1

Polaris SCAR

Monterrey, N.L., MX 04/05/2013

What is a SCAR?

So, before completing a Polaris SCAR form, an understanding of the 8D methodology will be helpful. Let’s talk about the 8D methodology….

SCAR stands for Supplier Corrective Action Report, Polaris SCAR form is

based on 8D methodology and is required when a significant supplier

quality issue is found

2

3

The 8D (Eight Disciplines) is a proven team oriented and structured problem solving methodology commonly used in automotive industries, but also very popular across different industry branches around the world.

This problem solving approach is used to identify, correct, and eliminate recurrence of a quality problem.

The 8D is a problem solving methodology for product and process improvement.

The 8D name is given because it is structured in eight disciplines, emphasizing team synergy. The team as a whole is believed to be better and smarter than the quality sum of the individuals.

8D is also know as Global 8D, Ford 8D or TOPS 8D.

8D requires the use of other popular tools such as: 5Why’s, 5W/2H, Fishbone(Ishikawa) and others.

What is an 8D?

4

Where does the 8D methodology come from?

Despite what many people think, the 8D methodology was not created by FORD. It actually comes from the U.S. Department of Defense. The U.S. Government first standardized an 8D-like process during the Second World War as Military Standard 1520, Corrective Action and Disposition System for Nonconforming Material was first released in 1974 and the last release was in 1986. It was canceled and discontinued in 1995.

Ford Motor Company first documented the 8D method in 1987 as a course manual named “Team Oriented Problem Solving”. This was created at the request of senior management of the Power Train organization of the Ford Motor Co. which was facing growing frustration because of the same problems recurring year after year.

Many changes and revisions were made based on feedback from the pilot sessions with the course manual. This has been Ford's approach to problem solving ever since. Today, the 8D Problem Solving Process has become a standard in many industries for problem solving or process improvement; such as internal Corrective Action Request (CAR) Process or as Supplier Corrective Action Report (SCAR) Process.

The 8 Disciplines are:

5

When to use a SCAR?

6

When the problem is:• Recurring.• From an unknown source/cause.• For safety related implications.• Requiring a problem solving record per customer request, legal

requirements, quality system auditory, etc.• A process variation that is not understood.

People may ask why not use the 8D process? While the 8D process is effective, some companies skip steps of the process. The step most consistently skipped is D8: Congratulate the Team. Another reason why Polaris will not use just an 8D is the form can be intimidating for some that are completing it. Polaris does not want this SCAR form to be viewed as “another requirement that needs to be completed,” rather, it should be viewed as an effective tool to determine the root cause of a problem.

7

How 8 Disciplines fits into the new Polaris SCAR form?

D1- Establish a teamD2- Describe the problem

D3 – Interim containment actions

D4 – Root cause D5 & D6 – Choose and Verify Corrective Actions

D7 – Implement and Validate Permanent

Corrective Actions

Create the SCAR team.

8

Objective: Assemble a multi-disciplinary team with the process and/or product knowledge, allocated time, authority, and skills in the required technical disciplines to solve the problem and implement corrective actions. An effective team leader must be appointed.

A few recommendations for success:• Create Synergy.• Maintain open communication.• Respect everyone’s opinion.• Promote teamwork.• Team must have a leader that supervises and closes

the SCAR form.• Define roles & responsibilities for each of the team

members.• Use a cross-functional team including production

personnel, who often have the most experience with the process.

Description of Non-Conformance

9

• Describe the internal or external problem by identifying “what is wrong with what”, this is the “should be and is” and detailing the problem in quantifiable terms. Develop a clear Problem Statement and Problem Description.

Description of Non-ConformanceHow It Was Found?

10

A useful tool for this step is the 5W/2H (Who, What, Why, Where, When, How &How many), the problem description should include answers to these questions:

•Who reported the non-conformance?- Supplier is required to enter here the name of the person who originally reported the issue•What is the non-conformant part?-Supplier is required to enter the part number of the component and the description as know by Polaris.•Why this is a non-conformance?-Supplier is required to capture the deviation from design record, this is the SB & IS rule, ideally this will come from the RMO.•Where was the non-conformance found?-Supplier will enter the plant where the non-conformance was found, if available, they may also enter the Polaris process where this was found.•When was the non-conformance found?-This is the date when the problem was reported to the supplier•How was non-conformance detected?-Supplier may need to gather more information from Polaris to answer this question. Was it discovered while trying to assembly the part? Was it discovered during vehicle power up or run up? Was it discovered when taken from the box or container?•How many non-conformances were found?-This is the initial QTY of defective parts. here is where it comes to “measurable”, QTY and failure rate are useful numbers to quantify the problem reported.

1a/1b:Immediate Containment Actions

11

Define, verify and implement Immediate Containment Action to isolate the effects of the problem from any internal and/or external Customer until Permanent Corrective (Preventive) Action are implemented.

These are expected to be immediate emergency response and are always temporary actions to stop the bleeding.

These are defined based in the failure mode only and will not address yet the root cause.

These actions should include inventory certification for On Hand Inventory(at Polaris and at supplier), In transit inventory (before it hits Polaris facilities) and in process inventory (at supplier), results from this material certification must be recorded and entered into the SCAR.

It is important to verify the immediate containment actions to ensure it is detecting the failure mode or defect, the red rabbit process is a good option for doing that, this consist on putting a known bad part in a controlled way into the material being sorted/inspected to see if it will be effectively caught.

2:Primary Root Cause

12

Determine the Primary Root Cause by use of either a Fishbone diagram (see slide 19) or by use of the 5-Why’s.

When determining whether the Root Cause has been found, it is important to verify that you cannot ask more why’s before concluding the RC investigation.

Many Root Causes are only partially finished, answers such as “operator didn’t perform the operation” or “Human error” fail to answer why they didn’t do it.

• Are there work instructions at the work cell and are they complete? (i.e. was the operator even aware they needed to do this?)

• Was the operator properly trained? Is this documented?• Is the operator new, if so, what about new trainee auditing frequency?

• Is there a difference between QA audit frequency of new employees versus trained or veteran employees?

• Why did the product leave the supplier’s facility and not get caught in their audit process?

• What does the Control Plan say? Was the audit plan followed?

• Human Error is never an acceptable answer!!• An employee disregarding all processes may be a RC, but then you

must prove that all the other processes are adequate, in place, and the employee is properly trained.

2: Primary Root Cause (Decent Example)

13

Problem: “Flow through housing flashed shut”

Primary root cause(s) for product defect or nonconformance: • Slide core is flashed closed and not trimmed. Why? Trim did not punch out slug out in

part. Why? The switch for the mechanical slide punches did not activate. Why? Human error during set-up and switches were not turned on or trim press operator inadvertently turned off switches. Why? Switches are accessible to be turned on or off at anytime.

Root Cause: • Due to the fact that the switches can be turned on and off by anyone, there is a risk that

parts may be trimmed without the slide punches activating during the trim cycle.

Could be made even better by the answering/adding the following• Why are the switches easily accessible and not locked out to the operator?• Is it confirmed that the punches worked once the switches were turned on?

• Should it be required that this question is answered, and why?

• It is important to remember that it is getting to the details that will truly help permanently fix problems. Document the findings!

• If it is not confirmed that the punches activated when turned on, what did we prove? Only that someone turned on something that might not have been working anyway. Which would then be an additional Root Cause.

2:Primary Root Cause

14

Don’t forget to audit the processes, including the in-process checks and control plan!

Was there anything indicating that a problem was close to happening and was anything done?

Do not forget to look past inspection; equipment and tooling preventative maintenance should also be reviewed, as applicable.

Inspection or a lack thereof is not a Root Cause for the issue, it is a cause for escape of discrepant product though. Inspection is used to detect issues and catch them prior to them reaching the customer, something else failed to cause the issue in the first place.

Remember, this can all be done on the Fishbone or 5 Why tabs and then the finalized answer put in the main form. This will save clutter on the form.

3: Corrective Action

15

A properly written immediate corrective action should account for the following:

• What is being done to the non-conforming inventory resulting from the immediate containment action? Will it be scrapped, deviated for use as is, or deviated for rework?

• What is being done to ensure that new product will not leave the Supplier with this issue?

• Is there a need for new inspection gages, a change in the control plan, or changing the in-process checks?

• Are there in-process checks currently?• Is the inspection frequency adequate in the control plan?• Is the supplier implementing a dock audit or pre-delivery inspection (PDI)?• If changes are temporary to inspection frequency or PDI, how long will this be done?

• Any immediate fixes to the process or fixtures that will help prevent recurrence? This includes any temporary fixes, such as a toggle clamp versus a hydraulic clamp on a fixture.

• Any and all of these actions need to have a due date and who is assigned to complete the task.

• These dates should be within 2 business days or prior to the next production run.

4:Primary Reason for non-detection

16

Why did this quality issue escape?

Following up with the immediate containment and immediate corrective actions:• Verify if the feature/issue in question is captured in the control plan and/or in-

process checks

• Verify if the control plan and in-process checks are being performed at the appropriate frequency

• Verify that the checks are being done properly, was the person checking them properly trained to use that tool?

• Did the inspection results indicate a potential issue?• If so, was anything communicated to the appropriate people to address?

• Is the inspection method adequate for the issue at hand?

5:Permanent Corrective Actions

17

It is entirely possible that some or all of the immediate corrective actions will turn into permanent corrective actions (PCA’s).

However, it is important to ensure that the immediate corrective actions are robust enough. Temporary fixtures or fixture repairs are not PCA’s, as an example.

Also must include what will be done to fix the primary reason for non-detection.

All PCA’s must have a due date and a person assigned responsibility for completion.

6:Validation of Corrective Action

18

All PCA’s must also have a validation timeframe.

• Validation timeline is a set amount of time that a PCA is considered open.

• Many times, the validation timeline is between 30 and 90 calendar days or it may be for a determined number of deliveries to Polaris.

• The validation timeframe can vary depending on a number of items.• If the product is not produced frequently, the timeline will be longer.• If there is a long delivery timeframe, such as from products

overseas.• This timeframe should be agreed upon between the Supplier and

Polaris.• If any recurrence happens for the same issue, the selected PCA was

not adequate and the issue must stay open.• It must be determined why the PCA did not keep the problem from

occurring again.• Determine if a new PCA is required.• The validation timeframe is reset when an issue reoccurs.

• Supplier Management MUST sign the completed SCAR and submit to Polaris after validation is complete and the issue has not reoccurred.

19

Fishbone Diagram

If the supplier is not utilizing the fishbone tool, Polaris is providing one in the SCAR form, on the “fishbone” tab of the SCAR form.

Form can be printed off on 11”X17” piece of paper and filled in by hand or the form can be filled in electronically.

***Things to remember if using the electronic form:• Boxes on the forms are “text boxes” so the boxes size may need to be adjusted for

the amount of text in them. • Create a new “text box” for each item.• Use lines to connect the “text boxes” to the “bones” or the previous cause.

First item that is filled out on the form is the “Effect or Problem” text box at the head of the fish.

20

Fishbone Diagram

These instructions are found on the form:

Instructions: 1.Fill in the Effect or Problem box.2.Fill in causes under each category.3.Investigator/s circle apparent root causes with a dashed line.4.Review Team to circle (red solid line) each root cause.5.Indicate votes adjacent to each “consensus root cause”. i.e. 4/5, 5/6 etc. (4 out of 5 or

5 out of 6) in red. 6.Enter total No. of root causes________  7.Identify any “lack of 2nd verification method” instances adjacent to root cause/s as “No

2nd method” in red. 8.Total “2nd method” instances__________ 

Things to remember about filling out a fishbone diagram:• This is a brainstorming exercise, so there are no wrong answers.• Ask “why does this happen?” about each cause. Write sub–causes branching off the

causes. Continue to ask “Why?” to exhaust all causes.

21

Fishbone Diagram

Sample of completed form:

22

Fishbone Diagram

Fishbone Diagram ExampleThis fishbone diagram was drawn by a manufacturing team to try to understand the source of periodic iron contamination. The team used the six generic headings to prompt ideas. Layers of branches show thorough thinking about the causes of the problem.

For example, under the heading “Machines,” the idea “materials of construction” shows four kinds of equipment and then several specific machine numbers. Note that some ideas appear in two different places. “Calibration” shows up under “Methods” as a factor in the analytical procedure, and also under “Measurement” as a cause of lab error. “Iron tools” can be considered a “Methods” problem when taking samples or a “Manpower” problem with maintenance personnel.Excerpted from Nancy R. Tague’s The Quality Toolbox, Second Edition, ASQ Quality Press, 2004, pages 247–249.

23

5 Why

The 5 Why’s form can be found on the “5 Why’s” tab of the SCAR form.

Instructions: After each statement why should be asked until the root cause is discovered.If needed, add additional root cause statements. 5 Why’s is an average of when the root cause will be discovered. Some problems will require more than 5 why’s and some less than 5.

24

5 Why

Customer Problem: Slide core is flashed closed and not trimmed.Supplier Problem: Trimming operation missed on part.Why? The switch for the mechanical slide punches did not activate.Why? Operator error during set-up and switches were not turned on or trim press operator inadvertently turned off switches.Why? Switches are accessible to be turned on or off at anytime. Why? No formal controls in place for the setting up and running of the machine.Why? Operators relied on “tribal” knowledge of how to run parts.Why? No information captured on this part of the manufacturing process. Why? No formal audits had been done on the process. Why? System failure.

In this instance, the corrective action should be written against the break down of the system. How will the management team ensure this system breakdown will not happen again?

25

Questions???

Thank You.