trading Partner
Any organization in a customer/supplier relationship; all members within the channels of distribution with
Two-dimensional Symbol
A machine-readable symbol that must be examined both vertically and horizontally to read the entire mess
UN/EDIFACT
United Nations/EDI For Administration, Commerce, and Transport
The acronym for the international data standard for electronic business messages
VUCCS code
Uniform Company Coding System; an alphanumeric field which identifies a specific company
Unit Load
One or more containers held together by means such as seatbelts or banding, making them suitable for tran
PALLET AND CONTAINER INFORMATION

TYPE OF CONTAINER (CONTAINER NUMBER)
CONTAINER DIMENSIONS
DESCRIPTION OF REQUIRED DUNNAGE
# OF PIECES PER CONTAINER
# OF CONTAINERS PER PALLET
# OF PIECES/PALLET
NUMBER OF CONTAINERS QUOTED
NUMBER OF PALLETS QUOTED
CONTAINER/DUNNAGE/PALLET COST
COST OF CONTAINER
Include all straps, lids, label holders, etc
COST OF PALLET
Include all straps, lids, label holders, pallets, etc
COST OF DUNNAGE/CONTAINER
COST OF TOOLING FOR DUNNAGE
COST OF DUNNAGE DESIGN
COST OF TESTING EFFECTIVENESS OF CONATINER PER SUPPLIERS DEFINED STANDARDS
COST/CONTAINER WITH DUNNAGE
TOTAL INVESTMENT FOR ALL CONATINERS WITH DUNNAGE, DESIGN, TESTING
TOTAL INVESTMENT FOR ALL PALLETS WITH LIDS, STRAPS, LABEL HOLDERS, ETC
CONTAINER PROTOTYPE COST (SO)
DESIGN INVESTMENT COST FOR PROTOTYPE
TOOLING INVESTMENT COST FOR PROTOTYPE
PURCHASE OR FABRICATION OF (10) CONTAINERS TO SUPPORT SO PROTOYPE BUILD
FREIGHT COST FOR PROTOTYPE CONTAINER TO HBPO FACILITY
TOTAL (SO) PROTOTYPE PROGRAM COST
CONTAINER PROTOTYPE COST (S1)
DESIGN INVESTMENT COST FOR PROTOTYPE
TOOLING INVESTMENT COST FOR PROTOTYPE
PURCHASE OR FABRICATION OF (10) CONTAINERS TO SUPPORT S1 BUILD
FREIGHT COST FOR PROTOTYPE CONTAINER TO HBPO FACILITY
TOTAL (S1) PROTOTYPE PROGRAM COST
Enter Estimated Pieces per Tray or Level

Enter Estimated Pieces/Skid or Pallet
Enter Estimated Tray per Pallet or Skid
Enter Estimated Tray In Manufacturing Location WIP
Enter Trays in Manufacturing Location Finished Goods Inventory
Number of Days In Transit
Enter Customer Plant In Bound Goods Inventory in Days
Customer Plant WIP Inventory in Days
Calculated # of Pallets Required
Calculated Lid & Base per Pallet Required
Enter Number of Sleeves per Pallet
Enter Planned Pallet Size:
Enter Pallet Type
Enter if Disposable or Returnable Packaging
Enter Cost/ Pallet Base and Lid
Enter Cost for Diposable Pallet
Enter Cost/Tray
Enter Size of Pallet
Enter Estimated Pallets/Truckload
Enter number of Feet of Wraping
CONTAINER/DUNNAGE MAINTENANCE
It is the responsibility of the Supplier to ensure hired or Supplier owned containers/dunnage is fully maintained by the Supplier.
3. INTERNAL DUNNAGE
3.1. Any necessary dunnage (the internal material required to protect and support the parts in the container) must be agreed with the F
3.2. Any internal dunnage that cannot be made captive or reusable must be 100% recyclable and also must have the approval of the Fo
3.3. The total weight and cost for all this internal dunnage must be provided on the MFG1121.
rs), and usually other characters such as punctuation marks
symbologies (e.g. Interleaved 2 of 5, Code 39, Code 128, PDF417).
n following specific rules to represent elements of data that are referred to as characters; A bar code symbol typically contains a
umbers, letters, punctuation marks, or other information
he symbology as specified by ANSI AIM BC1
d in ISO/IEC15417
ws complies with an industry, regional or international standard
also Pack, Package or Load)
in a data record or a word in a sentence

ntended use of the data that follow; data identifiers are defined by ANSI MH10.8.2 / ISO 15418. The DI is not part of the data.
anner into recognizable or computer-compatible data
n & Bradstreet to uniquely identify business establishment
upplemental bits introduced or source encoded into a data stream to allow automatic correction of erroneous bits and/or derivatio
d syntax, e.g., ANSI ASC X12 or UN/EDIFACT.
atrix symbol (not the same as Data Element)
railing edge of the same element (see X dimension.)
r, or storage of data
only referred to as “ECC”, for error correction. Higher levels of error correction allow the correction of greater potential symbo
detection will keep the two-dimensional symbol from being decoded as erroneous data.
lated automatically from other symbol characters.

CS. It is used to identify a physical location for a supplier, customer, warehouse, etc.
Highlighting lines are easily distinguishable from the horizontal separator lines used to separate other building blocks. This visua
d in/and printed along with the linear bar code or 2D symbol.
me other means) and attached to an object to convey information
suppliers at this time.

shall be authorised by an issuing agency in accordance with the rules set up by that agency and 15459-1 (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 31
IAC), assigned to the issuing agency by the Registration Authority;
ntil a sufficient period of time has passed so that the first number has ceased to be of significance to any user responsible to the I
ed in a predetermined pattern, following specific rules, to represent elements of data; these bar and space patterns are referred to
les and approximate conversion to inches and millimetres).
xed-container pallet
g by manual or mechanical means (e.g. totes, palletboxes, and racks)
of the materials as a single load.

e Automotive Industry as a portable data base.
n any other unit of measure that is contained within the package.
ular, preceding the start character and following the stop character
bars and spaces in linear symbols) of a symbol into electrical signals for processing by the decoder.
used for uniquely identifying an individual item or entity for its life. This character string shall not be repeated within 365 days to
ULD” indicates a recommendation.
ipment if the container is undeliverable
ny of the packs described above (totes, palletboxes or racks).

tion sets out its particular rules of composition or symbol architecture.
governing the use of appropriate identifiers, delimiters, separator character(s) and other non-data characters within the message.
d eyelet in the label/ tag
nels of distribution within an industry (suppliers, carriers, customers and intermediaries)
y to read the entire message. A 2D symbol may be one of two types of machine-readable symbols: a Matrix Symbol or a Stacked
fic company
ng them suitable for transport, stacking and storage as a unit.

NED STANDARDS
TOYPE BUILD
NED STANDARDS
NED STANDARDS
ained by the Supplier.
ner) must be agreed with the Ford Packaging Engineers and must be captive or reusable. Dunnage to be approved on Production parts dunnage agreement.
must have the approval of the Ford packaging engineer.
bol typically contains a leading quiet zone, start character, data character(s), stop character, and a trailing quiet zone.
is not part of the data.
ous bits and/or derivation of missing bits, in accordance with a specific computational algorithm. See also “Error Correction Lev
greater potential symbol damage.

ding blocks. This visual difference may be the result of using a thicker line chosen by the labeler.
(ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 31 - Procedural Standard for unique identification of transport units). Issuing agencies are authorised and reg
user responsible to the Issuing Agency;
patterns are referred to as characters. A bar code symbol typically contains a leading quiet zone, a start character, data characte
eated within 365 days to a single customer.
ers within the message. Syntax is the equivalent of grammar in spoken language.
rix Symbol or a Stacked Symbol. 2D symbols differ from linear bar codes in that they have the capability for high data content, s
o “Error Correction Level.”
es are authorised and registered by the Registration Authority.
character, data character(s) including a check character (if any), a stop character and a trailing quiet zone
for high data content, small size, data efficiency, and error correction.
COMPUTER COURSES
Outlook
Word
Excel
Powerpoint
MS Project Management
Engineering Change Suystem
World Wide Web - Introduction
TECHNICAL COURSES
Design for Assembly
Design for Manufacturing
Design for Serviceability
Product Development Systems Overview
Cad System PDM Introduction
Robustness Imperative
Recycling Awareness
Design Mgt Knowledge
Experimental design
DVP & PV
Global 8D-7Step-5-Step
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis - FMEA
Process Control Methods
Robustness: Parameter Design
Robustness: Tolerance Design
Reliability
Systems Engineering Fundamentals
Design Mgt Knowledge For Managers
BUSINESS COURSES
Empowerment
Data-Driven Decisions
Financial Decision Making for Non-Financial Personnel
QUAL/PLNG/PROB. SOLVING COURSES
Quality Operating System (QOS)
Quick Quality Function Deployment
Policy Deployment
ISO9000 Awareness
TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT COURSES
Benchmarking
Project Management Theory
COMMUNICATION COURSES
Effective Listening & Feedback
Assertive Communications
Successful Work Teams
Writing on Target
Facilitative Leadership
Outstanding Meetings
Power Presentations
Executive Communispond
HUMAN RELATIONS COURSES
Employee Feedback
Managing Personnel Diversity
Salaried Supervisors Institute
Diversity Awareness
Environmental Health & Safety Awareness
Coaching and Counseling
Men & Women as Colleagues
I have identified and named all the current projects in my area of
responsibility.
All of the projects are prioritized.
All the projects have clear goals and initiatives that have been
agreed upon.
All the projects are scheduled in writing.
All the projects have approved budgets.
All the projects have adequate resources for completion.
All the people and vendors involved with the projects are
appropriately skilled and adequately trained to complete the project
work.
Potential conflicts with other projects are easily identified because of
open communications and clear project plans.
The potential problems in my projects are easily identified in advance
and actions are consistently taken to eliminate or minimize them.
All the people working with me on projects are committed to the

project and are enthusiastic about it.
Other project participants willingly respond to requests related to the
projects I am coordinating.
When project conflicts and disagreements come up, effective
agreements are reached quickly and with minimum disruption to
workflow.
I’m always sure of the current status of the projects I’m involved with.
Project changes are clearly communicated on a regular basis and

are always understood by project participants.
My projects are consistently completed on time, within budget, and to
specification.
Has the business problem been defined and documented?

Has the business value (corporate strategies or initiatives set by this
project) been documented?
Has the project scope been defined?
Have all business and technical requirements been thoroughly
identified and defined?
Have hardware and software requirements been identified?
Have legal and regulatory requirements been determined?
Have all required deliverables been identified and defined?
Have all issues been identified for resolution?
Have constraints been identified?
Have tangible benefits been documented?
Have benefit measures been established?
Were intangible benefits considered?
Does the recommended solution solve the business problem and
satisfy the user requirements?
Have consequences of rejection or delay of this request been
identified?
Have factors critical to the success of the project been documented?
Have the measurement criteria for project success been determined?
Has the risk assessment checklist been completed?

Have various alternatives been evaluated?
Does this project involve an existing system?
Has documentation been gathered on existing systems?
Has a system overview been written?
Have interfacing systems been identified?
Has the potential impact on interfacing systems been identified?
Have deficiencies in proposed system been documented?
Has a high-level project estimate been provided?
Have one-time costs been determined?
Have administrative expenses been determined?
Have costs to operate the system been determined?
Has adequate customer input been gathered?
External Logistics
Central Receiving and Shipping areas used.
Incoming and outgoing material staged at the
dock. Truck arrivals are at random intervals.
Trailer staging areas (Bullpens) used to
handle inbound freight overflow.
Lead Logistics Provider (LLP) utilized to

schedule inbound and outbound freight per
the plan for every part. Inbound freight
quantities maintain in-plant min/max.
inventory levels.
LLP's develop shipping windows logistics

plan. Std. delivery routes established for
local suppliers (milk runs). All freight is
scheduled into available shipping window
slots and ETA's provided to the plant by
LLP's. Freight unloaded/loaded live.
Inbound freight and shipping quantities

planned as a function of the Customer
Demand Rate. Releases are all electronic
(through CMMS). System does provide
space to contain overshipments.
Milk runs utilize SMART cards to determine

delivery order quantities. Actual production
data provided daily to supply base to drive
replenishment based production schedules
(CMMS used where SMART not practical).
Ship and receive a repeatable pattern

regularly at volumes leveled to customer
demand rate. Delivery schedules adjusted in
conjunction with volume changes based on
leveled customer demand.
Develop Material Flow Plan

Can the facility demonstrate an In-Plant
Replenishment Team has been formed and
meets the following criteria:
Hourly and salary FPS Material Flow
Coordinators are assigned.
FPS Material Flow Coordinators can document
that they have attended SMF Working
Knowledge Workshop & SMF Train-the-trainer
courses.
Workstations are provided for the FPS Material
Flow Coordinators in the FPS or SMF Team
Room
Names of plant personnel have been provided to
fill the supporting roles on the In-plant
Replenishment Team.
Can the facility provide Plan for Every Part
reports from the FPS WEB Data Base that
illustrates current state assessment:
IAA only
At Least 50% and less than 75% of the plant
Complete plant
Can the facility provide a report of SMF Baseline
Metrics as follows:
Total Cost Elements:
Inventory, Freight, Premium Freight, Total
Material Handling Labor Costs, Obsolete
Inventory, Yard Management, Traffic Labor,
Detention, Switching, etc.
Baseline Measures:
Bull Pen Trailer Inventory, Part and Trailer
Storage Space Required, Transit Damage
occurrences, etc.
Can the facility provide a detailed workplan for
implementation of SMF Internal Logistics:
IAA only
At Least 25% but less than 50% of the plant
Complete plant
Can the facility demonstrate an effective design
of inbound packaging, such that:
Packaging falls within ergonomic guidelines.
The Production Operator had input to the
packaging design.
Returnable, reusable, recyclable dunnage is
used whenever practical.
Packaging falls within the guidelines of the
Greening Strategy.
Packaging was designed to support FPS lean
manufacturing concepts.
Can the facility demonstrate a strategy to
develop ergonomic workstation design, such
that:
The Production Operator(s) played a integral role
in the design of their workstations.
The design minimizes Production Operator walk
time.
The workstation design supports line of site
management.
Each part used at the workstation is available
there at all times
The workstation design facilitates easy removal
of the card from the container by the production
operator.
Can the facility demonstrate a a Lead Logistics
Provider (LLP) has been assigned to the plant
and is stationed on site at the plant?
Can the facility provide an External Logistics
Plan that meets the following Criteria:
Routes Planned for more than 5%, but less than
25% of suppliers
Routes Planned at least 25%, but less than 50%
of suppliers
Routes Planned at least 50%, but less than 75%
of suppliers
Routes Planned at least 75%, but less than
100%
Routes Planned all (100%) of the suppliers (100)
OR
Can the facility show that an Alternate External
Logistics Plan (e.g., Pay On Use, Kan Ban, etc.)
meets the following Criteria:
The Plan is being used for more than 5% but less
than 25% of the total parts
The Plan is being used for more than 5% but less
than 25% of the total parts
Used for at least 50%, but less than 75%
Used for at least 75%, but less than 100
Used for all parts applicable
Implement Material Flow Plan
Can the facility provide training documentation
that demonstrates the following:
Have all Production Operators in launched
application area received the SMF Overview and
Request Material Movement Training?
Have all Material Handlers in launched
application area received SMF Overview,
Internal Logistics and Request Material
Movement Training?
Has the facility established a Card or Scan
Market Area(s) that meet the following criteria:
Does each part have only a single Market
Address assigned to it?
Are the market addresses compatible with the
SMART System?
Does every rack have a standard SMART Market
Area Label attached to it and is the label correct?
Are parts only stored in their designated area?

Has an overflow area been established and
clearly labeled?
Does the Market Place layout facilitate efficient
picking of parts?
Has a mailbox been established for each route
(Card only)?
Are min/max quantities established and adhered
to for every part?
Are active racks controlled by a FIFO process?
If tiered racks are used, are Fill Active Cards
attached to the rack associated with each part?
(Use of roller racks establish FIFO and eliminate
the need for a "Fill Active" process)
Are Visual Factory Techniques being used for

vehicle parking areas in the Market Area?
Is a part location banding directory posted in the
Market Area?
Active (pick) areas have containers free of
packaging materials such as shrink wrap &
banding
Part labels in reserve areas face outward for
easy identification
Has the facility established a Call Market Area(s)
that meets the following criteria?
Are the parts in the Market Area stored relatively
close to their point of use/fit?
Is the Market Area(s) established between where
the parts are received and where they are used?
Does each storage location have clearly visible

part labels with min/max quantities established
and adhered to?
Parts are stored in their designated area.
Has an overflow area been established and
clearly labeled and properly used?
There is a process being used for FIFO control.
Has a monitor, light board or RF Terminal been

established for the Market Area?
Are Visual Factory Techniques being used for
vehicle parking areas in the Call Market Area?
Can the facility using card replinishment
demonstrate the effective use of SMART card
Mail Boxes, such that:
Mail boxes are within easy reach of the
production operator.
Mail boxes are clearly visible and labeled using
Visual Factor techniques.
Zone mail boxes are located in the main aisles
providing easy access from the work areas.
Has the facility established SMART Office(s) that

meet the following criteria?
Has a SMART Office been physically established
in the plant?
Does the SMART Office provide a secure and
clean environment to house the equipment?
Is the SMART Office equipped with a Device that
is able to read (scan) smart cards, Pentium PC,
Card Generation Equipment?
Has the facility established holding areas at the
Receiving Docks that meet the following criteria:
Has a General Holding Area been established?
Has a Quality Report Holding Area been

established?
Has Delivery Staging Areas been established?
Does each Market Area serviced at the dock
have established holding areas?
Are all Holding Areas clearly defined and labeled
using Visual Factory Techniques?
Are parking areas for material handling
equipment clearly defined and labeled using
Visual Factory Techniques?
Can the facility demonstrate well organized and
ergonomic workstations have been implemented
in launched application areas, such that:
Every part at the workstation has a designated

storage space and that spaced is labeled with
standard SMART Workstation labels.
The part number on the label agrees with the
part number stored at the location.
Min/max quantities have been established and
adhered to for every part.
The parts are presented to the production
operator such that no additional moves of the
material will be required.
The part is presented to the production operator
so excessive bending and lifting has been
eliminated.
The work station facilitates easy removal of the
Smart Card and promotes FIFO use of the parts
at the work station.
The above has been replicated to 50% of the
areas of the plant.
The above has been fully deployed to the entire
plant.
Has the facility established Material Movement
routes from the Card Market Areas that meet the
following criteria:
Have all routes been assigned unique visual
identification such as color codes?
Are all routes clearly labeled on the floor, pillars
or overhead signs?
Are the routes easy to follow from the Market
Place or Receiving Dock to final destinations?
Can the facility demonstrate visual factory
techniques have been used to direct truck traffic
at the plant, such that:
Routing signs have been posted from the Gate(s)
to the appropriate Receiving Docks.
Dock Numbers are posted and clearly visible.
Designated Truck Parking Areas are clearly
identified for trucks waiting for window times
Trailer Drop Area are clearly identified when a
trailer can not be live unloaded
Can the facility demonstrate the Detailed Work
Plan has been implemented:
Plan implemented in the Initial Application Area
only
Plan implemented in at least 25%, but less than
50%
Plan implemented in at least 75%, less than
100%
Plan implemented in all (100%) of the plant
Schedule Component Production
Can the facility demonstrate the ability to
electronically receive planning information, such
as Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG)
Electronic Data Interchanged (EDI) 830 and 832
transactions and shop schedules.
Can the facility demonstrate the ability to
electronically transfer the customer information
directly into their scheduling system?
Can the facility demonstrate a scheduling

process with the ability to maintain schedules
that are consistent with their customers' demand:
Customer requirements are satisfied and

reduced inventory is maintained within min/max
parameters
Inventory is produced just in time to meet
customer requirements
Can the facility demonstrate year to year
improvement in the reduction of the average
batch size being scheduled? (Includes End
Product, WIP, Internal Sub Assembly and
Manufactured Components)
Can the facility demonstrate a scheduling
process that supports small repeatable batches?
Can the facility demonstrate a Production

Instruction Card process that pulls production
through the plant based on the downstream
operations’ usage, such that:
PI Cards used for less than 25% of Workstations
PI Cards used for at least 25%, but less than

50%
PI Cards used for at least 50%, but less than
75%
PI Cards used for at least 75%, less than 100%
PI Cards used for all (100%) of the Workstations
Can the facility demonstrate a process to control

partial lots?
Manage External Logistics
Can the facility demonstrate that the Lead
Logistics Partner/Provider (LLP) is being
provided electronic copies of all releases:
Daily (862)
Weekly (830)
ILVS if applicable
Can the facility demonstrate that truck shipments
are being managed with window times, such that:
At least 25%, but less than 50%

At least 75% but less than 100%
Complete compliance
Can the facility demonstrate that truck shipments
are being live unloaded, such that:
Greater than 10, but less than 25% of inbound
trucks are live unloaded
Greater than 25, but less than 50% of inbound
Greater than 50%,but less than 75% of inbound
Greater than 75%, but less than 100% of
inbound trucks are live unloaded
All truck arriving with parts/materials are live
unloaded and the Bull Pen (Truck Yard) is empty
Can the facility demonstrate they are maintaining
a log of process deviations, such as:
Carrier that is late for a window time.

Loads that were not validated at point of pick up
Material that was damaged in transit

Carrier deviations
Can the facility demonstrate all suppliers with
active truck routes have been trained by their
LLP?
Can the facility demonstrate the LLP is
reevaluating the truck routes on a regular basis
for improved route optimization?
Can the facility demonstrate that truck cubing is
being optimized, such that:
Greater than 50%, but less than 60%
Greater than 60% but less than 70%
Greater than 70% but less than 85%
Greater than 85% trailer cube
Does the facility have a process to check in truck
conveyances at the Security Gate, such that:
Trucks arriving too early are sent to a

designated hold area.
Arrival time of the truck if logged
Can the facility demonstrate a process that
ensures that carriers are properly directed, such
that:
Identification of appropriate gate is being
communicated to the carrier.
Identification of appropriate unloading/shipping
dock is being communicated to the carrier.
A robust process exists to communicate changes
because of emergency situations.
Can the facility demonstrate an effective inbound
receiving process for live unloads, such that:
Route Manger reports to the designated area

after parking trailer.
Route Manager present shipping documents to
Receiving personnel.
The Route Manger remains inside the plant while
the truck is being unloaded.
Can the facility demonstrate effective outbound
shipping process, such that:
Out bound shipments that are to be "live loaded",
managed trucks (e.g., milk runs, or other
"window "trucks) are staged prior to the arrival of
the truck.
Shipping Documentation is available concurrent
with the loading of the truck and in compliance
with window requirements.
All managed out bound truck shipments are
being verified by the Route Manager or truck
driver.
Managed trucks are being loaded to the Route
Manager's trip sheet or other instructions
consistent with customer requirements.
Can the facility demonstrate the proper truck
departure process is being followed, such that:
The Route Manager's or Truck Driver's Trip

Sheet is signed by authorized plant personnel.
Shipper is provided to Route Manager or truck
driver and signed by personnel.
Shipping dock personnel remove all physical
restraints.
The Route Manager or truck driver has verified
all physical restraints have been removed.
Truck release document (if required) is validated.
Follows plant process to post the shipper.

An ASN is generated.
Does the facility follow a process to check
outbound truck conveyances at the Security
Gate, such that:
Truck loads are verified against shipping
documentation; or unbroken seals are verified.
Empty trucks are visually inspected.
Departure time of the truck is logged.
Can the facility demonstrate a process for
handling delayed truck shipments, such that:
The LLP has the capability to monitor route
execution for all truck routes.
The Route Manager contacts the LLP at the plant
using onboard communication system when the
delay becomes evident.
The LLP records metrics for delays in routes.
The LLP works with the plant to determine best
means of protection.
The LLP advises the Route Manager(s) of
required action via onboard communication
system.
The LLP is arranging for alternative pickup when
necessary.
The LLP updates the ETA for the conveyance.
includes the Lead Logistics Provider in Premium
Freight decision making process?
assures that the Lead Logistics Provider is
notified on a timely basis regarding any type of
plant shutdown?
Can the facility demonstrate they have provided
the LLP with training in their Parts Follow-up
System?
Can the facility demonstrate the LLP has
assumed parts follow up responsibilities for all
parts that are being managed by the LLP? Any
contractual agreements would take precedence
over this requirement.
Can the facility demonstrate year to year
improvement in the following base line metrics:
Inventory
Freight Costs
Premium Freight Cost
Obsolete Inventory Costs
Total material handling labor cost
Detention/Demurrage Costs
Switching Costs
Bull Pen Trailer Inventory
Manage Internal Logistics - Receive Material
Can the Facility demonstrate it has implemented

a live unload safety practice, such that:
Live unload safety practices are posted at all

Receiving Docks.
All Truck Receiving Docks are equipped with
trailer restraints (N/A for Side Unload).
All Trailers actively being unloaded are chocked
and/or locked (N/A for Side Unload).
No Driver is present in any truck that is actively
being unloaded.
No engine is running in any truck that is actively
being unloaded.
A designated area at the Receiving Dock has
been identified (using visual factory techniques)
for Truck Drivers to wait.
The Receiving Dock personnel have a clear
understanding of the Live Unload Safety
procedures and other safety practices.
Can the facility demonstrate effective unloading
safety practices so that, according to safety
records, no PMHV or truck related accidents or
newer misses occurred on the shipping /
receiving docks.
Can the facility demonstrate inbound truck
unload / load window times have been set and
that:
At least 25% of all conveyances meet the
designated unload / load window time.
At least 50%
At least 75%
100% meet designated window times
How effective is the facility at being able to
unload/load a truck conveyance within the
prescribed window times:
At least 25% of the trucks with set windows, but
less than 50%.
Complete compliance
Does the personnel on the Receiving Dock have
a clear understanding of when and how to use
the various Holding Areas?
QR Holding Area
Delivery Staging Area for production materials
Delivery Staging Area for IM
General Holding Area
Does the facility have a process that assures that
the best Material Handling Routes from the
Receiving Dock to Workstations are being used
for those parts that have been designated direct
delivery to the Point-o-Fit.
100% use Material Handling Routes
How effectively is the facility’s use of specified
Material Handling Routes from the Receiving
Dock to Delivery Destinations such as call or
card market places:
100% compliance to Material Handling Routes
Can the facility demonstrate the effective use of
QPS Sheets at the Receiving Docks, such that:
QPS Sheets were developed by the individuals

responsible for receiving.
QPS Sheets are visibly posted at the Receiving
Docks.
QPS Sheets reference designated Material
Handling Routes
QPS Sheets reference the holding areas.
JSA have been developed.
QPS Sheets being used to continuously improve
the process.
The facility can demonstrate effective use of
Work Groups on the Receiving Dock that support
the SMF IAA, so that:
Work Groups have been established.
Work Groups have received all required training.
A Work Group leader has been established.

Roles and responsibilities have been established
for the Work Group.
The Work Group meets on a regular basis.
Meeting minutes are captured.
The Work Group has actively solved problems.
The Work Groups are continuously improving the
process.
Can the facility demonstrate year over year
improvements in the following areas:
Average unload/load window times
Percentage of live unloaded trailers
Manage Internal Logistics - Manage Material
Flow
How effective is the facility in the involvement of
the Production Operator in triggering the request
for material movement (reference question 10.1):
Launched Application Area Only

At least 25% of the Plant Production Operators /
Areas, but less than 50%
Production Operators trigger material movement
for all parts being pulled to their workstation.
How effective is the facility in the use of standard

SMART Triggers :
Launched Application Area Only
Greater than 25% of the Plant Production
Operators / Areas, but less than 50%
Complete compliance
The Production Operators understand and follow
the defined process for requesting material in
emergency situations, such that:
Does the Production Operator have a clear
understanding of workstation min/max levels,
such that:
The Production Operators can influence the
determination of min/max levels at their
workstation.
The Production Operators monitor the inventory
levels at their workstation.
The Production Operators understand that it is
their responsibility to optimize workstation
inventory levels where possible.
Does the facility effectively maintain workstation
inventory within the designated min/max levels
Work stations in IAA with min/max levels

25% to 50% of the workstations within min/max
levels
100% within designated min/max levels
QPS Sheets in the Launched Application Area to
reference material replenishment practices at the
Workstations, such that:
QPS Sheets were developed by the Production
Operator.
QPS Sheets are visibly posted at the
Workstation.
QPS Sheets reference when and how material
request triggers are being used.
QPS Sheets reference how material is requested
in emergency situations.
QPS Sheets reference what actions are required
if inventory falls below min or goes above max
level.
QPS Sheet references actions to take place
when parts are improperly delivered to the
workstation.
the process.
Can the facility effectively demonstrate the use of
a pull process to replenish the workstation
Manual Card and Call Process or other Pull

System used in IAA
SMART System being used in the IAA
SMART used for at least 25%, but less than 50%
of parts in plant
SMART System fully deployed in the plant
Can Facilities using Card replenishment
demonstrate that an effective SMART Cards
collection process has been established, such
that:
Cards are collected on regular cycles.
Cards are collected by designated Production
person.
The Group Leader or Designated Person picking
up cards) should use local job knowledge to
verify the reasonableness of the quantity of cards
being picked up compared to the remaining stock
at the work station.
Cards are delivered to zone mailbox.
Has a Material Replenishment Coordinator
(MRC) been assigned to the SMART Office, such
that:
The MRC has been assigned.
The MRC has completed SMF Training for
SMART and Internal Logistic
The MRC works in the SMART Office.
Can the facility provide evidence that the MRC is
performing the following:
Schedules system downloads.
Maintains SMART System parameters.
Analyzes "Emergency Delivery" Incidents
Analyzes Part Usage Reports.
Reviews and resolves Missing in Action (MIA)
Cards.
Announces Card Pick-up (where applicable).
Monitors and maintains call equipment.
Monitors and maintains SMART Office
equipment.
Generates SMART Management Reports.
Maintains Replenishment Process measures.
Trains Material Handlers.
Initiates Process Improvements.
Can facilities using Card replenishment
demonstrate that SMART Cards are being
processed through the SMART Office, such that:
Cards are being mechanically read.

Card maintenance is being performed after each
collection cycle.
The cards are being sorted by delivery route and
delivered to the Line Feeder(s).
Can facilities using Card replenishment
demonstrate the effective management of
missing cards, such that:
SMART Missing in Action Reports are generated
on a regular and frequent basis.
Missing cards are investigated with the
Production Operator(s) and/or Material
Handler(s).
Personnel mishandling cards are being
instructed in regards to proper card handling.
Missing cards are being replaced with new
SMART Cards.
Can the facility demonstrate an effective process
of monitoring and resolving root causes for
emergency deliveries from card and call
marketplaces, such that:
A history of emergency deliveries is being
maintained.
Emergency Delivery Reports are veing
generated on a frequent and regular basis.
Root Cause Analysis is being conducted for parts
with high incidences of Emergency Deliveries.
Can the facility demonstrate the trend in the use

of Express Cards or Emergency Scans has been
reduced year to year?
Does the Material Handler (route drivers and or
call Hilo drivers responsible for managing the
market place) have a clear understanding of
Market Area min/max levels, such that:
The Material Handlers are able to influence
min/max levels in their Market Area.
The Material Handlers monitors the inventory
levels in their Market Area.
The Material Handlers understand that it is their
responsibility to optimize Market Area inventory
levels.
QPS Sheets in the Market Areas, such that:
QPS Sheets for market place functions were

developed by the Material Handlers.
QPS Sheets are visibly posted in the Market
Area.
QPS Sheets reference when and how material is
being stored, picked and/or delivered.
QPS Sheets reference how material is delivered
in emergency situations.
QPS Sheets reference what actions are required
if inventory falls below min.
QPS Sheets indicate inventory above the max
level must be stored in the Overflow Area.
QPS Sheets have a process identified to remove
material from the overflow area.
the process.
Can the facility demonstrate an effective process
plant wide for managing returnable containers
and dunnage, such that:
Returnable Containers are received into the
plants records the same as production parts.
Returnable Containers are removed from the
workstation at the time parts are being delivered.
Returnable Containers are moved to a

Marshalling Area following a designated route.
Returnable Container Marshalling Area is labeled
using Visual Factory Techniques.
Returnable Containers are returned to the
supplier on a timely basis.
Returnable Containers have shippers generated
prior to returning to the supplier.
Advanced Shipping Notification (ASN) is
generated for all Returnable Container returns.
This process has been implemented for both
containers and dunnage details.
Can the facility demonstrate an effective use of
Work Groups for the Linefeeders to support the
SMF IAA, so that:

for the Work Group.
The work group has actively solved problems.
process.
Manage Internal Logistics - Ship Material
How effective is the process to generate correct
shipping documentation the first time:
100% of shipping documentation is correct
Can the facility demonstrate an effective FIFO
process for picking material to ship?
assures unique labeling for "New Model" parts
that prevents mislabeling and/or shipping
discrepancies to the customer?
Can the facility demonstrate a process that ships
returnable containers in a 1:1 ratio with
returnable containers received for all closed loop
Milk Runs?
How effective is the facility at being able to
unload/load a truck conveyance within the
prescribed window times:
Complete compliance
QPS Sheets at the Shipping Docks, such that:
QPS Sheets related to the shipping process were

developed by the Material Handlers.
QPS Sheets are visibly posted at the Shipping
Docks.
QPS Sheets reference processes to be followed
when the parts requested for shipment are not
available.
QPS Sheets reference the Route Manager
validation process.
the process.
Can the facility demonstrate that shipments are
being validated at the Shipping Dock?
Can the facility demonstrate that it has the ability
to either generate or verify Advanced Shipping
Notifications (ASNs) by scanning barcoded
shipping labels?
Can the facility demonstrate that it has a robust
process to assure that data content of all ASNs is
100% accurate, including a check to assure that
ASNs cannot be sent without having all required
fields complete/edited?
Can the facility demonstrate that ASNs are being
generated (including returnable containers) no
later than the departure of the conveyance, on a
24hour/ 7day basis?
Can the facility provide a process that describes
the proper utilization of shipping quantity
determination equipment?
assures the shipping quantity determination
equipment can account for variations in
packaging?
The facility can demonstrate effective use of
Work Groups on the Shipping Dock that support
the launched SMF IAA, as is:

for the Work Group.
The Work Group has actively solved problems.
process.
Manage Internal Logistics - Monitor and
Adjust the Process
Can the facility demonstrate the use of a robust
process for assuring that (cumulative ship0
quantity disagreements with the customer are
detected and reconciled in a timely manner, such
that:
100% of part records have correct cum ship
Can the facility demonstrate that the Production
Operators can explain and follow the process
when:
Inventory exceeds the maximum level at their
workstation.
Inventory falls below the minimum level at their
workstation.
Card Parts are delivered to their workstation
without a card attached.
Parts are placed in the wrong location.
Emergency delivery of parts is required.
Above questions implemented for 50% of plant.
Above questions implemented fin the entire

plant.
Can the facility demonstrate that the Material
Handlers that maintain the market place can
explain the process when:
Inventory exceeds the maximum level in the
Card or Call Market Area.
Inventory falls below the minimum level in the
Call Market Area.
Incorrect parts are delivered to the Call or Card
Market Area.
Above questions implemented in 50% of plant.
Above questions implemented in the entire plant.
Can the facility demonstrate that the individual

feeding the workstation (CARD=Route Drivers,
CALL=Hilo Drivers) can explain and follow the
process when:
Inventory exceeds the maximum level in the
Market Area.
Inventory falls below the minimum level in the
Market Area.
Parts are stored in an incorrect storage location
in the Market Area.
Requests that can not be filled.
Above questions implemented in 50% of the
Plant.
Above questions implemented in the entire Plant.
Can the facility demonstrate that the Material

Handlers can explain the process followed for
placing material into the Overflow Area and
removing material from the Overflow Area?
Can the facility demonstrate that the Receiving
Checkers can explain the process when:
Incoming material is improperly labeled

Unloading and loading of conveyance can not be
accomplished within prescribed window times.
Required containers are not available for return

to the supplier.
Carrier is not arriving within +/- 15 minutes of
prescribed window times.
Carrier has picked up wrong parts or allowed
overshipment of parts.
Can the facility demonstrate that the Shipping
Clerks can explain the process followed when:
Unloading and loading of conveyance can not be
accomplished within prescribed window times.
Required parts are not available for shipment to

the customer.
Carrier is not arriving within +/- 15 minutes of
prescribed window times.
Discrepancy between the shipping documents
and the carriers route trip sheet exists.
Can the facility demonstrate workstation
inventory levels have been reduced from the
base line:
Greater than 5% but Less than 25% of the total
plant workstations have reduced levels.
All workstations have reduced inventory levels
Can the facility demonstrate problem solving
sessions have been conducted to resolve:
High number of emergency deliveries of card
parts for a part/workstation.
Highnumber of emergency calls for a
part/workstation.
High occurrence of falling below the min at a
part/workstation.
Can the facility demonstrate Market Area
inventory levels have been reduced from the
base line:
At least 5% but Less than 25% parts in Market
have reduced levels.
All parts in Market have reduced inventory levels.

ensures documents related to SMF are reviewed
and approved by authorized personnel prior to
issue?
Can the facility demonstrate a process to
continually improve Carrier Performance, such
that:
The Lead Logistics Provider generates monthly
reports for the plant on Carrier performance.
The Lead Logistics Provider coaches the Carrier

on performance issues.
All Carrier performance issues are reported to
the Supplier/Carrier Training Development
Section.
Can the facility demonstrate an emergency
fallback process to cover failures relative to
SMART or other pull systems.
Manage Internal Logistics - Manage
Engineering Changes
Can the facility demonstrate that they are
effectively using the SMART System to manage
Engineering Changes, such that:
The Material Replenishment Coordinator
regularly attends the plant Change Coordination
Meetings.
The SMART System contains the latest
Engineering Change Information.
The Engineering Changes being broken on a
timely basis in the SMART System.
Can the facility demonstrate effective use of the
SMART System to manage Engineering
Changes, such that:
Prior to the Engineering Change breaking:
Are new Workstation and Market Area labels

printed?
A new SMART Cards printed for all card parts?
Are new parts identified and quarantined in a

New Part Market Area?
Are Production Operators and Material Handlers
kept informed of pending Engineering Changes?
At the time the Engineering Change breaks:
Are new parts moved from the New Part Market

Area to the designated Market Area?
Are new Rack Labels hung in the Market Area?
Are old parts moved to a quarantine area to wait

for disposition?
Are new Rack Labels hung at the Workstation?
Are an equal number of containers of parts

swapped at the workstation?
Are parts removed from the workstation moved
to a quarantine area to wait for disposition?
Can the facility demonstrate that counters are
being set in SMART to break exhaust
Engineering Changes?
Can the facility demonstrate that old SMART
Cards that are read and sorted are being
removed and discarded after the Engineering
Change breaks?
Compliance with Regulatory and Company
Requirements
Is the facility in compliance with Company
standards for Material requiring:
A toxicology review of all materials.
Material use restrictions.
Storage of hazardous or regulated material.
Transportation of hazardous or regulated
materials.
Inventory of all managed materials used.
Does the facility have a process for the review
and approval of new materials to assess
environmental impact?
Do contracts with suppliers require compliance
with all regulatory and Company health, safety,
and environmental standards?
Are records of managed materials maintained by
the facility, such that:
Tracked by quantities purchased and used
Tracked using MATS or equivalent system
Tracked by using area
Updated at least quarterly
Management Process for Synchronous
Material Flow
Can the facility demonstrate a management
structure which recognizes the importance of and
places appropriate emphasis on the SMF
process, such that:
Plant managers superintendents and supervisors
(including MP&L and Production) received SMF
Understanding Training.
Resources have been committed to the In-Plant
Replenishment Team.
Sufficient budget has been allocated to provide
for required changes to plant processes and for
SMF training for production and material
personnel.
Plant policies are fully aligned to the SMF
Processes
Has the facility established quantitative goals for
the full implementation of the SMF process?
Are objectives aligned with strategic goals?

Have area/department specific SMF objectives
been developed?
Have the objectives been communicated to the
plant floor level?
Does the facility track total cost savings by part
and by supplier?
Has the facility established a review process to
determine the effectiveness of the SMF process
with the following elements:
Identification of appropriate Measureables?
Collection of data and information?
Periodic review of performance against
objectives?
Identification of issues and improvement actions?
Identification and verification of best practices?

Has the facility management shown commitment
to the SMF process by:
Allocation of sufficient resources to meet the
facility’s objectives and goals?
Support for the deployment and improvement of
the SMF process?
Has the facility defined the roles, responsibilities,
and authority to implement the SMF process?
Has the facility included the SMF process into

the scope of the internal audit process?
Has the facility included the SMF process in the
scope of its ISO9000 document record/control
procedures?
Mode Selection
Days of Inventory on Hand
Route Miles
Rate Per Mile
Daily Cube
IB Wkly Freq
OB Wkly Freq
Pool purchases from multiple locations to

increase overall volume. Larger volumes
increase your leverage with the supply base.
Standardize purchases of related materials to

increase volume and leverage.
Single Source MRO supplies to increase total
volume and reduce cost - increases on some
items may be offset by overall reductions on
others.
Reduce the number of suppliers to increase
volume, reduce administrative complexity,
and enable cooperative value engineering
efforts. A smaller supply-base facilitates more
meaningful partnerships.
Use competitive bidding to reduce the cost of

purchases. Competitive bidding is not
necessarily at odds with single-sourcing. Use
competitive bids to select the single-source,
and commit to the single-source for a period
of time. You can tie pricing to overall market
price indexes to ensure continued price
competitiveness. Use a balanced scorecard
when bidding - quality and delivery are often
more important than cost.
Differentiate your strategy between pure

commodity items that may be purchased on
spot basis to take advantage of favorable
prices, and engineered materials where a
long term relationship with the supplier is
appropriate.
Use internet purchasing exchanges to increase the number of suppliers participating in the bidding process - partic
Negotiate "Most Favored Nation" status when
outsourcing to ensure that competitors are
not given a better price.
Specifications and Content
Don't over-specify - use Design Of
Experiments (DOE) to substitute lower cost
materials without negative impact on the
process. See the MoreSteam.com Toolbox
tutorial on Design of Experiments.
Shift engineering to the supply base. Many

suppliers have a higher level of engineering
capability and lower cost. Retain only system
integration engineering responsibility.
Include inbound freight and other value-
added activities in the purchase price if the
supplier has a lower cost base, OR
Separate inbound freight from the purchase
price if you can combine with outbound
freight volume to leverage overall freight
costs.
Revise incoming packaging to reduce total
cost. Bulk packaging can save on direct
packaging materials as well as the time and
labor required to remove the material.
Consider disposal cost as well.
Require incoming pallets to be the same size

as finished goods pallets so that you can
save on finished good pallet purchases.
Use returnable dunnage to eliminate material

cost (potentially offset by the return cost).
Return of empties
Packaging concept (disposable/re-
usable)
How are empties returned?
Folding ratio the containers
Emergency strategy
What is the procedure if the delivery in
the context of the standard process
cannot meet the delivery date?
What is the procedure if means of
transport fail?
With what logistics providers have
agreements been concluded (overland
and/or air) to carry out emergency
transports?
(Name, contacts, phone number)
What is the transport time?
What is the emergency procedure if
damaged or wrong parts have been
supplied to HB?
How much time is needed in an
emergency between notification of the
emergency and delivery?
What happens if delivery calls cannot be
sent or received?
Supplier’s contacts
Function Name Phone/f Mobile E-mail
ax
Plant Manager
Logistics management
Planning
Production
Dispatch
Quality
Empties control
Emergency (outside working hours incl. holidays)
EDI
Finances
Receiving and Inspection Review

Does the Receiving and Inspection area have the
appropriate measurement systems on-site to allow for the
analysis of purchased material?
Material Flow
Is there an effective system in place to control the
identification and status of in-process material?
Is barcoding utilized?
Is rejected material removed from the production area
in a timely manner?
Are the parts protected from damage during movement

within the process and within the factory?
Is there a material flow layout diagram for the facility?

Does the design optimize the flow of material through the
operation?
Does the facility have a process to assure the appropriate
identification and storage of all unusable or damaged
material (scrap, returns, rejects, etc.)
Shipping Dock Review
Is there a defined dispatch audit system in place and are
appropriate records available?
Are appropriate controls in place to prevent the shipment

of mixed product?
Are appropriate controls in place to prevent the shipment

of mis-labelled product?
Are appropriate controls in place to assure that the

correct quantity of pieces is shipped?
Product Packaging
Is appropriate Ford approved packaging available and has
it been verified by shipping trials to protect the product
from damage while in transit to the Ford Assembly plant?
Is there a process to assure that accurate packaging
data for all parts on release is confirmed in the Ford
system?
Manufacturing Plan Development
Is there a launch plan for the indicated parts? By
launch plan, we are referring to an initial production plan
with "ramp up" quantities as tools and facilities become
available. This plan should be by part, by day in
sufficient quantities to support the customers
requirements. Provide latest example.
Do you develop and maintain a rolling "manufacturing
plan" that indicates your production plan, by end item or
part family, to support current customer requirements for
at least the next 6 months? Provide latest report.
Does the facility perform, on a weekly basis, a
comparison of capacity vs. the customer's present and
future requirements? Provide latest report.
Is there a process in place to assure that Ford
is advised immediately of any capacity shortfalls,
short and long term? Describe the process.
Do you maintain performance metrics regarding the shop
floor's performance to your schedules?
Provide example.
Do you monitor and track delivery performance to
Ford? Provide latest example.
For the parts involved in this launch, have you

provided your suppliers with planning volumes
and weekly or daily releases for the raw materials and
purchase parts required to support Ford's
requirements? Have you verified that the requirements
are correct and that the supplier can support on time?
Describe the process to identify your "high impact"
suppliers for this program. How do you evaluate their
launch and on-going readiness?
Do you utilize EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) with
your supply base? If not, how do you send your release
requirements to your supply base?
What is your continous improvement process for the
delivery performance and capability of your suppliers?
Do you have performance metrics on your supply base's

delivery performance? Provide latest example.
MP&L Systems and Administration

Do you have an integrated (Materials, Purchasing,
Finance, Manufacturing) Production Control mechanized
system that handles your data and generates
production plans and supplier releases?
Do you utilize Direct Data Link (DDL) with Ford?
Are Ford Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)

requirements processed directly into your
Material Planning and Scheduling computer system?
Is there an understanding of the Ford shipment release
authorization (830, 862, 866), DDL, EDI and Supplier
Delivery Rating requirements?
Inventory Management
Do you have an active inventory record verification
program? What is the verification frequency?
Do you have an active program to verify accum totals with

Ford? What is the date of the last accum verification?
Engineering Change Management

How are engineering changes from Ford received
and managed in your facility?
Do you have metrics to verify Bill of Material

accuracy versus actual usage on the production floor?
Provide example.
Material Handling
Are all shipping containers labeled to Ford
expectations/standards?
For shipments to Ford, are the appropriate fields

of the Advance Shipment Notices (ASN) generated by
scanning the bar coded shipping labels?
Does the process assure that each ASN is input at the
time of conveyance departure?
Does the facility utilize adequate warehouse controls on
all storage areas? Is there an effective stock rotation
program (FIFO)? Are stock segregation areas clearly
marked?
Have you verified that your transportation carrier can
support your launch and on-going volume?
If you are involved in the LLP (Lead Logistics Provider)

initiative, what percentage of your delivery windows
are met?
Support Functions
The functions which support production and do not directly touch the product
Maintenance Performance
5
Maintenance implements improvement plans to increase staff utilization
5
Maintenance implements improvement plans to increase service level
5
Some maintenance staff is incorporated to production organization
Basic reactive maintenance is also performed by operators (short and easy
5
repairs)
5
All maintenance objectives are clearly linked to production operational goals
4
Preventive Maintenance Operations have standard allocated times
Maintenance workload is assessed & maintenance utilization ratio is measured
4
(workload vs. workforce)
4
Operators perform part of planned maintenance
Based on actual failures rates, preventive maintenance frequency is optimized to
4
reduce workload
Maintenance implements action plans to improve own processes for unplanned
and planned maintenance (sequence of operations and value added analysis,
4
tools, parts availability, root cause analysis …)
KPIs and improvement initiatives are monitored on maintenance teams display
4
panels
An action plan is implemented in case of any deviation in relation to service level
4
targets
3
There are detailed procedures describing Planned Maintenance operations
Duration of failures and repair work are recorded for all equipments and are
3
consolidated
3
KPIs include service level agreements to production
Operations performed by maintenance are recorded but remain dispersed on
2
paper supports attached to pieces of equipment
2
There is no consolidation of maintenance operations
There is neither tracking of maintenance staff utilization nor of maintenance
1
workload
Logisitics Performance
5
Logistics questions and transforms own policy to make breakthrough in efficiency
5
All logistics objectives are clearly linked to production operational goals
5
Logistics implements improvement plans to increase service level
Some incentive at team level is attached to achievement of performance & service
5
level targets
4
Overall logistics staff utilization is measured
Logistics implements action plans to improve own processes (reducing variability,
improving efficiency by reducing number of handling, increasing inventory
4
accuracy ...)
4
Meeting production requirements is a major concern
4
KPIs and improvement initiatives are monitored on logistics teams display panels
4
targets
3
Each flow has an estimated man hours time
Responsibilities for part flows are balanced between resources to maximize
3
individual staff utilization
3
Abnormalities are recorded
3
KPIs include service level agreements to production
2 Sets of flows of parts or material are assigned to specific persons in a simple way
(for instance allocation of all flows to and from a working station)
There is no time calculation, just a rough check that resource is adequate to
2
workload
1
There is no tracking of logistics staff utilization
Flows of parts or material are not clearly assigned to people, tasks are performed
1
by available staff
Manufacturing Engineering Performance
Some incentive at team level is attached to achievement of performance & service
5
level targets
Manufacturing engineering implements improvement plans to increase service
5
level
4
Utilization rates are measured for repetitive tasks
4 Industrial engineering implements action plans to improve own processes for main
deliverables (SOP, time calculation, tooling design, lay out design…)
4
Multi-skilling is developed to improve flexibility and utilization rate
KPIs and improvement initiatives are monitored on industrial engineering display
4
panels
All Manufacturing engineers are able to perform different types of tasks (time
4
calculation, writing instructions, designing tools)
A large part of Industrial Engineers are able to perform value added analysis, time
4
and motion studies
4
targets
There are rough estimates of workload for elementary and repetitive tasks (hours/
3
SOP, hours per € of tooling investment, …)
A majority of Manufacturing engineers are able to perform different types of tasks
3
(time calculation, writing instructions, designing tools)
Some Manufacturing Engineers are able to perform value added analysis, time
3
and motion studies
3
KPIs include service level agreements to internal & external customers
2
There are some procedures to describe deliverables of industrial engineering
2
There are no metrics to assess workload to each type of deliverables
Some Manufacturing engineers are able to perform different types of tasks (time
2
calculation, writing instructions, designing tools)
There is neither tracking of industrial engineering staff utilization nor of industrial
1
engineering workload
Other Support Function Performance
5
All support functions implement improvement plans to increase staff utilization
5
All support functions implement improvement plans to increase service level
5
Critical support resources are incorporated in production organization
These resources are no longer grouped by functions but cross functionally,
5
according to the production area covered
5
All functional objectives are clearly linked to production operational goals
5
A large part of functional activities are dedicated to operational improvement
4
All support functions track own staff utilization
Support functions implement action plans to improve own process (using tools as
4
flow and value added mapping)
4
Improvement plan is in line with production requirements
KPIs and improvement initiatives are monitored on support functions’ display
4
panels
4 Pre-shift and handover production team meetings are cross functional, involving
indirect functions like maintenance, logistics, engineering and quality
4
Support functions are located a few meters from assembly line
4
targets
All support functions have a set of performance objectives whose achievement is
3
measured by KPIs
There is a daily plant management meeting (cross functional) on the floor to
3
review production issues
3
Support functions are located within the same building as production
Support function team members are clearly identified on production team display
3
panel
3
KPIs include service level agreements to internal or external customers
There are scheduled weekly cross functional meetings at plant level (plant
2
management meetings)
There are identified interlocutors for each production team within each support
2
function
Support function have some KPIs but they don’t integrate function own
2
performance
1
There are no regular meetings between production and support functions
1
Support functions have no KPIs
"The supplier shall..CAD/CAE"

"a) …meet input requirements;
"b) ... acceptance criteria;"
"c) ident. those characteristics"
"Design output documents ..."
"The supplier's design output…"

"Efforts to simplify ..."
"Utilization of geometric dim.."
"Analysis of ..trade-offs"
"Use of feedback from…"
"Use of design FMEA's
"At approp. stages of design…"
"At appropriate stages ..."
"Design validation shall be ..."
"Design Validation..Program Timing…Design Failures…Corrective

action…documented
"All design changes and ..."
"All…changes…Customer Approval… effects evaluated."

"The supplier.. Impact on System…"
"When Reqd…prototype prog"

"Performance tests shall ..."
"All performance tests.. tracked
"The supplier shall ensure…"
Statement of Work
Inspection Metrhod
Method
Visual
Touch
Listen
Gage
Missing
Wrong
Damaged
Fit
Loose
Function
Effort
Surface
Color
Noise
Route
Level
Position
Leak
Binding
Space (Sq. Ft.)

WIP Inventory (Process) Units
Inventory at the Cell(s) (Raw) Units
Cost to Carry Inventory ($ value X 0.75)
Walking Distance (Ft./Shift)
Part Travel distance (Ft./Unit)
Lead Time (Hrs., Min., or sec. or % on time delivery)
Quality (% defect free, DPU, DPH, yield)
Crew Size (Operators/Shift)
Evironmental, Health, Safety Issues (#)
Changeover (min.) (Last good to first good piece)
Visual Controls (# Items)
5S Rating
Pieces Per Operator Hour
QTY
STA / POS
TOOL PART NUMBER
TOOL DESCRIPTION
TOOL LIFE (PCS)
CHG TIME (MIN)
SCHED FREQ (PCS)
EST SET UP TIME (MIN)
Process Control Boards

1. Boards must be visible by all operators working within the
area/zone.
2. The layout and the support structure determine the number of
boards in the plant.
3. TV monitors with close circuit cameras can be used in places
where the operator cannot see the Process Control Board (Pit areas,
maintenance areas, etc.).
4. The process Control Boards will always be on the same side of
the line the operators. (Two sided boards will double the area to be
covered).
5. One workgroup Leader should support 4-10 operator-
controlled process stations (Lower group leader to operator ratios
will result in a more robust process).
6. Maximum of 30 operations/workstations/columns on one board
(Ideally 6 group leaders).
7. Minimum one workgroup leader per board.
8. The group leaders should support all the operator process
stations, plus all the fully-automatic process stations in between.)
1PP (First Phase of Production Prove-Out)
AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
AIMS (Automated Issues Matrix System)
APQP (Advanced Product and Quality Planning)
AWS (Analytical Warranty System)
BTS (Build-To-Schedule)
C&E (Cause and Effect)
CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing)
CC (Critical Characteristic)
CP (Confirmation Prototype)
Cpk (Process Capability Index)
CPU (Cost Per Unit)
CPV (Capacity Planning Volume)
CTQ Critical to Quality
DCP (Dynamic Control Planning)
DDL (Direct Data Link)
DFMEA (Design Failure Modes & Effects Analysis)
DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control -- 6 Sigma Problem solving)
DPMO (Defect per Million Opportunities)
DPU (Defect per Unit)
DTD (Dock-To-Dock)
DVP&R (Design Verification Plan and Report)
ES (Engineering Specifications)
FCPA (Ford Consumer Product Audit)
FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)
FSN (Ford Supplier Network)
FSP (Ford Supplier Portal)
FSS (Full Service Supplier)
FTT (First-Time-Through)
AGE R&R (Gage Repeatability & Reproducibility)
HIC (High Impact Characteristic)
JIT (Just In Time)
KPIV (Key Process Input Variable)
KPOV (Key Process Output Variable)
LRR (Launch Readiness Review)
MP&L (Material Planning and Logistics)
MS (Material Specifications)
MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis)
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology)
np Chart (Chart for monitoring defective-nonconforming individual products)
OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness)
PD (Product Development)
PEO (Product Engineering Office)
PFMEA (Process Failure Modes & Effects Analysis)
PMT (Program Module Team)
PPAP (Production Part Approval Process)
Ppk (Performance of process)
PSW (Part Submission Warrant)
PVA (Percent Value Add)
PVT (Plant or Product Vehicle Team)
QOS (Quality Operating System)
QR (Quality Rejects)
RPN (Risk Priority Number)
SC (Significant Characteristic)
SDS (System Design Specification)
SEI (Software Engineering Institute)
SFMEA (System Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)
SIM (Supplier Improvement Metrics)
SMED (Single Minute Change of Die)
SPC (Statistical Process Control)
SREA (Supplier Request for Engineering Approval)
STA (Supplier Technical Assistance)
TGW (Things Gone Wrong)
TPM (Total Productive Maintenance)
VDA (Verband der Automobilindustrie - International Standard)
VO (Vehicle Operations)
VOC (Voice of the Customer)
WERS (Worldwide Engineering Release System)
YC (Potential Critical Characteristic)
YRT Rolled Throughput Yield
YS (Potential Significant Characteristic)

Lean Organizational Assesment That Is in Dvelopment - 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lean Organizational Assesment That Is in Dvelopment - 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lean Organizational Assesment That Is in Dvelopment - 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assessment Tool

Visual Management Visual Management Visual Management

Change Over SMED SMED SMED

Emergency and Environmental Health and

TPM TPM TPM

Level Schedule Sychorized Flow

Takt Build to Schedule

Pull System Kanban

Transportation External Logisitics

JIT JIT JIT

Other Support Behavior assessment of

Problem Solving Problem Solving

Upstream Quality In Station Process Control

Flexible Manpower Flexible Manufacturing

Flow Design Internal Material Flow

Skill Building Worker flexibility

Annotation Use of FMEA

Tools Unique to Jeromes

Items We will try to integrate into current

Lean Product Design

Corrective Action System

First Time Through

Wasted Operator Motion

Supplier Quality System

Packaging and Labeling

The effectiveness of the control of material within a plant

The measurement of the efficiencies of union relations

The effectiveness of the system that checks the quality of

The measurement of the capabilities of the firms

The measurement of the capabilities of the firms other

The effectiveness of error proofing to solve or eliminate

The effectiveness a process to run automatically via an

The effectiveness of Standardizing operator work functions

An assesment of the plants training system robustness

A Measurement of the involvement of the HR department

An assesment of the decision making behavoir of leaders

An assesment of how standrized packaging and labeling is

An assesment of the robustness of Program Management

Visual Factory: Visual Displays

Product/defect displays implemented plant-wide.

Visual Displays are current and updated frequently plant-wide.

Visual Displays are not current.

Visual Factory: Visual Controls

Linkages to feeder departments seen displayed and communicated plant-wide.

1 Error Proofing devices introduced on production lines only

Effectiveness of Error Proffing Methods-devices in Automated Equipment

Operator Job Saftey Instruction Sheets Only

Legislation / regulations are changed

Accidents or high potential near miss incidents occur

Physical modifications to the workstation are made

A process or product change is made

Operator suggestions for continuous improvement are approved or implemented

Work step times recorded plant-wide.

“Watch and Learn" training only

No formal training period

No consideration of material & traffic flows considered

How easy is it to alter the total production rate by +/-15%?

What is management's target operating capacity for individual departments or machines?

5 Fool proofing devices guarantee any assembly or part abnormality will be