Other Party Management Team (OPMT) Rick Downs Textron – Cessna Aircraft Chairman – IAQG OPMT April 11, 2008 Agenda • This report provides the highlights of activities and/or changes since the October meeting in Orlando and covers the following topics: ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ Principals Membership Demographics Standards Update OASIS Feedback Process Improvement Initiatives Summary 1 Principals – Purpose • The IAQG Other Party Management Team is a Global, Industry-Controlled, Oversight Committee chartered to manage the Other Party Quality Management Schemes and assessment results performed by the Sector Management Structures (SMS) on the 9100-series standards. – Goal • To improve the quality level and assure QMS implementation throughout the whole supply chain. 2 Principals Other Party Scheme is based on: • The use of identical or equivalent international, sector and national standards based on 9104 • An industry oversight system at international, sectorial and national levels to ensure that scheme’s requirements are fulfilled • Auditors authenticated against identical requirements • All information related to the scheme is collected in the OASIS database(Online Aerospace Supplier Information System) 3 Membership ++ IAQG-OPMT Chair + IAQG-OPMT V-Chair IAQG - OPMT * Sector OPMT Leader Americas Asia Pacific Europe Rick Downs ++ Tamaki Nishio * Herbert Mairose +* Cessna-Textron IHI Airbus Li Wei Gualtiero Arsento AVIC 1 Alenia Akihiro Iguro Gerard Pleigneur Mike Roberts Boeing Susie Neal Goodrich Vince May Honeywell MHI (Alternates) Safran (Alternates) Masahiro Kawamoto Jean Louis Bounie (alt) MHI Airbus Randy Dougherty Kunihiro Tanabe Norbert Borzek ANAB JAB TGA CB Focals Reg Blake TBD Pat Adamcik Ind. Assoc & OASIS Focals Jay Myers Kazuki Kanai Hans Luijt SAE SJAC ASD EASE Voting Members Mike Gallagher Lockheed Martin Tim Lee * Boeing (Alternates) IAF / AB Focals BSI DNV 4 Demographics National Schemes NAB’s CB’s Auditors OASIS Supplier sites Americas 1 (1) 2 (3) 48 (42) 420 (405) 4934 (4486) Asia Pacific 1 (1) 1 (1) 4 (4) 18 (14) 487 (399) Europe 7 (6) 7 (7) 43 (40) 305 (278) 3802 (3387) TOTALS 9 (8) 11 (11) 95 (86) 743 (697) 9223 (8272) NAB – National Accreditation Body White figures: Napoli status CB – Certification Body Yellow figures: Orlando status 5 Standards Update • 9104: Globally harmonized standard defining the registration / accreditation process. Released in all three sectors. Update in process to harmonize with recently published 9104-2/-3 standards and incorporate outputs from improvement initiatives. Scheduled publication is October 2008. • 9104-2: Globally harmonized standard defining the surveillance and oversight processes. Published in all sectors. Implementation date set for no later then Jan 1, 2008. Next revision to start soon to incorporate outputs from improvement initiatives • 9104-3: Globally harmonized standard defining the auditor qualification and auditor training processes. Published in all sectors. Implementation date set for no later then July 1, 2008. Next revision to start soon to incorporate outputs from improvement initiatives Standards Updates are the Path to Improvement 6 OASIS 7 OASIS 8 OASIS 9 Feedback Process Feed back B Certification Body Products/ product quality audit Audit findings Feed back A: Information on product quality nonconformance to supplier: - to perform root cause analysis - to take corrective/preventive action, also on Quality system level Feed back B: Information on product quality problems to CB: -When related to possible QM system causes -to focus CB audit activities on potential weak spots Supplier Feed back A Customer PAH/POA holder Feed back C Feed back C: Information on findings to the customer found by the CB during the audit: -to determine possible impact on product quality - to determine additional audits (surveillance) or other actions to the supplier 10 Feedback Process 11 Improvement Initiatives • Compiled current failure modes using data from: • Sector oversight activity • Accreditation Body corrective actions • OEM Supplemental Oversight • OASIS Feedback Process • Using failure mode data compiled an FMEA was completed to evaluate risks and prioritize failure modes for action 12 Improvement Initiatives • Failure Modes Identified • Commercial issues drive CBs to minimum audit time • Soft Grading, audits find issues but are documented as OFIs vs findings • No description of non-conformances • Accuracy/completeness of data in audit report • OASIS not updated within 30 days of certificate issuance • Auditor weaknesses result in in effective audits. • Audit planning is not complete • Customer Satisfaction - effectiveness of audit approach • Thorough review of specific customer requirements (i.e.Pos, quality flowdowns, contracts) • Corrective action implementation/effectiveness not fully evaluated • Process does not ensure that all auditors are part of oversight activity. • Certificate is issued prior to closing non-conformances • Auditor competency and effectiveness not evaluated. • Currently there are no rules for CB or Auditors re-entering ICOP after withdrawal. • Audit team leader can develop bias after developing long term relationship with certified organization. 13 Improvement Initiatives • Proposed actions address three general issues: • CB Operations • Auditor Competency • Audit effectiveness and corrective action effectiveness • Where we are headed: • Develop more specific requirements for the ICOP process • Formal rules for addressing non-compliance (consequences) • Work towards auditor competency improvement • Improved visibility of audit data in OASIS • Emphasis and improved deployment of OASIS feedback process 14 Summary • • • New OASIS functionality for feedback process is in use. OPMT will be sending out additional information to all OASIS users to improve understanding of feedback process. We need Your Support in utilizing the feedback process Actions to address current failure modes identified for the ICOP process are our priority. Suppliers will be impacted by clearer rules for certification process 2009 to 2011 will see much activity around the implementation of 9100 Revision C. The OPMT may ask the Council for budget for developing training. This supports both the implementation of the new 9100 revision and the identified ICOP improvement initiatives. 15 Questions 16