Quality Assessment

Assessment for Quality Improvement Paper

Constantly improving on previously established processes is becoming more of a culture attitude or behavior, than a foreign concept. Assessing what needs to be improved under the umbrella of quality has become easier in the last two decades, since TQM was re-discovered in corporate America. To that effect, let's not forget the little guys or even the up and coming organizations that have benefited from all of the previous research and experiences learned by the bigger corporations. One of the rapidly growing organizations in the helicopter engine industry is Turbomeca-USA (TMUSA), a global company with subsidiaries strategically positioned around the globe.

This global setting has induced process flow myopia within each location and its working structures. This summary will briefly describe the problem, possible solutions, how the process improvements would flow if implemented. Also who the key stakeholder would be to ensure solutions are implemented, what challenges will be encountered and how will the solutions be measures against plan.

Problem

Stagger or multilayer communication style is basically the root cause facing one of the many established processes at TMUSA. The aviation industry is always evolving, inventing or evolving new ways to produce new product or create new repairs to exiting product. There are certain steps to be taking in order for innovation to be implemented into the design of the product; either new or in service product. The established process to submit a new repair request from TMUSA to Turbomeca France (TMF) has proven to be not Lean efficient. The time-frame it takes to process and receive an approved new repair averages between 30 to 60 days in turn around time.

The departments involved to get the process started at TMUSA do so according to process standards. It is the time it takes for TMF engineering controlling design that sets up the goal for failure. The cause is time zones, the many departments, and language translation to be worked throughout, especially when technical and critical dimension are to be consider when implementing changes into the original product design.

Proposed Solution

In order to streamline the approval process, a series of concessions have to be achieved and in place between TMUSA and TMF. This in relation to a new repair proposal from the operations floor engineers to design engineers. TMUSA has to have the authority to approve certain categories of repairs without going to TMF - have a local engineering design liaison from TMF. By classifying the repairs from light to heavy, the process will suffice the intent to differentiate among agreed boundaries. Once this authority is establish the operations' engineering support group (ESG), has the freedom to use the experience gained by troubleshooting opportunities for improvement on the floor shop with the engine technicians.

ESG submits the proposed repair to the local design engineering department for review of applicability and effectiveness of affected model type engines. Once approved design engineering forwards the approved repair within 72 of receipt from ESG to QA department. QA proceeds to perform first article on the product in order to validate the new repair design against plan. Once the first article is approved Ð'- a time frame between 48 to 96 hours - the final approval is reformatted into the appropriate repair documentation to be release by Document Control department to the shop floor via controlled electronic library.

This process relives the overall time it takes to approve light repairs at this time at TMUSA. After time an established process can lead to TMF entrusting more control over design creating a better flow to provide a better quality product to the customer in a time efficient manner.

New Proposed "AS IS" Flow Chart:

TMUSA New Repair Authorization Request Flow Chart