The context
The subcontractor tracks manufacturing deviations, customer returns and inspection findings. Supporting evidence sits in measurement records, photographs and exchanges between the workshop and quality staff. Each record needs to distinguish established facts, possible causes, treatment decisions and missing material so the responsible people can assess the event on a documented basis.
The problem to solve
Gathering evidence can delay analysis and leave conflicting accounts of the event. A plausible cause is not a demonstrated cause. The quality manager must assess the evidence and retain control over containment decisions, corrective actions and the eventual closure of the nonconformity record.
The proposed mission
- 01
Test preparation of a source-linked chronology using authorized records, listing available evidence, contradictions and missing material that the quality team needs to examine the deviation in its actual context.
- 02
Draft a record that separates observations, hypotheses and possible actions, without deciding the event's severity, determining a root cause or declaring the affected product acceptable for use or delivery.
- 03
Have the quality manager assess each suggestion and measure the pilot before production, requiring approval for record updates, communications and any treatment, corrective action or closure decision.
Intended benefits
- Less time gathering evidence, leaving more time to analyse causes and decide actions.
- Evidence collection that is easier for quality and workshop teams to follow.
- Human assessments supported by a structured history of the material actually examined.
How to measure the outcome
- Record completeness at review
- Evidence preparation time
- Assessment corrections required
The baseline and objectives are defined during scoping, then compared with pilot results.