Team Problem Solving

DØ - Prepared For The 8D Process

Quick Reference Guide (8D) (313) 565 - 6266
D2 - Describe The Problem US (888) FOR - FMEA
CDN (877) 609-0999
D1 - Establish The Team AU/EUR 011 61 (03) 9585-6423
Def ine and Quantify
INPUT www.quality-one.com
Sy m ptom; Identify INPUT
Awareness of Rev iew
Customer and Team
the Symptom Av ailable Data
Aff ected Parties established
INPUT
Identify Champion
8D Process Initiated
Go to DØ
Can
Is an Emergency Application YES
NO Sy m ptom
Response Action Criteria Step NO
be
Required? f or Each
Subdiv ided? Does
Sy m ptom Does
YES Problem
Problem
Identify Team Leader NO NO Describe a
YES Describe
“Never
Select ERA and Verify State Sy m ptom “Somethi ng
Been
Changed”
as an Object There”
Situati on?
and Def ect Situati on?

YES
NO ERA
Verif ied? Determine Skills and
Knowled ge of Core Team Do we Know
YES the Cause? NO Use Alternate Methods
YES
NO (Repeated Use 8D (e.g. DOE, Process
Process ? Improv ement
Why ’s)
Implement Approaches, Innov ation)
IF NO
Roles of YES
Core Team Document
YES Problem Suspend
Gather and Rev iew Established Statement 8D
Av ailable Data
And Y ES Select Team Members
Assigned? • SME’s
Supplement Use Alternate Methods
Initiate Dev elopment of 8D Process YES
NO (e.g. DOE, Process
Does the Problem Description with
Propos ed Address Alternative
Improv ement
Do we Hav
Have e (Is/Is -Not)
8D Meet NO YES Sy m ptom Methods? Approaches, Innov ation)
Enough
the Using Other
Application Informati on?
Methods Establish Team Goals and
Criteria? NO
Membership Functions
Identify
Process Flow

Rev iew Problem

Description with OUTPUT
Will the
the N
New
ew
Customer Af f ected Problem Description
8D Duplicate YES Prov ide Data to Identify
an Existi ng Parties
Existing Team Establish Operating Additional Data
8D? OUTPUT
Procedures and Working Required
Team Established
Relationships of the Team

NO Collect &
Warm Up
1. A regular team meeting time and place is established? Analy ze
2. The team meeting room is user-f riendly ? Additional Data
Initiate the 8D OUTPUT 8D
Process Process Initiated 3. Adequate team building has been done to build relationships with team members? Problem Statement
4. Preparation is adequate to help team members f ocus on the team’s activities? 1. The question “What’s wrong with what?”has been answered?
5. The purpose of each meeting has been highlighted? 2. Repeated Why’s were used asking the question “Do we know for certain why this is occurring”?
6. The team is inf ormed of each meeting’s agenda? 3. A specific problem statement has been defined (object and defect)?
Emergency Response Action (ERA) Membership Problem Description
1. Necessity for E mergency Response Actions has been evaluated? 7. Are the people aff ected by the problem represented? 4. Is/Is Not Analysis has been performed (what, where, when, how big)?
8. How is the 8D customer’s v iewpoint represented? 5. Prior experience has been considered to determine if this problem has appeared before?
2. If an E mergency Response Action was taken, it has been verified? 9. Does each person hav e a reason f or being on the team? 6. The current process flow has been identified?
3. If an E mergency Response Action was taken, it has been validated? 10. Is the team large enough to include all necessary input, but small enough to act 7. Changes from the original process flow, if any, have been evaluated?
eff ectiv ely ? Problem Description
8D Application Criteria 11. Does the team membership ref lect the problem’s current status? 8. Process detail has been reviewed to determine where this problem first appears?
4. The symptom(s) has been def ined and quantif ied? 12. Do the team members agree on the membership? 9. The engineering system design has been studied and system delivery, system function and interactions between components in the s ystem are
5. The 8D customer(s) who experienced the symptom(s) and, if appropriate, the aff ected parties, Product/Process Knowledge understood?
hav e been identif ied? 10. Problem pattern(s) has been considered/evaluated?
13. Special skills or experience that the team will require is av ailable?
11. Similar components and/or parts have been reviewed for the same problem?
6. Measurements taken to quantif y the sy m ptom(s) demonstrate that a perf ormance gap exists Operating Procedures and Working Relationships Problem Description
AND/OR that priority (sev erity , urgency, growth) of the symptom warranted initiation of the 14. The team’s goals and membership roles hav e been clarif ied? 12. All required data has been collected and analyzed?
process? 15. The team has suf f icient decision making authority to accomplish its goals? 13. The affect of the ERA on the the data has been evaluated?
8D Application Criteria 16. Communication plans hav e been dev eloped f or both internal and external team 14. Physical evidence of the problem has been obtained?
7. The cause of the problem is unknown? inf ormation? 15. A Cause & Effect Diagram has been completed?
Type of Problem
8. Management is committed to dedicate the necessary resources to fix the problem at the root 17. All indiv idual members agree with and understand the team’s goals? 16. Determination has been made as to whether this problem describes a “something changed”or a “never been there” situation?
cause lev el and to prev ent recurrence? Roles Review of Problem Description
9. Sy m ptom complexity exceeds the ability of one person to resolv e the problem? 18. The Champion of t he team has been identif ied? 17. The problem description has been confirmed as to what the customer(s) and/or affected party(s) are experiencing?
Other 19. The Te am Leader has been identif ied? 18. The necessity of reviewing the problem with executive management has been evaluated?
20. Team Member’s roles and responsibilities are clear? 19. Consideration has been made for setting aside financial reserves ?
10. The ne w 8D will not duplicate the existing 8D?
21. Ned f or a f acilitator to coach the process and manage team consensus has been 20. Moral, social, or legal obligations related to this problem have been considered?
Common Tasks (as appropriate) Common Tasks (as appropriate)
considered?
11. All changes are documented (e.g., FMEA, Control Plan, Process Flow)? 21. All changes are documented (e.g., FMEA, Control Plan, Process Flow)?
Common Tasks (as appropriate) 22. The team composition has been reconsidered?
12. Measurables hav e been rev iewed?
22. All changes are documented (e.g., FMEA, Control Plan, Process Flow)? 23. Measurables have been reviewed?
13. The 8D Report has been updated? 24. The need for a Service Action has been determined?
23. Measurabl e hav e been rev iewed?
14. The need f or a serv ice action has been determined? 25. The 8D Report has been updated?
24. The 8D Report has been updated?
 D4 – Define and Verify Root Cause and Escape

Root Cause
Flow

Root Cause
INPUT
Flow
ICA Implementation
(Part 2)
Rev iew and Update
Problem Description Do the Root
Do we need to
Causes Account Y ES initiate separate Y ES Go to
D3 - Develop Interim Containment Action (ICA) f or all of t he
Problem
8Ds f or each Root (Pref erred) D2
Cause identif ied?
Identify D iff erences, Description?
Changes and Dev elop
INPUT Is ICA NO Theories NO NO
Got to D4
Problem Description Required?

YES
Test Theories Against Ev aluate Alt. Methods with
Problem Description
Champion (e.g. DOE,
Ev aluate ERA Process Imp. Approaches)

Does the
NO Theory explain
All the Known Escape Flow
Identify & Choose the
Data?
‘Best” ICA and Verify
Use Alt. Methods (e.g. DOE, Suspend
YES Use 8D NO
Process Imp Approaches, 8D
Process?
Innov ation, Robust Design)

Can the MLC be

Is ICA NO Y ES Rev iew Process Flow &
NO Verif ied? (Make
Verif ied? Identify Control Points f or
the Problem Root Cause(s)
Come & Go)
YES

YES Supplement
Dev elop Action Plan, Use Alt. Methods (e.g. DOE,
8D Process Y ES
Implement and Validate Process Imp Approaches,
with Alt.
ICA Innov ation, Robust Design)
Method? Does a Control
Acknowledge Root Cause System Exis t to NO
NO Detect the
Problem?
NO Is ICA
Validated? YES
Is There More Root Cause
YES YES
Than One Root Flow Acknowledge Root Cause
Cause? (Part 2) Identify Control Point
Continue Monitoring ICA OUTPUT Closest to the Root Cause
Eff ectiv eness ICAs Established
NO

Root Cause
Key Concepts OUTPUT
Flow
Root Cause Escape
n Attacks the symptom (problem) (Part 3) OUTPUT
Root Causes
Flow Is the Control
(Part 3) Point Capable NO Acknowledge the Control
n Is verif ied for effectiveness before implementation of Detecting the
Problem?
System is NOT Capable

n Is monitored w hile being used

Root Cause
n Is documented YES

n Is not a "Band Aid," w hich may be forgotten 1. The factual information in the problem description (Is/Is Not ) has been Acknowledge the Control Acknowledge the need f or a
n Is replaced by permanent corrective action at D6 updated?
Point as Verif ied Escape
Point
new or improv ed Control
System
n Adds cost
2. Differences unique to the Is when compared to the companion Is Not
have been identified? OUTPUT
Verif ied Escape Point
OUTPUT
Acknowledged need for
Improv ed Control Sy stem

3. For a “Change-Induced” problem, changes in or around the difference

have been uncovered?
4. The theories developed have been tested against all the facts at D2?
5. The most Likely Cause accounts for all the facts at D2?
(313) 565 - 6266
6. The Root Cause was verified passively and actively?
US (888) FOR - FMEA
CDN (877) 609-0999 7. Root Cause Analysis has gone far enough (we don’t need to know
AUS/EUR (03) 9585-6423
www.quality-one.com why this root cause happened)?
 D5 – Choose and Verify Permanent Corrective D6 – Implementation and Validate
Actions (PCAs)for Root Cause and Escape Point Permanent Corrective Actions (PCAs)
INPUT INPUT
Verif ied PCA f or Root Verif ied PCA f or Escape
INPUT Cause Point
INPUT
Verif ied Root Cause Verif ied Escape Point or
Acknowledged Need f or
Improv ed Control Sy stem

Root Cause Flow Escape Flow

Root Cause Flow

Escape Flow

Dev elop Action Plan f or Dev elop Action Plan f or

PCA PCA
Establish Decision Criteria

Establish Decision Criteria

Implement PCA Plan Implement PCA Plan

Identify Possible Actions
Identify Possible Actions
Including ICA

Remov e ICA and

Choose the “Best” Choose the “Best” Remov e Interim
Ev aluate PCA f or
Permanent Correctiv e Permanent Correctiv e Containment Actions
Escape Point
Action (PCA) Action (PCA)

Testing Testing
NO NO Perf orm Validation Perf orm Validation
Verif ies Verif ies
PCA? PCA?

YES YES

Re-Ev aluate Identify Possible Actions

ICA & PCA for escape that Improv e ICA
Point
Conf irm with Customer, Using
NO the Sy m ptom Measurable,
That the Sy m ptom has been
Champion
Eliminated
Concurs in
PCA
Selection

YES
OUTPUT
OUTPUT OUTPUT
Implemented PCAs and
Verif ied PCA f or Verif ied PCA f or
Validated Data
Root Cause Escape Point D6 – Assessing Questions
n Planning/Problem Prevention
1. The need for PCA implementation support from other departments/organizations has been evaluated?
D5 – Ass essing Q uesti ons 2. Representatives of those departments/other organizations are on our team to plan and implement the PCA?
n Before PCA Decision 3. Consideration was made to the need for customer and/or supplier involvement?
1. Criteria has been est ablished for choosi ng a PC A for root c aus e and esc ape point ? 4. The responsible party for customer and /or supplier planning has been identified (if required)?
2. The Champion agrees with t he PCA criteria? 5. An action plan has been defined (responsibilities assigned; timing established; required support determined)?
3. The right ex perience is on the t eam to choos e t he best PCA? 6. Resources necessary to implement this plan have been identified?
4. Full range of alt ernatives hav e been considered for the PCA? 7. Consideration (Problem Prevention Planning) has been given to what could go wrong for each step of the plan and what can be
5. The f eat ures and benefits f or the perfect choice hav e been pr eserved? done to prevent these troubles from developing?
6. Risks associat ed wit h t his decision are bei ng managed? 8. Appropriate contingent actions have be developed in case prevention efforts are unsuccessful?
7. The Champion concurs wit h the PC A sel ection? 9. The trigger (date or event) for the contingent actions have been identified?
n Verification 10. Progress to the plan until completion is being effectively monitored?
8. Evidence (pr oof) exists that thes e actions will resolve the problem at t he root c aus e lev el? 11. Included in the plan is a date when the ICA will be removed?
9. Verification met hods made allowances for variations in t he frequency (or patterns) created by the cause? 12. The plan has been communicated to those that have a need to know?
10.Variabl es meas ured during our verification step c onstit ut e sound verification? 13. Training required for plan implementation has been determined?
11.Verification met hods ev aluated t he PCA over the full range of producti on v ariation and operati ng c onditions?
14. The Champion agrees with the plan?
n After PC A Decision
12.A Risk Analysis was performed on the PCA sel ected? 15. Measurable(s) have been identified for validating the outcome of the PCA (pre-customer and customer)?
13.The cus tomer and affect ed parti es were c ons ulted on t he selec ted PCA (if required) n Validation
14.The ICA will continue to be effective until the PCA can be implement ed? 16. The ICA has been discontinued
15.Consideration has been given to the res ources r equired for PCA impl ementati on?
17. Validation measurables have proven that the unwanted effect has been totally eliminated?
16.Departments/ other organiz ations that need to be i nvolv ed i n the planning and implementati on of this PCA have been i dentified?
17.Actions hav e been c onsi dered t hat will improv e the ICA prior to PCA impl ementati on? 18. Long – term results are continuing to be monitored?
n Common Tasks ( as appropriat e) 19. The customer has provided confirmation that the PCA is effective?
18.All changes are documented (e. g., FMEA, Control Pl an, Process Flow)? n Common Tasks (as appropriate)
20. All changes are documented (e.g., FMEA, Control Plan, Process Flow)?
19.The t eam com position has been r econsider ed? 21. The team composition has been reconsidered?
20.Measurables hav e been revi ewed? 22. Measurables have been reviewed?
21.The need f or a Service Action has been determined? 23. The need for a Service Action has been determined?
22.The 8D R eport has been updat ed? 24. The 8D Report has been updated?
 D7 – Prevent Recurrence 8D Quick Reference Guide
INPUT
Implemented PCAs
and Validated Data D8 – Recognize Team and Individual Contributions
Identify and Choose
Rev iew the History of Prev entiv e Actions INPUT
the Problem
Prev entiv e Actions f or
Present Problem

Analy ze How this Verify Prev entive

Actions
Problem Occurred
and Escaped

Identify Affected Parties Are the INPUT Select Key D ocuments

& Opportunities f or Prev entiv e NO Prev entiv e Actions f or and Prov ide f or Their
Similar Problems to Actions Similar Problems Retention
Occur & Escape Eff ectiv e?

YES
Identify the Sy stem’s
Policies, Practices, and
Dev elop Action Plan
Procedures that Allowed INPUT
the Problem to Occur and Systemic Prev entiv e Rev iew the Team’s
Escape to the Customer Recommendations Process and Document
Team Lessons learned
Champion
Agree with NO
Analy ze How Similar Identif ied
Problems Could be Prev entiv e
Addressed Actions?
Recognize the Entire
YES
Team’s Collectiv e Eff orts
in Solv ing the Problem

Implement Prev entiv e

Actions and v alidate

Mutually Recognize All

OUTPUT
Dev elop Sy stemic Prev entiv e Actions f or Contributions to the
Prev entiv e Present Problem Problem Solv ing Process
Recommendations
Technic al Lessons
Lear ned to Lessons
Lear ned Syst em
Present Systemic
OUTPUT
Prev entiv e
Prev entiv e Actions f or
Recommendations to
Similar Problem OUTPUT
Process Owner Celebrate Completion of
8D Completed
Team’s Tasks
Team Closure
OUTPUT
Systemic Prev entive
D7 – Assessing Questions Recommendations
n Problem History
1. How and where this problem entered the process has been identified?
2. Why the problem occurred there and why it was not detected has been confirmed?
3. We have considered whether confusion or lack of knowledge contributed to the creation of this root cause and/ or escape?
4. Policies, methods, procedures and/or systems have been identified that allowed this problem to occur and escape? D8 – Assessing Questions
5. If Band-Aid fixes in the process have been identified, where they are located and what they are compensating for has been determined?
6. Affected parties have been identified? n8D Report
n Prevent Actions (this problem and similar problems)
1.The 8D r eport has been updated and publis hed?
7. Policies, methods, procedures and/or systems have been identified that need to be done differently to prevent recurrence of the root cause and escape?
8. Evidence evaluated to determine the need for a Process Improvement Approach (i.e., RAPID, Focused Improvement, Re-engineering)? 2.All who hav e a need to k now, including the c ustomer, hav e been i nformed of the st atus of t his 8D ?
9. Individuals and/or organizations have been identified that are responsible for design improvements in any of the systems, policies, methods and/or procedures that
resulted in this root cause and escape? 3.The 8D r eport and att achments are retained i n the historical file system?
10. The best way to trial run these improvements has been determined? nRecognition Planni ng
11. Practices needing standardization have been identified?
12. Plans have been written to coordinate prevent actions and standardize the practice? 4.All current and past t eam mem bers ar e being recogniz ed?
13. The Champion concurs with the identified prevent actions and plans? 5.Significant c ontributions by individual team members hav e been i dentified?
14. A method for communicating to those affected by the changes in the new practice has been determined?
15. The new practices have been standardized? 6.The opportunities hav e been evaluat ed to provide recogniti on from leader to t eam, t eam mem ber t o
16. Progress check points have been identified to assess system improvements? team member, team to leader, team to C hampi on?
n Systemic Prevent Recommendations 7.Different w ays t o communicat e the rec ognition message have been c onsi dered?
17. The management policies, systems or procedures that allowed this problem to occur or escape and that are beyond the scope of the current Champion have been
identified? 8.Contributions by non-team members t o t he 8D have been consider ed f or recogniti on?
18. Responsibility for these practices that are beyond the scope of the current Champion have been established? nRecognition Implem ent ation
19. The current Champion agrees with the Systemic Prevent Recommendations of the team?
9.Opportuniti es for team publicity considered ( e.g. , company n ewslett er)?
n Lessons Learned
20. Appropriate technical lessons learned have been developed and submitted to the FAO Lessons Learned database? 10.The rec ognition satisfi es the fit, foc us, timely criteria?
n Common Tasks (as appropriate) 11.8D is intended to be positive. T he c hance that it might backfire and t urn into a negative has been
21. All changes are documented (e.g., FMEA, Control Plans, Process Flow)? considered and guarded against?
22. The team composition has been reconsidered? nLessons Learned
23. Measurables have been reviewed?
24. The need for a Service Action has been determined? 12.Team proc ess has been eval uated and less ons lear ned identifi ed?
25. The 8D Report has been updated?