improving apqp process for effective program...
TRANSCRIPT
Dele Awofala Director of
Quality – Vehicle
Group, N.A.
Date: Sept 23rd
2015
Improving APQP Process
for
Effective Program
Execution
Combining our strengths
Accelerating our growth
Eaton
Sales $22B
Employees 102,000
Countries 175+
Year Founded 1911
Patents 10,463
Overview of Eaton
2
We provide reliable, efficient, safe and
sustainable power management for…
Buildings
Transportation
Industrial and Machinery
Information Technology
Infrastructure
Energy and Utilities
Public and private sectors
Electrical Products
Electrical Systems & Service
Aerospace Group
Hydraulic Group
Vehicle Group
Eaton Business Units
Overview of Eaton
3
Vehicle Group Customer Landscape
4
Technologies engineered for passenger car,
SUV and light and heavy duty trucks
Supercharger
Valve train
Torque Control
Fuel Emissions
& Powertrain
Controls
Fluid
Conveyance
& Plastics
Light-duty
Transmission
Clutches
Heavy-duty
Transmission
Vehicle Solutions
5
My Axle Program Manager Story
Year & Month: 2006, April
Plant: Detroit Axle Plant
Role: Program Manager
Program: 2007 Jeep Liberty Axle
6
Growth and Opportunities
Automotive industry continues to grow ……….
2020 light vehicle sales
2014 115
2018 161
Global new vehicle launches
Source: IHS.ocm pressroom, Nov 2014. 7
Challenges and Opportunities
Consumer expectation continues to drive ……
1. New technologies and innovation. ….. More complex programs
2. Global competitive landscape …. Increasing pressure for flawless launches
3. Shorter product life cycles ….. More frequent program launches
4. Global product platforms …. Challenges for global program teams
5. Global supplier network …. Increasing complexity of supplier launches
8
Notable Big Program Launches …. Current APOP Process may not be sufficient
9
Project: Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
Project: FCA New 9-speed transmission program.
Delayed vehicle launch for several months.
Synopsis:
Many new technologies. Software issues.
Supplier Challenges:
Changing OEM requirements.
Conflicting development information.
Product complexity
Cost increase from $5B to $12B (2013)
3 years delay in completion and budget overrun.
Synopsis: Changing requirements & scope.
Complexity of managing large supply chain.
Complexity of new manufacturing processes
Top Reasons For Poor Program Execution
Resources: Lack of resources, resource conflicts, turnover, poor planning
Requirements / Scope Changes: Unclear, lack of priority, ambiguous, contradictory
Complexity: Too complex, Not managed, Unfamiliar technology or system used
Planning / Schedules: Too tight, unrealistic, delays, insufficient details, poor estimates
Knowledge Sharing: Lack of right info, insufficient data, inefficient communication, inefficient transfer of best practices.
10 Source: Strategies for project recovery, pmsolutions Inc, 2011
Overview of APQP Process
PLANNNIG
11
Output of Each APQP Phase
12
Gaps In APQP Process
Resource Planning and Monitoring. Complexity Assessment Change Review Process Work Activities Review and Approval Process
1
2
3
4
13
Improving APQP Process
Resource Planning and Monitoring.
Complexity Assessment
Change Review Process
Work Activities Review and Approval Process
1
2
3
4
14
Resource Planning Challenges
Frequent changes in key resources during life of programs.
Un-coordinated monitoring of resources allocated to single or multiple programs.
Long delays in filling open positions within a program team.
The level of resource time engaged not managed.
1
15
Resource Planning and Monitoring
Name for each role required is defined early in the APQP process and reviewed frequently
Approving manager or director is also defined in the resource matrix.
Resource plan and level of engagement reviewed at each program gate.
Ensures adequate level of resources are assigned and gaps addressed quickly.
Gate Review Target Dates
Team Roster Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title
Program Manager 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sales\Marketing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lead Design Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCM / Purchasing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Supplier Development Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
APQP Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Advanced Mfg.Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Financial Analyst 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HR Representative 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Manufacuting Plant Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plant Quality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Systems Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Software Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reliability Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gate Review Target Dates
Work Package Approvers Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title Name Title
Product Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sales / Marketing Manager or Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Engineering Manager or Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCM Manager or Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SDE Manager or Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Regional Quality Manager or Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Advanced Mfg. Manager or Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Financial Controller 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
HR Manager or Director 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Director of Operations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plant Manager 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Business Unit President 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Others 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Phase 5
Phase 0 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 5 Phase 6
Phase 0 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
Phase 3 Phase 4
Phase 6
1
16
Improving APQP Process
Resource Planning and Monitoring.
Complexity Assessment
Change Review Process
Work Activities Review and Approval Process
1
2
3
4
17
Complexity Assessment Product range: Single component to complex system
Understanding the complexity of technology, manufacturing process and supply chain is critical to having an effective APQP process.
Supercharger
Cylinder De-Activation System Engine Valve
Class 8 transmission
2
18
Complexity Assessment Matrix
Five categories: Marketing
Technology
Supply Chain
Manufacturing
Project Management
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Marketing Technology Supply Chain Manufacturing Project
Management
High Complexity
(Stranger)
Alien to organization
Medium Complexity
(Major Repeater)
Low Complexity
(Minor Repeater)
Runner
Weighted score of all elements in each category to a scale of 0 – 100
Highest ranking in the Assessment Matrix determines the complexity of the
program
Complexity drives the level of management focus and attention to the
APQP process
2
19
Improving APQP Process
Resource Planning and Monitoring.
Complexity Assessment
Change Review Process
Work Activities Review and Approval Process
1
2
3
4
20
Challenge with Change Management
Changes emerging after design and development is completed (Gate 3) and before production validation creates significant risk to flawless launch.
Manufacturing and supplier equipment are in development/tryout.
Drives supplier cost higher BOM cost.
Drives higher manufacturing cost.
3
21
Eaton Change Review Process
Change Review Board
Change Request
Impact / Benefit Analysis
Approve / Reject
Release & Implement
Change
Assess Result
Supply Chain
Management
Engineering
Manufacturing
Quality
Program
Management
Initiated after Gate 3
Changes after gate 3 go through a change review board consisting of cross-
functional reps – design, supply chain, mfg., quality and finance
Results in lower BOM and manufacturing cost
Minimize unplanned manufacturing reaction and enables flawless launch
Gate 3
3
22
Improving APQP Process
Resource Planning and Monitoring.
Complexity Assessment
Change Review Process
Work Activities Review and Approval Process
1
2
3
4
23
Work Activities Review and Approval
Linkage between each work activity is critical to the transfer
of customer requirements into finished product
Inconsistent cascading of special characteristics throughout
the APQP process
Gaps in translation of customer requirements into
controlled dimensions and features in production.
Customer Requirement /
Spec
Product Design / Development
DFMEA
Process Design & Development
PFMEA
Tooling & Equipment Build
Production Validation
Gage design / Build / MSA
Process Checks
Finished Product
4
Control Plan
CTQ/Special characteristics
Key Product Print
24
Eaton Work Activities Review and
Approval Process
Work activities review and approval prior to gate review.
Reviewer: Functional manager or Director
Ensures complete and correct information/requirements flows downstream
Evaluates the quality of work within the work packages.
Validates conformance to applicable standards and procedures.
Provides information @ gate review that supports moving (or not) to
the next phase.
Reduces the level of changes through the program life cycle.
Concept / Initial
Analysis
Plan and Define
Program
Product Design &
Development
Process Design & Development
Product & Process
Validation
Production / Launch
Gate1 Gate2 Gate3 Gate4 Gate5
4
25
Putting It All Together Improved APQP Framework ……….
Resource plan Complexity Assessment Work Activities Review
Resource plan reviews Complexity Assessment Work Activities Review
Resource plan reviews Change Reviews Work Activities Review
Resource plan reviews Change Reviews Work Activities Review
Resource plan reviews Change Reviews Work Activities Review
Change Reviews Work Activities Review
26
Illustration / Benefits
Product: Cylinder De-Activation system for automotive engines Launch date: June 2015 SOP
27
Conclusion
APQP Process is widely adopted for new product development and launch.
Current process is necessary but in-sufficient to achieve flawless launch
Additional activities to improve current APQP process; • Resource Planning and Monitoring. • Complexity Assessment • Change Review Process • Work Activities Review and Approval Process
Benefits of improved APQP process include; – Lower program cost – On-time launch – Minimized launch issues – Higher customer satisfaction
28
Remember
29
Questions
30
Presenter: Dele Awofala, PhD Contact: [email protected] Number: 734-717-1401