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