Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

D#

Discipline

D1

Problem solving team

D2

Problem description

- Poor description
- No data

D3

Containment action

No real containment action

D4

Define and verify problem root


cause(s)

- No 5 Why analysis
- No Ishikawa analysis

D4

Define and verify non detection


root cause(s)

- No 5 Why analysis
- No Ishikawa analysis

D5

Choose and verify problem


corrective action(s)

- Shallow description
- No efficiency estimation

D5

Choose and verify non detection


corrective action(s)

- Shallow description
- No efficiency estimation

D6

Implement problem corrective


action(s)

- Copy of D5
- No efficency verification

D6

Implement non detection


corrective action(s)

- Copy of D5
- No efficency verification

D7

Action(s) to prevent recurrence

D8

Closing 8D

Report

No Good
- Champion not named
- No manager

Shallow / poor activity

Copy and paste sentence

- Poor presentation
- Poor legibility

OK (minimum

OK (minimum)

Bonus

Score

- Champion named
- Not only Quality Dpt
- Manager in the team

- Clear function description


- Phone number of all participants

/5

Clear and complete description (P/N ,


lots , Date code , QN , number of
pieces , plant/0Km/field , ...)

- Pictures
- Measurements
- Test results

/7

- Tracability analysis
- Lot blocking (at supplier, at cust.)
- Fire wall on time

-Fire wall efficiency checked


-Sorting organized by supplier on site
-Secured lots identified

/ 10

- Consequent 5 why analysis


- Consequent Ishikawa analysis
- Real / physical verification

- Additional problem solving method


used (Is / Is not , ...)
- Risk assessment available

/ 10

- Consequent 5 why analysis


- Consequent Ishikawa analysis
- All possibilities analyzed

- Additional problem solving method


used (Is / Is not , ...)
- Risk assessment available

/ 10

-Clear corrective action(s)


-Detailled action plan (date , resp)
-Efficiency estimation

- Possible side effect analysis


- Pictures

/ 10

-Clear corrective action(s)


-Detailled action plan (date , resp)
-Efficiency estimation

- Possible side effect analysis


- Pictures

/ 10

- Real implementation timing


- Efficiency verification
- First batch identification

- Efficiency follow-up (SLC)


- Support documents , graph ,.

/ 10

- Real implementation timing


- Efficiency verification

- Efficiency follow-up (SLC)


- Support documents , graph ,.
- First batch identification

/ 10

- Real documented lessons learned


- Documents changed
- Other lines, products, plants

- Attached evidences of activity


(changed document , ...)
- Actions impact analyzed (FMEA)

/ 10

- Champion sign-off
- Champion Manager sign-off

- Other manager sign-off (production ,


logistics , ...)
- Pertinent management comments

/5

8D versions followed (update date ,


versions , ...)

- Good legibility
- Consequent attachments

/3

Total Score
Percentage

70

/ 100

70.0%

Box

Category

D4

Root Cause D4
(occurrence)

D6

Countermeasure
D6
(occurrence)

D4

Root Cause D4
(non-detection)

D6

Countermeasure
D6
(non-detection)

D6

Countermeasure
confirmation D6

D7

Updates of QM
system
(PQP, FMEA, etc)

D8

Signatures

Other attachments
/ reports

Not good

OK (minimum)

(0) "Shallow" root cause or direct


cause only or hypothesis only

(+3) OK. Root cause found in


addition to direct cause

(0) Poor, not clear, not robust, no


timings, no evidence of physical
action

(+2) OK. Efective


countermeasure.
Includes timing, lot no.,

(0) "Shallow" root cause or direct


cause only or hypothesis only

(+3) OK. Root cause found in


addition to direct cause

(0) Poor, not clear, not robust, no


timings, no evidence of physical
action

(+2) OK. Efective


countermeasure.
Includes timing, lot no.,

(0) Blank or "weak" method

(+2) OK. Efective method


explained

(0) Blank

(+1) Box complete (Yes/No)

(0) No manager sign of

(+1) Manager sign of

n/a

(0) Non-relevant or no documents


attached

Information:
- The 8D report must be a comprehensible description of the root cause finding, understanding and
eliminating.
- It must be convincing to the customer, that all possibilities are analyzed.

(minimum)

Excellent

Score
current

maximal

(+1) All possibilities confirmed


(Ishikawa, 5 why attached)

(+1) Relevant additional data


(e.g. photo, sketch, poka-yoke
etc.)

(+1) All possibilities confirmed


(e.g. Ishikawa, 5 why attached)

K. Efective
rmeasure.
es timing, lot no.,

(+1) Relevant additional data


(e.g. photo, sketch, poka-yoke
etc.)

K. Efective method
ned

(+0.5) Efective method with


back-up data (e.g. check sheets)

2.5

ox complete (Yes/No)

(+0.5) If applicable, explain how


PQP and/or FMEA is updated.
Lessons Learned concerning other
processes, products, locations,

1.5

anager sign of

(+0.5) Additional Sign-Of


(e.g. Production Manager, Plant
Manager, etc.)

1.5

(+0.5) Relevant documents


attached (e.g. Analysis data
sheets, etc.)

0.5

20

K. Root cause found in


n to direct cause

K. Efective
rmeasure.
es timing, lot no.,

K. Root cause found in


n to direct cause

n-relevant or no documents
ed

finding, understanding and

Total Score

d.
Percentage:
0.0%