QA6640 Chat Room Transcript
February 28, 2007
Prof. Atkins 20:21:04
The chat room is closed for this evening. It will reopen next Wednesday at 7:35
pm.
Rich Weaver 20:15:59
Thanks. Have a good evening!
Prof. Atkins 20:15:00
Rich Weaver,
There will be computers available in the SPSU exam room. You may also write your answers by hand if you prefer. Each student may select whichever option the student prefers.
Rich Weaver 20:10:07
In the past, there have been computers with Microsoft Word available in the
exam room. Will they be available, or do we have to hand-write the Final Exam?
Prof. Atkins 20:07:07
If you have questions, you may ask them at this time.
Prof. Atkins 20:06:45
The thirty-minutes are now up.
If you wish to take the final exam on campus,
then you do NOT need to select a proctor to monitor the final exam for you.
However, if you are NOT taking the final exam at the SPSU campus, then you will
need to select a proctor. The form was due today and most students have faxed
the copy to me.
If you need a proctor and have not yet selected one, then you may have until
this Friday, March 2, to fax your choice of proctor to me on the form that can
be downloaded from the course web site.
Komic 20:04:01
Company: Snowden Pencer. The company develops, manufactures, packages and
markets surgical instruments.
Snowen -Pences established STS (ship- to- stock)
program to handle incoming material supplied from its high-quality suppliers.
The program was established mainly to handle incoming material more efficiently
and economically. As per Bossart the STS can be divided into three phases:
candidacy, qualification and maintenance.
In order to accept the product from the supplier directly into stock, supplier
and a company must perform qualification of both, the product and the process.
Every significant change in the processes, or the introduction of any new
process, must undergo proper qualification prior to its implementation. This
will ensure that the affected process flow will still be capable of consistently
meeting the specifications of the form, fit, and function of the final
products, even after the change. Process qualification refers to the process of
ensuring that the change will not result in any degradation in the quality and
reliability of the final products.
SP in particular have one finished good product (endoscopic instrument)
purchased from the French supplier.
SP requires First Article Inspection as a part of its Product qualification
unless exempted by Engineering. First article inspection is performed by
SNinternal SOP. Most of the time this inspection is performed according to
applicable drawings and engineering instructions. Engineering dispositions
First Article Inspection according to inspection results. If results are
conforming than one step in the qualification process of the product is
satisfied. The product was further qualified by accepting 10 consecutive lots
using normal inspection plan ( Z 1.4 sampling plan) following by 10 consecutive
lots using reduced sampling plan.
Because we are medical Device Company, and the final device must be traceable
to its components the item would still go through the incoming inspection for
documentation purposes, but only verification of the item and product qty will
be recorded on the Device History Record.
gstevens 20:03:48
Name: Glenn Stevens
Email: anandale@comcast.net
1. Briefly describe the company you have chosen.
2. Briefly describe the phase you will discuss.
3. Use a specific example to help explain the phase, and include as much detail
as possible without exceeding the thirty-minute time limit for your response.
Company: The company of interest was LHS. This
company was in the business of developing software applications for wireless
telecommunication operators. I served as the software test director for the
company. The company had a growing presence in North America and was being
sought out by many of the newly established wireless companies for use of its
customer service, call rating and billing software. The company at the time was
the dominant market player in the provisioning of software solutions in this
space.
Concept: The area that this discussion focuses
on is qualification. In the scheme of supplier management, and the need for
companies to reduce the cost of incoming and in-house product inspection it may
want to rely on the quality effectiveness of its supplier. This is one of the
key components of ship-to stock. This entails the supplier has to demonstrate
the capability to develop and deliver the product to the customer with minimal
defects. It is incumbent on the purchasing company to assess the supplier by
means of surveys. According to Bossert, “ the candidate supplier must undergo
in-depth quality and system surveys which are performed with special attention
to the supplier’s adherence to process controls (Bossert, 28). The purchasing
company will examine historical quality data supporting the processes used by
the supplier. This is includes lot inspections and resultant rating, assessment
of the production of the production or development process against some
benchmark or raking. Additionally it is important in this stage to appoint a
supplier designated quality control engineer who is responsible for certifying
the quality of the product before it is shipped to the customer.
Example. In the following, Air Touch Satellite
(ATS) Services was interested in retaining LHS as a supplier for its wireless
communication, customer care, call rating and billing system. The company at
the time had a main product that was sold on the open market. ATS did not want
to incur additional expenses to develop a software testing lab to test the
product once it was delivered. Additionally ATS would be requesting quaterly
updates to their version of the product, and hence wanted confidence that the
product would be delivered on time and with no high level severity defects.
The qualification process ATS used entailed making multiple site visits and
sending different team members to explore different aspects of the company’s
operations in the development of the software product. The first team that came
consisted of the management representatives, who conducted interviews with LHS
development line management team. They spent hours determining staffing
educational levels, looking customer satisfaction rating LHS had received from
other companies. This was the first wave.
The second wave qualification concentrated and providing lower level ATS team
members who immersed themselves with LHS developers in understanding how the
product was built. They were extremely interested in the process of developing
the software, how quality was managed, how defects were captured and stored, as
well as how these were resolved. They wanted to know how the software parts
were kept under version control, who had access to make changes, what security
features were used to prevent unauthorized changes. Again the results of the
visit were used for input in the final decisioin.
The third wave consisted of a specialized team from ATS who again was immersed
in the software testing operations to see first hand how the product was system
tested. This area is very critical. They observed the automated regresstion
test facilities, the tools used, the test scripts used. They were not just
satisfied to observe, but took an active role in conducting some of the tests
them selves. They spent several days interactively “looking under the covers”
of the software test process. They examined and participated in the performance
testing of the product, to determine how well the product would be able to
stand up under large volume of data, users, and the speed at which it could
process and rate calls as well as the speed of bill generation.
The final component was the appointment of an ATS product advocate, who would
be responsible for following through on ATS product enhancement requests,
reviewing the test results of the product before it was shipped. This person
had to supply with each product shipment, a list of the features in the
product, the number of test cases included in the test, the number of defects
found per phase of the development life cycle(requirements, analysis, design,
construction and system testing).
The program was such a success that LHS recommended this model to many of its
existing customers and new customers. It is important to note that the software
development process in use by LHS at the time was certified by ISO 9000 which
was a huge selling point to ATS.
el hamraoui hanane 20:02:32
Hanane El Hamraoui
helhamra@spsu.edu
The company I chose to refer to in my discussion of the candidacy phase of the
Ship-to-stock program is the Texas Instruments Semiconductor Group (TI SG, a
market leader in the semiconductor industry.
Texas Instrument/Semiconductor/Military Products (TI/SG) has instituted a
Ship-to-Stock (STS) program that eliminates costly, redundant testing and
unnecessary extra handling. The 1985 Environmental Stress Screening for
Electronic Hardware conference determined that a maximum device defect rate of
100 ppm would increase the rescreening cost more than add value. Consequently,
any TI/SG/MP device meeting this criteria is subject to being accepted as an
STS part.
The Texas Instruments Semiconductor Group Ship-to-stock program requires the
customer to submit a list of candidate devices that is scanned to verify that
it meets the requirements of minimum 18-month Group A sample size of 1,000 from
the same package type; and maximum device-related reject rate of 100 ppm. The
customer's part number is then correlated with the TI/SG/MP part number. TI
sends an approved STS device list to the customer. An STS contract is then
negotiated and signed by appropriate representatives. This contract can be
customized to include special instructions for handling paper work or
box-labeling provisions and reporting procedures for Group A rejects. TI/SG/MP
currently has 20 STS customers and 10 more are reviewing their processes for
STS implementation.
http://www.bmpcoe.org/bestpractices/internal/tisem/tisem_2.html
Rich Weaver 20:01:00
Working in a GM assembly plant, there is little or no opportunity to be
involved in sourcing parts, or performing supplier surveys before the contract
is signed. These functions are handled by specialists in Detroit, and except on
rare occasions, the plant has no input into these decisions. However, when the
source is relatively close, plant personnel do get involved with different
types of quality audits.
JCI had a facility near Newark, NJ, that
provided completed seat assemblies for the Tarrytown plant.
After one particular quality ‘spill’ was rectified, it was felt that Tarrytown
GM personnel should became involved on a regular basis with the JCI plant. The
distance was close enough that regular travel back and forth was possible.
When we visited the JCI facility, we performed
all three types of maintenance audits that Bossert mentions:
System – together we reviewed their Quality
Management System, and looked for areas of improvement. We concentrated on
where “quality was controlled throughout their facility, and what control
technique was used at each point.” (Buying and Supplying Quality, by Weber and
Johnson, page 84). We looked for evidence of management support, and other
QS9000-type of high-level questions.
Process – checked to see that quality parameters
where met. Some examples that we looked at were torque control (seat frame
secured to the seat riser), control of incoming material, first-in first-out
material handling, adequacy of job instructions, verified that operators where
following standardized work, proper handling and loading of material, etc.
Product – verified torque, performed functional
checks on seat recliners, headrests, etc.
Inspection – we performed finished-product
inspections on random samples of seat assemblies both at the JCI facility, and
in Tarrytown. Besides the functional type checks mentioned above, we also
considered seam alignment, absence of loose threads, absence of excessive
puckering. These were especially useful in that evaluation of seat quality is
very subjective, and we were able to come to a mutual understanding of the
standards, and documented accept-reject criteria.
They were also able to look at our process, and
point out practices used in our plant that could result in damage to the seats.
Working in a GM assembly plant, there is little or no opportunity to be
involved in sourcing parts, or performing supplier surveys before the contract
is signed. These functions are handled by specialists in Detroit, and except on
rare occasions, the plant has no input into these decisions. However, when the
source is relatively close, plant personnel do get involved with different
types of quality audits.
JCI had a facility near Newark, NJ, that
provided completed seat assemblies for the Tarrytown plant.
After one particular quality ‘spill’ was rectified, it was felt that Tarrytown
GM personnel should became involved on a regular basis with the JCI plant. The
distance was close enough that regular travel back and forth was possible.
When we visited the JCI facility, we performed
all three types of maintenance audits that Bossert mentions:
System – together we reviewed their Quality
Management System, and looked for areas of improvement. We concentrated on
where “quality was controlled throughout their facility, and what control
technique was used at each point.” (Buying and Supplying Quality, by Weber and
Johnson, page 84). We looked for evidence of management support, and other
QS9000-type of high-level questions.
Process – checked to see that quality parameters
where met. Some examples that we looked at were torque control (seat frame
secured to the seat riser), control of incoming material, first-in first-out
material handling, adequacy of job instructions, verified that operators where
following standardized work, proper handling and loading of material, etc.
Product – verified torque, performed functional
checks on seat recliners, headrests, etc.
Inspection – we performed finished-product
inspections on random samples of seat assemblies both at the JCI facility, and
in Tarrytown. Besides the functional type checks mentioned above, we also
considered seam alignment, absence of loose threads, absence of excessive
puckering. These were especially useful in that evaluation of seat quality is
very subjective, and we were able to come to a mutual understanding of the
standards, and documented accept-reject criteria.
They were also able to look at our process, and
point out practices used in our plant that could result in damage to the seats.
Michael Ginn 19:59:44
Michael Ginn
Email: ginnmichael@hotmail.com
1. STS – Qualification
The company I will reference to is a tier one
automotive supplier (Transmission Supplier to the Big-Three). I worked there as
a SPC technician. This company is a fairly large plant (200-250 employees).
They supplied a total of 12 different models of transmissions. Being in
quality, I had some interaction with incoming and STS qualifications.
The STS program is widely used by Toyota, and other top ranked industries. It
is a great concept when it is implemented and controlled properly. The section
of the program I will review tonight is qualification. This section is made up
of both product and supplier qualification. This is carried out by an on-site
audit. This audit is very in-depth. The audit team will look into the quality
system and process controls. Other information, like the historical quality
performance will be taken into consideration in the qualification of the
supplier. The company I worked for would normally send a two man team to the
new supplier. This team would ask the supplier to fill out a supplier check
list and a detailed agenda of the items that will be covered in the audit. The
auditors will normally spend a complete day at the supplier’s location. On that
the day the auditor will ask to see the process run from start to finish, and
complete a run at rate to see if the supplier is capable of producing the
demand required. Also, numerous parts will be inspected on-site to insure the
suppliers measuring equipment is accurate enough, and to complete a short-term
capability study. After this is complete, (Normally around lunch) the team will
meet back together to review the results. This meeting will also will be a
question answer session between the supplier and customer. Once this is
complete, the audit team and supplier management team will sign up to the
customers requirements. The final step to the qualification is for the supplier
to ship “X” amount of parts with no defects or quality problems. If the
supplier completes all of these items, then we would put them on STS status.
gleiter 19:59:12
Kimberly Gleiter
kgleiter@hedonline.com
The maintenance of a Ship To Stock Program
includes audits of the system, process, and product as well as inspections. One
customer of SC Packaging, which produces molded protective packaging products,
is Anderson Packaging. Anderson conducts supplier system and process audits
every two years. These audits cover the ISO 9000 requirements including
corrective action, quality management, material storage, calibration, document
control (e.g. prints, external standards and specifications) etc. In addition
to determining whether the process in place is effective, they also verify that
SCP is complying with the quality management system outlined. Product audits
are carried out including the review of certificates of compliance,
certificates of analysis and inspection and test records.
J Scott 19:59:05
J Scott
QA6640
Jscott6@spsu.edu
The company I chose to discuss is Delta
Airlines. Delta operates a vast supplier network for spare aircraft parts. The
ability to acquire quality aircraft parts in a timely manner is crucial to the
safe and efficient operation of the aircraft. Additionally, documentation must
be accurate to ensure traceability.
Maintenance Phase
Delta has a rigorous supplier maintenance
program that is continuously monitored. Auditors are trained and certified
through ASQ to ensure proficiency. Auditors also receive industry training on
the recognition of counterfeit parts. Delta combines each type of audit into an
annual supplier audit program where system, process, and product are audited to
ensure a quality and compliant product.
The maintenance phase of the Ship-To-Stock
program involves system audits, process audits and product audits
Each of these 3 audit types is meant to ensure
that the supplier is maintaining an effective quality management system and
that processes are adequate to produce the product. Further, processes must be
documented and adhered to in the production process. The final product is also
scrutinized to ensure that packaging is correct, production specifications are
consistently met and important product characteristics are consistent.
Suppliers receive a system audit ensures the supplier system is capable of
producing an acceptable product. The system audit is needed to evaluate the
effectiveness of the supplier quality program, the documented processes,
drawing and revision control, documentation follow-up, document retention,
material control including storage and the over-all quality infrastructure in
place to ensure an effective system.
Processes are also examined to ensure that work
instructions are being followed, employees are trained to perform the
production tasks and that adequate process capability is being monitored.
Final product is reviewed in plant as well as
through receiving inspection. Receiving inspection will notify the quality
department of any irregularities in either product or documentation
encountered. The quality department will in turn investigate the matter and
perform a site inspection as required.
Should irregularities occur in any of the
quality areas of system, process or product, the quality department will issue
a Correction Action Report. The supplier is required to correct the problem and
recommend a comprehensive corrective action to ensure the problem does not
re-occur. Final approval for the corrective action is jointly approved with
both supplier and the quality department.
Chris Wellman 19:58:52
Christopher J. Wellman
Company is Ford Aerospace; they were building an
Air Defense weapon for the Army, which was basically a Tank with 40mm Anti
Aircraft Gun controlled with a radar system.
Maintenance; Ford performed a combination of
sampling our product and audits of our system to ensure we maintained the
standards for their ship-to-stock program.
During this stage our product was sampled once a
quarter by subjecting it to a standard acceptance procedure, the rest of our
product was sent straight to their storage of assembly area. We were required
to submit once a year when Ford would conduct an audit of our processes to
ensure that we were maintaining the processes at an acceptable level to
maintain the quality necessary to meet their needs.
About once a Month I had to fly out to their
Assembly plant to review any issues they had with product and receive training
to keep qualification as their supplier ship-to-stock representative. At one
point their personnel complained about cleanliness of our optics.
We investigated the complaint and determined
that the problem was defective fiber optic that formed the low light
amplification device we installed in the night vision portion of the sight. I
was required to plan and conduct a training class for their personnel on what
was acceptable for these defects in our sight.
This process of intense communication between
Kollmorgen (my company) and our customer Ford, was a symbiotic relationship.
Ford saved on the cost of conducting an incoming inspection or performing source
inspection. We saved on the cost of submitting to source inspection and
benefited from the cost we would have experienced in a more traditional
relationship where the Customer may have simply rejected product back to us,
instead of contacting their supplier ship-to-stock representative for an
immediate answer to what they might perceive as a problem.
This was the case with the defective fiber optic
elements that appeared as a cleanliness issue. We were able to prevent an
unnecessary rejection that would have cost a lot of money for both companies
and were then able to train them to fully understand to situation themselves.
On the whole the ship-to-stock program was very beneficial to both companies.
We found the program so good that we Kollmorgen have used a similar program with
many of our best suppliers.
alan dial 19:56:53
Alan Dial
Dalzell22a@yahoo.com
Briefly describe the company you have chosen.
Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI) is the world
leader in digital signal processing and analog technologies, the semiconductor
of the Internet age. I am specifically discussing the TI semiconductor Group
(TI SG). They manufacture semiconductors for the electronics industry and
government customers.
Briefly describe the phase you will discuss.
I will describe the “Candidacy” phase of TI’s
STS program. The candidacy phase encompasses the rigor around determining if
the supplier is a candidate for the ship to stock program. Product and system
requirements are agreed to with the supplier so that a relationship is
developed and expectations are established. This includes but is not limited to
audits and performance metrics. Information is gathered and presented to a
Steering Committee for certification.
Use a specific example to help explain the
phase, and include as much detail as possible without exceeding the
thirty-minute time limit for your response.
In the early 1980's, the semiconductor industry
was experiencing high failure rates in its military product lines with defect
rates of 10,000 to 20,000 ppm often reported by the original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs) at their incoming eceipt inspections. TI found itself
spending a lot of capital on quality checks and process control techniques for
defecting defects after the quality issues had been addressed. Historically the
Customer established and STS program; alternatively, TI went to its Customers
and worked to establish the program for components that had a historical defect
rate less than 100 ppm.
The TI STS program requires the customer to
submit a list of candidate devices that is scanned to verify that it meets the
requirements of minimum 18-month sample size of 1,000 from the same package
type; and maximum device-related reject rate of 100 ppm. The customer's part
number is then correlated with the TI part number. TI sends an approved STS
device list to the customer. An STS contract is then negotiated and signed by
appropriate representatives. This contract can be customized for handling
rejected components. TI currently has 20 STS customers and 10 more are
reviewing their processes for STS implementation.
Natasha_Romero 19:55:37
Natasha Romero
nromero@spsu.edu
Maintenance Phase
1. I currently work for Sandia National Laboratory. We are a contractor to
the Department of Energy and Department of Defense. Our mission is national
security. We design both embedded and non-embedded software systems.
2. The maintenance phase of a ship-to-stock program “involves system audits,
process audits, product audits and inspections” as stated by Bossert in The
Supplier Management Handbook.
3. I will focus on the third audit type which is the product audit. The product
audit can be conducted after the product has been received by the customer. At
one time we purchased a product from a supplier that was a motion sensor. It
was critical that the motion sensor have the specified sensitivity that was
called out in the specifications. Due to the criticality of the motion sensors
conformance to specification and the fixed amount of product that was to be
purchased it was decided that there would be 100% inspection of the product
prior to installation and use. The process for acceptance was that the every
product would be tested on a test bed platform to verify the sensitivity of the
sensor. If a product passed it was green tagged by the test evaluators as a
good product which passed testing. If a product failed the sensitivity testing
the product was red tagged and was then scrapped. After the testing of the
product was completed our Quality Engineer would perform a visual inspection of
the product and review the test results. An acceptance form was then completed
to document serial numbers and lot number of accepted products. In addition
metrics were taken from the tests results to monitor things such as amount of
defects per lot, acceptances per lot, and comparison of the supplier’s results
with our results of sensitivity.
Brad McGuire 19:51:03
1) I will be using the British Standards Institute (BSi) and Lockheed Martin
Corporation Suppliers as my example companies.
2) I will be discussing the ‘maintenance phase’
(specifically system audits) as it relates to the semi-annual audits British
Standards Institute conducts on the Tier-1 Suppliers of Lockheed Martin
Corporation.
3) British Standards Institute (BSi) conducts
semi-annual corporate-wide Quality Management System audits of all suppliers
and operating business units of Lockheed Martin Corporation. These continuing
audits consist of comprehensive reviews of the customer-supplier International
Aerospace Quality Management System based on the AS9100 standard. Lockheed
Martin suppliers use BSI in order to maintain the coveted ‘third-party’
certification. This type of certification provides additional accolades and
confidence in the eyes of their customers. It is also a major indicator that
Lockheed’s suppliers are committed to continuously improving their systems.
Thus, the suppliers’ yearly goals are to focus on training each individual to
use AS 9100 as the framework and guide for continuous improvement in their
individual activities. Lockheed suppliers prepare all employees for the audits
by reviewing with them all the items that will be audited. Their management
ensures items such as: 1) employees work to procedures, 2) all individual and
operation records (e.g. drawings, specifications) are maintained and accurate,
3) all training courses are up-to-date and recorded as such, 4) previous BSi
audit findings have been corrected, and 5) all inspection measuring equipment
is calibrated and 6) all personnel are aware of Lockheed’s Quality Policy. In
turn, BSi audits several elements of the suppliers Quality Management System
ensuring it complies with AS9100. Some elements include: 1) identifying the
crucial processes of which all other processes rely on, 2) determining the
requisite sequences of these processes, 3) determining the criteria and methods
needed to ensure the processes are correct, 4) ensuring all resources and
information are available to support these processes, and 5) ensure processes
are continuously being improved upon. Similarly, AS9100 specifies that a
Quality Management System is one that 1) consistently demonstrates an ability
to provide the customer with a product that meets their requirements and 2)
strives to enhance customer satisfaction by continuously trying to improve
their processes. Lockheed constantly stresses the importance of these audits in
that the levels of quality demonstrated in the results reflect upon the entire
corporation.
Prof. Atkins 19:35:52
Chris Wellman,
No, you must FAX the form to the number at the
bottom of the form, or you may mail it to the address at the bottom of the
form.
Natasha_Romero 19:34:50
Thank you for the extention on the proctor form.
Chris Wellman 19:34:46
E-mail of the form ok?
Prof. Atkins 19:34:18
You have thirty-minutes to answer the following chat room question:
In the ninth chapter of “The Supplier Management
Handbook” at the top of page 78 the author briefly discusses the following
three phases of a ship-to-stock (STS) program:
1. Candidacy,
2. Qualification, and
3. Maintenance.
Select any ONE of the above three phases and
discuss it in detail as it applies to a specific example that you are familiar
with. You may discuss your example in context to any ONE of the following:
The company you now work for, or
a company you have worked for before, or
any company you are familiar with.
Your discussion should cover the following three
issues:
1. Briefly describe the company you have chosen.
2. Briefly describe the phase you will discuss.
3. Use a specific example to help explain the phase, and include as much detail
as possible without exceeding the thirty-minute time limit for your response.
Prof. Atkins 19:33:30
If you wish to take the final exam on campus, then you do NOT need to select a
proctor to monitor the final exam for you.
However, if you are NOT taking the final exam at
the SPSU campus, then you will need to select a proctor. The form was due today
and most students have faxed the copy to me.
If you need a proctor and have not yet selected
one, then you may have until this Friday, March 2, to fax your choice of
proctor to me on the form that can be downloaded from the course web site.