1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
You must be a registered member in order to post messages and view/download attached files in this forum.
Click here to register.

Layered Process Audit Compliance

Discussion in 'IATF 16949:2016 - Automotive Quality Systems' started by qmr1976, Sep 14, 2020.

  1. qmr1976

    qmr1976 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    27
    I rarely reach out for advice. I try to respond to other's inquiries more than anything but this issue has me frustrated at the moment and wanted to reach out to others to try and get some fresh ideas and possibly a different approach to my situation. LPA compliance has declined considerably within the last few months. COVID somewhat contributed to this, but we were struggling prior to and after COVID. I want to remain compliant, yet still meet our customer specific requirements for LPAs. I have scaled back our schedule where we could and have updated our LPAs to be more effective but they still aren't getting done. I am being told by upper management we need to shorten the LPAs and break them out more because the people performing the LPAs are getting overwhelmed and don't see the value in them, which is fine. They also want to make them electronic, which I am totally on board with as well. However, in my experience you can make it easier, more efficient and sometimes the task still doesn't get done. It's all about discipline. So, was just wondering if anyone has struggled with this as well, and if so how did you handle it?
     
  2. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    5,170
    Likes Received:
    2,591
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    Reality is, even the FCA KTP 2 plant where they started, LPAs became a pencil whipping exercise. It's the nature of the thing. TBH, if you are in Quality, you should "gift" LPAs to Manufacturing management who should own the thing. It's NOT a Quality tool. It's a Process Control tool - nothing more or less.

    My take is, scale them back to parts of the process where something isn't working well, like FPY or where something is new/changed. Only those things.
     
  3. qmr1976

    qmr1976 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    27
    OK. Thank you for your input and yes LPAs have a major rep for being pencil whipped and I would rather someone not do them vs. pencil whipping them because they have just as much value as if someone just went through the motions. They can be a good tool, if actually used properly.
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  4. leyladonmez

    leyladonmez Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2018
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    7
    Hi,
    I need information about LPA. In my company headquarter separated auditors in 4 levels. level1: line leaders, level2: supervisors, level3: managers, level4: plant manager. In our plant it doesn't work. all managers and general manager doesn't perform audits. So we reorganized it as level1: line leaders, quality operators (daily). level2: quality, production engineers (weekly), level3: production chief (weekly), level4: production, quality managers (monthly).
    Headquarter uses 1 type list but it takes too long time to use so we use different and short lists for each level. only level 4 uses headquarter's list.
    Shortly we have our own rules which is more practical for us. Does it cause a nonconformity according to standard? Does it cause a nonconformity to not describe general manager as auditor?
    Thank you for your help.
     
  5. qmr1976

    qmr1976 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2019
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    27
    Hi Leyla (Love your name, by the way)

    I would reference the CQI-8 for Layered Process Audit development that is published by AIAG. In this manual they state that all members of management 'should' (suggestion-not a requirement) participate in LPAs, but also state that the organizations 'top manager' within the facility shall always take part. (You determine that frequency) Shall is deemed a requirement. Believe me, this is one area that is a challenge for us because the highest level here that participates in LPAs is our COO. They can be considered top management, but technically it would be our President/Owner, but he does not. He was tasked with reviewing the progress of LPAs in their management review meeting and technically that's meeting the requirement. It's a stretch, but does comply, nonetheless. Hope this helps!
     
    leyladonmez likes this.
  6. Andy Nichols

    Andy Nichols Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2015
    Messages:
    5,170
    Likes Received:
    2,591
    Trophy Points:
    112
    Location:
    In the "Rust Belt"
    If the Certification Body auditor knows the purpose of the "layers" in LPA, then they should write a non-conformity. Sadly, many people have exactly the same problems as you describe, Leyla, and NEVER get a non-conformity.

    If your auditor doesn't see a problem the way you are forced to do the LPA's then whisper in their ear that you want them to report a non-conformity. Also be sure to include that it's NOT the Quality Department's job - according to CQI-8 - to manage the LPA program, too!
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2021
    leyladonmez and qmr1976 like this.
  7. leyladonmez

    leyladonmez Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2018
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    7
    thank you:)
     
    Andy Nichols likes this.
  8. leyladonmez

    leyladonmez Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2018
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    7
    thank you :)
     
    qmr1976 and Andy Nichols like this.