Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cqi 14 Assessment Tool Final
Cqi 14 Assessment Tool Final
Pre-Assessment
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Please note: For the purposes of this survey, "the organization" can mean "Company," "Division," "Department"
This is not intended to replace the full assessment. It is designed to provide an initial gap analysis of a warranty management process
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
1
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Pre-Assessment
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Please note: For the purposes of this survey, "the organization" can mean "Company," "Division," "Department"
This is not intended to replace the full assessment. It is designed to provide an initial gap analysis of a warranty management process
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
2
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Pre-Assessment
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Please note: For the purposes of this survey, "the organization" can mean "Company," "Division," "Department"
This is not intended to replace the full assessment. It is designed to provide an initial gap analysis of a warranty management process
Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP)
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
3
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Pre-Assessment
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Please note: For the purposes of this survey, "the organization" can mean "Company," "Division," "Department"
This is not intended to replace the full assessment. It is designed to provide an initial gap analysis of a warranty management process
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
4
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Pre-Assessment
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Please note: For the purposes of this survey, "the organization" can mean "Company," "Division," "Department"
This is not intended to replace the full assessment. It is designed to provide an initial gap analysis of a warranty management process
Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the Process
Implementation Assessment
Effectiveness Assessment
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
5
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
6
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
7
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
8
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
9
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Yes = 5, No = 0
Copyright
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
10
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.01 The organization has a defined warranty management process with Organization chart information / structure,
Supplier Section 1 Yes = 5, No = 0
Establishing the Baseline defined ownership. Procedures
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.02 There is upper management oversite of warranty management
Supplier Section 1, 7.3 Records of management reviews with teams Yes = 5, No = 0
Establishing the Baseline activities.
Copyright
11
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.19 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept LPA records, maintenance records -
Supplier 1.2 Use scoring method table
Establishing the Baseline ownership for warranty risk reducing actions. information shared with employees
1.20 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer
1. Management Introduction to Warranty /
Supplier satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the 1.2, 6.6 NTF records, NTF Metric, Case studies Use scoring method table
Establishing the Baseline
root cause is determined and eliminated.
2.02 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related Product development shows records of
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre-
Supplier risks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates 3.2 identified surrogate and review of issues/etc. Use scoring method table
Program Activities
data, scorecards, etc. and changes effected to design/process
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.03 NHTSA and other government databases are consistently reviewed
Supplier 3.6 NHTSA information review records Yes = 5, No = 0
Program Activities for recalls and campaign information to help define risks.
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.04 TSB's are obtained, when available, and made accessible for review
Supplier 3.10, 4.8, 5.6, 6.3 Records of TSB review inputs Use scoring method table
Program Activities and improvement input.
2.05 Past T-G-W, T-G-R and corrective actions (like 8Ds, 5 Whys and
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- Process & Design FMEA evidence, meeting
Supplier other problem solving activity) are routinely reviewed for potential 3.1, 3.3, 4,4 Use scoring method table
Program Activities records/process line review records
improvements to reduce incident rate risk by the organization.
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.09 Past FMEA's are reviewed by the organization for potential risks Records of FMEA reviews and
Supplier 3.4, 4.1, 6.2 Use scoring method table
Program Activities and "needs improvement" identification, including development needs. improvements
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.10 The organization reviews available high mileage data to verify or
Supplier 3.5, 4.5, 5.8 High mileage data review records Use scoring method table
Program Activities identify potential reliability and durability performance issues.
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.11 Design for Six Sigma opportunities are identified and/or Program reviews include DFSS review
Supplier 3.7 Yes = 5, No = 0
Program Activities implemented to reduce warranty incident risks. records
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.12 The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks
Supplier 3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7 Records show supply chain improvements Use scoring method table
Program Activities and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements.
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.13 The organization has sufficient warranty process training for supply
Supplier 3.9, 3.10 Training records Use scoring method table
Program Activities chain partners.
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- Referenced industry Layered
Supplier 2.14 Is the organization actively involved in Layered Audit Procedures? LPA records Yes = 5, No = 0
Program Activities Process Audit procedures
2.15 An Error Proofing checklist for design and process to include
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- manufacturing and assembly is utilized. Following launch, the assembly Referenced industry Layered
Supplier LPA records Use scoring method table
Program Activities checklist for Error Proofing effectiveness is incorporated in the Layered Process Audit procedures
Audit Process.
Documents, function analysis records,
3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.01 The organization considers consumer use differences, by market,
Supplier 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7, 4.1, 4.5 FMA. FMEA, QFD checklist, field Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP) for global platforms for both systems and components.
benchmarking
Copyright
12
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 4.10 The organization prepares an investigative plan when reviewing Dealer vehicle procedure and specific
Supplier 5.7 Use scoring method table
Production dealer vehicles. investigative plans on record
Copyright
13
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.03 This agreement(s) includes who is responsible (ownership) for each Agreements indicate
Supplier 6.1, 6.7 Yes = 5, No = 0
Actions/Solutions improvement step and timing (reference question #2). ownership/responsibilities
5.04 The organization and partner organization's FMEA's, Control Plans
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events:
Supplier and other quality/engineering documents are updated after a warranty 6.2, 6.7 Engineering documents, quality documents Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions
concern is addressed.
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.05 Cross-functional teams are engaged in the updating of FMEA's, Records show CROSS FUNCTIONAL
Supplier 6.2, 6.7 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents. TEAM involvement
5.06 Corrective actions are shared with partner organization;
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Records show corrective action sharing with
Supplier confirmation exists that their FMEA's test and/or measurement methods 3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions supply chain partners
are updated.
5.07 Warranty lessons learned are applied to all product lines, systems, Warranty lessons learned database/records
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events:
Supplier processes, materials, etc. where applicable, to leverage improvement 3.9, 6.7, 6.8 show application across systems and Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions
across a broader base of the business (i.e., Yokoten, Poka-Yoke, etc.). product lines
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working Verification of corrective actions by metric
Supplier 6.5, 7.2 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics. tracking
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.01 The organization tracks the available warranty data and understands Trend charts, Pareto charts, specific issue
Supplier 1.3, 1.6, 5.2, 6.5, 7.1, 7.2 Use scoring method table
Process the warranty trends including detection of emerging field issues. lists, part return analysis results
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.02 The organization monitors social media to identify consumer
Supplier 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 6.5, 7.2 Documented process Yes = 5, No = 0
Process concerns as an early warning.
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.03 The organization follows up with dealer technicians for additional
Supplier 5.5, 5.6, 7.2 Dealer contact records Use scoring method table
Process claim information where permitted.
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.04 Warranty data is pareto charted to identify potential improvement
Supplier 7.1 Pareto charts Yes = 5, No = 0
Process targets.
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.05 The organization establishes yearly improvement targets and places
Supplier 1.6, 7.1 Annual targets on metric Yes = 5, No = 0
Process higher priority on issues with high incident rates (vs. cost).
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.06 The organization implements continuous improvement activities Improvement targets are supported with
Supplier 1.6, 7.1, 7.3 Use scoring method table
Process which meet or exceed improvement targets. action plans - records
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.07 The organization periodically establishes agreed upon warranty Supply chain partner warranty improvement
Supplier 6.1, 7.1 Use scoring method table
Process improvement projects with partner organizations. project records
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the Lessons Learned review records during
Supplier 6.08 Lessons learned are applied to future programs. 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 7.1 Use scoring method table
Process program reviews
I.01 The organization has a senior management-level champion who
Supplier 7. Implementation Assessment owns and defines the warranty management system with trained support Section 1 Organization chart information Yes = 5, No = 0
identified.
Copyright
14
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
I.08 Warranty-related Lessons Learned database is populated with Warranty records/lessons learned database
Supplier 7. Implementation Assessment Section 3, 6.8, 7.3 Use scoring method table
appropriate Look-Across activities. shows look across references and actions
I.09 The organization applies and updates its defined NTF process as NTF defined process being applied and
Supplier 7. Implementation Assessment 6.6, 7.3 Use scoring method table
necessary. updated
I.10 There is increased effort to analyze End-Of-Life products to validate
DVP, FMEA's, durability performance and OEM reliability End of life product analysis records, and
Supplier 7. Implementation Assessment requirements. This data is applied to further improve quality 3.5, 4.5, 5.8 records of updated Lessons Learned Use scoring method table
/performance to meet consumer satisfaction targets and fed forward into database
Lessons Learned database for new program review.
I.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision Warranty risk reviews in contract / program
Supplier 7. Implementation Assessment 1.8, 3.8 Yes = 5, No = 0
making process of bidding or accepting a program. reviews - records
I.12 Problem solving tools are applied and standardized to assist root Evidence of problem solving tool use,
Supplier 7. Implementation Assessment 1.7, Section 5 Use scoring method table
cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary. fishbones, decision trees etc.
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty
Supplier E.01 Incident rates meet improvement targets. 1.6, 7.1 Trend charts Yes = 5, No = 0
Management Program
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty E.02 The organization meets/exceeds warranty metric targets set by
Supplier 1.6, 7.1 Charts Yes = 5, No = 0
Management Program organization/customer.
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Reporting of warranty data, lessons learned
Supplier E.03 Regular data updates have been made available to the organization. 1.6, 7.3 Yes = 5, No = 0
Management Program data base
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty E.04 There is increased evidence of cross function engagements with
Supplier 3.9, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7 Project records Yes = 5, No = 0
Management Program partners/suppliers with the problem solving of warranty concerns.
Copyright
15
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.07 Supply chain partners are integrated into the warranty management Evidence of supplier involvement/reviews
OEM 1.6, 3.9, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7 Use scoring method table
Establishing the Baseline process. of product returns etc.
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.18 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept LPA records, maintenance records -
OEM 1.2 Use scoring method table
Establishing the Baseline ownership for warranty risk reducing actions. information shared with employees
1.19 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer
1. Management Introduction to Warranty /
OEM satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the 1.2, 6.6 NTF records, NTF Metric, Case studies Use scoring method table
Establishing the Baseline
root cause is determined and eliminated.
2.01 The consumer's concern is thoroughly and accurately captured as a
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.2 Record Use scoring method table
verbatim.
2.02 "CCNDs" are captured and explanations are documented for
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.3, 2.2 Record Yes = 5, No = 0
potential future review.
2.03 The repair order is completely and accurately filled out by the
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.4, 2.7 Record Use scoring method table
Service Manager/Advisor.
2.04 The Technician is able to access the necessary TSBs, repair
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities procedures, hot lines and other tools to adequately diagnose and repair a 2.6, 4.8, 5.6, 6.3 Database access demonstrated/file records Yes = 5, No = 0
vehicle.
2.05 The Technician documents and reproduces the consumer concern
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.3 Record Use scoring method table
(cc) and root cause before proceeding with a repair.
2.07 Parts properly tagged for identification and stored for possible
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.10, 2.11 Tagged parts/records Use scoring method table
return per the OEM's procedure.
2.08 When requested by the OEM, parts are sent to the appropriate
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.11, 5.1, 5.5,1.3 Record Use scoring method table
return center with correct identification and claim data.
2.09 Consideration is given to having the OEM and/or supplier
OEM 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities participate in the diagnosis and repair of vehicles at dealerships or fleet 5.7, 5.8, 6.6 Meeting minutes, records Use scoring method table
centers.
Copyright
16
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
3.01 Previous and current warranty from areas listed below, is pulled for
review to help determine improvements in design, materials, process or
service required to reduce warranty risk in preparation of a new program,
(a) Incident rate;(b) Warranty data analysis (analytics) results;(c) Partner
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre-
OEM organization assembly plant (d) Past serviceability (e) Organization's 1.3, 1.6, Section 3 Metrics Use scoring method table
Program Activities
own manufacturing or assembly issues;(f) Field return investigations
results and root cause's;(g) Review of latest warranty repair center parts
and data;(h) Extended service data review (if available);(I) Third party
data that helps assess current performance levels.
3.02 Past T-G-W, T-G-R and corrective actions (like 8Ds, 5 Whys and
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- Process & Design FMEA evidence, meeting
OEM other problem solving activity) are routinely reviewed for potential 3.1, 3.3, 4,4 Use scoring method table
Program Activities records/process line review records
improvements to reduce incident rate risk by the organization.
3.05 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related Product development shows records of
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre-
OEM risks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates 3.2 identified surrogate and review of issues/etc. Use scoring method table
Program Activities
data, scorecards, etc. and changes effected to design/process
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.06 The organization routinely reviews internal quality records and
OEM 1.6, 3.3, 5.2, 5.3 Reviews of project records Use scoring method table
Program Activities supply chain quality data for potential warranty risks.
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.07 Past FMEA's are reviewed by the organization for potential risks Records of FMEA reviews and
OEM 3.4, 4.1, 6.2 Use scoring method table
Program Activities and "needs improvement" identification, including development needs. improvements
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.08 The organization reviews available high mileage data to verify or
OEM 3.5, 4.5, 5.8 High mileage data review records Use scoring method table
Program Activities identify potential reliability and durability performance issues.
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.09 NHTSA and other government databases are consistently reviewed NHTSA information review records
OEM 3.6 Yes = 5, No = 0
Program Activities for recalls and campaign information to help define risks. quarterly (minimum)
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.10 Design for Six Sigma opportunities are identified and/or Program reviews include DFSS review
OEM 3.7 Use scoring method table
Program Activities implemented to reduce warranty incident risks. records
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.12 The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks
OEM 3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7 Records show supply chain improvements Use scoring method table
Program Activities and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements.
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.13 The organization has sufficient warranty process training for supply
OEM 3.9, 3.10 Training records Use scoring method table
Program Activities chain partners.
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre-
OEM 3.14 TSB's are made accessible for review and improvement input. 3.10, 4.8, 5.6, 6.3 Records of TSB review inputs Use scoring method table
Program Activities
Copyright
17
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.15 The company actively promotes the use of Layered Audit Referenced industry Layered
OEM LPA records Yes = 5, No = 0
Program Activities Procedures. Process Audit procedures
3.16 An Error-Proofing checklist for design and process to include
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- manufacturing and assembly is utilized. Following launch, the assembly Referenced industry Layered
OEM LPA records Use scoring method table
Program Activities checklist for Error-Proofing effectiveness is incorporated in the Layered Process Audit procedures
Audit Process.
4.01 The organization's FMEA's identify all risks from component and
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced
OEM systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for 3.4, 4.1, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6 FMEA records Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP)
Serviceability.
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.02 The organization considers NTF's and how risk reducing activities Documentation, FMEA checklist,
OEM 3.7, 4.1, 6.6, 7.3 Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP) can be reflected in the FMEA's. information
Documents, function analysis records,
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.03 The organization considers consumer use differences, by market,
OEM 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7, 4.1, 4.5 FMA. FMEA, QFD checklist, field Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP) for global platforms for both systems and components.
benchmarking
4.04 The organization links FMEA's of the supply chain/customer to
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced
OEM their own FMEA's to increase risk detection and buy-in of reduction 3.4, 4.1, 6.2, 6.7 Organization/supplier FMEA linked Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP)
activities.
4.05 The organization correlates DVP&R results with actual field
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced DVPR results correlated to field and
OEM performance data including warranty investigation results to verify that 3.5, 4.1, 4.5, 5.5, 5.8 Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP) warranty investigation results
the correct failure modes are being evaluated.
4.06 The organization considers diagnostic methods and best practices to
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced Diagnostic methods such as, fault tree, fish
OEM allow for cost effective and timely root cause analysis and repair in the 4.3, 4.7, 4.8, 6.3 Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP) bone etc., used in design phase
design phase
4.07 The organization applies effective problem solving tools (reference
Problem solving tools such as AIAG ref.
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced AIAG CQI-20) to optimize: functional performance, manufacturing
OEM 3.7, Section 5 CQI-20 used to optimize operations etc. Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP) operations, shipping/handling efficiency, defect free assembly and
Documentation
effective repairs.
4.08 End-Of-Life products are captured, analyzed and compared to
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced End of Life product vs. design validation
OEM design validation conditions to understand high mileage risks and 3.5, 4.5, 5.8 Use scoring method table
Product Quality Planning (APQP) documentation
improvements.
4.09 The organization engages the supply chain with the OEM's Vehicle
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced Evidence of involvement with Vehicle Parts
OEM Parts and Service organization to allow improvements in diagnosis, 4.3, 6.2 Yes = 5, No = 0
Product Quality Planning (APQP) and Service to support improvements
repair tools and repair methods.
Organization and supply chain involved in
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.10 The organization allows supply chain partners to participate in the
OEM 4.3 Vehicle Service Manual reviews. meeting Yes = 5, No = 0
Product Quality Planning (APQP) review and validation of the Vehicle Service Manual.
minutes etc.
4.11 The organization provides training to partners to improve parts Documented evidence of training supply
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced
OEM handling, component assembly processes, issue diagnosis and problem 4.3, 4.7 chain partners in product handling, assembly Yes = 5, No = 0
Product Quality Planning (APQP)
resolution. and problem issue resolution
5.01 The organization communicates implemented corrective action
5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Records of clean point date communication
OEM clean point dates and applies increased warranty monitoring at the time 1.6, 5.4, 6.1, 6.5 Use scoring method table
Production contained in 8D's, 5Whys etc.
of new platform launch or change implementation.
5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 5.02The organization and partner(s) reach agreement for implementation
OEM 6.1 Records, audits Use scoring method table
Production of counter measures.
5.03 The organization expands investigations beyond the component
5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Investigation records show system
OEM level to include system interactions, assembly, mating component, and 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 6.6 Use scoring method table
Production interaction/mating product reviews
handling/logistics conditions.
5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 5.04 Applicable repair procedures and TSB's are generated to support
OEM 5.5, 6.3 Procedure and record of TSB reviews Use scoring method table
Production improvement in diagnostic and repair activities.
5.05 The organization makes available to its supply chain partners access
5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Dealer vehicle procedure and specific
OEM to dealership investigations, problem resolution, and consumer concerns Section 2 Use scoring method table
Production investigative plans on record
data.
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.01 Warranty agreements for directed source components are defined at Warranty agreement dates match source
OEM 1.8, 3.8, 6.7 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions the time of sourcing. dates
Copyright
18
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.03 This agreement(s) includes who is responsible (ownership) for each Agreements indicate
OEM 6.1, 6.7 Yes = 5, No = 0
Actions/Solutions improvement step and timing (reference question #2). ownership/responsibilities
6.04 The organization and partner organization's FMEA's, Control Plans
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events:
OEM and other quality/engineering documents are updated after a warranty 6.2, 6.7 Engineering documents, quality documents Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions
concern is addressed.
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.05 Cross-functional teams are engaged in the updating of FMEA's, Records show CROSS FUNCTIONAL
OEM 6.2, 6.7 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents. TEAM involvement
6.06 Corrective actions are shared with partner organization;
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Records show corrective action sharing with
OEM confirmation exists that their FMEA's test and/or measurement methods 3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions supply chain partners
are updated.
6.07 Warranty lessons learned are applied to all product lines, systems, Warranty lessons learned database/records
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events:
OEM processes, materials, etc. where applicable, to leverage improvement 3.9, 6.7, 6.8 show application across systems and Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions
across a broader base of the business (i.e., Yokoten, Poka-Yoke, etc.). product lines
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.10 The organization participates in preparation of training materials Records of training material involvement
OEM 4.8, 6.3 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions and service personnel where allowed. NOTE: Not Applicable to OEM. with service personnel where allowed
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.11 The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the
OEM 6.6 Records of NTF reviews Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions system environment.
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.12 The organization uses a defined process for NTF root cause 6.6, Fig 9 (Ref. AIAG/OESA Records of Decision tree use for NTF root
OEM Yes = 5, No = 0
Actions/Solutions investigation. NTF Decision Tree) cause investigation
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.13 The organization applies continual improvement practices to NTF 6.6, Fig 9 (Ref. AIAG/OESA Decision tree expanded to show new and/or
OEM Yes = 5, No = 0
Actions/Solutions process. NTF Decision Tree) specific NTF paths
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working Verification of corrective actions by metric
OEM 6.5, 7.2 Use scoring method table
Actions/Solutions and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics. tracking
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 7.01 The organization establishes yearly improvement targets and places
OEM 1.6, 7.1 Annual targets on metric Yes = 5, No = 0
Process higher priority on issues with high incident rates (vs. cost).
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 7.02 The organization has an established warranty lessons learned
OEM 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 7.3 Warranty Lessons Learned database Yes = 5, No = 0
Process database.
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the Lessons Learned review records during
OEM 7.03 Lessons learned are applied for future programs. 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 7.1 Use scoring method table
Process program reviews
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 7.04 The organization manages warranty improvement projects with Supply chain partner warranty improvement
OEM 6.1, 7.1 Use scoring method table
Process supply chain partner organizations. project records
8.01 The organization has a senior management-level champion who
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment owns and defines the warranty management system with trained support Section 1 Organization chart information Yes = 5, No = 0
identified.
8.02 The organization has defined warranty champion(s) responsible for
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 1.1 Job description Yes = 5, No = 0
coordinating resolution of warranty issues.
8.03 Warranty training is provided to all cross functional staff and supply
chain partners, including all warranty personnel. There is emphasis on Training records
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment Section 1, 3.9, 3.10 Use scoring method table
the objective to satisfy the consumer through risk reduction activities Internal metrics
that minimize incident rates.
8.04 The organization sets warranty metric targets annually; targets are
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 1.6, 7.1 Annual metrics set Yes = 5, No = 0
reviewed by senior management.
8.05 Customer warranty database access is established and data is shared Evidence of database access, passwords etc.
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 1.3, Section 3, 5.2, 5.3 Use scoring method table
within the organization. Show me
8.06 Active projects to reduce the incident rates of NTF's involve
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 7.1 Incident rate tracking tied to action plan Use scoring method table
partners/suppliers.
8.07 Associates are involved with using the warranty data to perform
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 1.7, 1.8, 5.2 Warranty data deployed to all affecting areas Use scoring method table
their job functions.
8.08 Warranty-related Lessons Learned database is populated with Warranty records/lessons learned database
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment Section 3, 6.8, 7.3 Use scoring method table
appropriate Look-Across activities. shows look across references and actions
Copyright
19
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Responsible Area Section Circumstance or Condition Applicable Manual Section Recommended Evidence / Indicator Evidence / Indicator Provided Scoring Guideline Score 0 - 5
8.09 The organization applies and updates its defined NTF process as NTF defined process being applied and
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 6.6, 7.3 Use scoring method table
necessary. updated
8.10 There is increased effort to analyze End-Of-Life products to
validate DVP, FMEA's, durability performance and OEM reliability End of life product analysis records, and
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment requirements. This data is applied to further improve quality 3.5, 4.5, 5.8 records of updated Lessons Learned Use scoring method table
/performance to meet consumer satisfaction targets and fed forward into database
Lessons Learned database for new program review.
8.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision Warranty risk reviews in contract / program
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 1.8, 3.8 Yes = 5, No = 0
making process of bidding or accepting a program. reviews - records
8.12 Problem solving tools are applied and standardized to assist root Evidence of problem solving tool use,
OEM 8. Implementation Assessment 1.7, Section 5 Use scoring method table
cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary. fishbones, decision trees etc.
OEM 9. Effectiveness Assessment 9.01 Incident rates meet improvement targets. 1.6, 7.1 Trend charts Yes = 5, No = 0
9.02 The organization meets/exceeds warranty metric targets set by
OEM 9. Effectiveness Assessment 1.6, 7.1 Charts Yes = 5, No = 0
organization/customer.
9.03 Regular data updates have been is made available to the Reporting of warranty data, lessons learned
OEM 9. Effectiveness Assessment 1.6, 7.3 Yes = 5, No = 0
organization. data base
OEM 9. Effectiveness Assessment 9.06 Does the organization measure the NTF ratio to total claims? 1.7 Organization measures NTF vs. total claims Yes = 5, No = 0
9.07 NTF resolution performance (e.g., ratio of NTF to total parts, time NTF resolution - number of open items is
OEM 9. Effectiveness Assessment 1.6, 7.1 Use scoring method table
to resolve, etc.) is improving. decreasing
Copyright
20
© AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Organization Supplier
21
Copyright
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Copyright
22
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.13 The organization focuses on incident rate reduction over cost
0 Establishing the Baseline recovery as a priority, working collaboratively with partners to achieve 0.00
improvements.
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.14 The organization is accessing and utilizing available customer
0 Establishing the Baseline warranty data systems. 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.15 The organization is proactively receiving and analyzing warranty
0 Establishing the Baseline field returns sent by the OEM or Supply Chain Partners and results are 0.00
shared.
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.16 The organization encourages activities that drive early problem
0 Establishing the Baseline detection and identification. 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.17 The organization shares warranty data with supply chain partners.
0 Establishing the Baseline 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.18 The organization provides adequate training to those involved with
Establishing the Baseline warranty data analysis, root cause problem solving including field return
0 analysis, validation methods and adjoining systems training. 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.19 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept
0 Establishing the Baseline ownership for warranty risk reducing actions. 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.20 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer
0 Establishing the Baseline satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the 0.00
root cause is determined and eliminated.
Copyright
23
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.02 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related
0 Program Activities risks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates 0.00
data, scorecards, etc.
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.03 NHTSA and other government databases are consistently reviewed
0 Program Activities for recalls and campaign information to help define risks. 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.04 TSB's are obtained, when available, and made accessible for review
0 Program Activities and improvement input. 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.05 Past T-G-W, T-G-R and corrective actions (like 8Ds, 5 Whys and
Program Activities other problem solving activity) are routinely reviewed for potential
0 improvements to reduce incident rate risk by the organization. 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.06 Does the organization utilize a procedure prior to launching a new
Program Activities production line; which entails a thorough review of all corrective
0 actions, poke yoke, and error proofing implementations on previous lines 0.00
regardless of customer is undertaken to identify potential issues on the
new line.
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.07 The organization has established Lessons' Learned database that
0 Program Activities captures information such as reasons for FMEA and Control Plan 0.00
changes, manufacturing or assembly improvements etc.
Copyright
24
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.10 The organization reviews available high mileage data to verify or
0 Program Activities identify potential reliability and durability performance issues. 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.11 Design for Six Sigma opportunities are identified and/or
0 Program Activities implemented to reduce warranty incident risks. 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.12 The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks
0 Program Activities and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements. 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.13 The organization has sufficient warranty process training for supply
0 Program Activities chain partners. 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.14 Is the organization actively involved in Layered Audit Procedures?
0 Program Activities 0.00
2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.15 An Error Proofing checklist for design and process to include
Program Activities manufacturing and assembly is utilized. Following launch, the assembly
0 checklist for Error Proofing effectiveness is incorporated in the Layered 0.00
Audit Process.
3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.01 The organization considers consumer use differences, by market,
0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) for global platforms for both systems and components. 0.00
3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.02 End-Of-Life products are captured, analyzed and compared to
0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) design validation conditions to understand high mileage risks and 0.00
improvements.
3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.03 The organization's FMEA's identify all risks from component and
0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for 0.00
Serviceability.
3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.04 The organization considers NTF's and how risk reducing activities
0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) can be reflected in the FMEA's. 0.00
Copyright
25
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Copyright
26
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 4.10 The organization prepares an investigative plan when reviewing
0 Production dealer vehicles. 0.00
4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 4.11 The organization has defined process to notify the customer of
0 Production potential suspect or nonconforming parts (service parts and supply 0.00
chain).
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.01 Warranty agreements are clearly defined at the time of sourcing for
0 Actions/Solutions directed source components. 0.00
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.02 The organization establishes agreements and reviews
Actions/Solutions issues/corrective actions with partner organizations for improvements in
0 design, specifications, logistics, handling, service procedures and other 0.00
areas to reduce the potential for warranty events.
Copyright
27
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.08 The organization has a formal process(es) for obtaining, reviewing
0 Actions/Solutions and updating OEM: TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, call 0.00
center procedures and safety recall notifications.
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.09 The organization has a defined Design for Service process.
0 Actions/Solutions 0.00
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.10 The organization participates in preparation of training materials
0 Actions/Solutions and service personnel where allowed. 0.00
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.11 The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the
0 Actions/Solutions system environment. 0.00
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.12 The organization uses a defined process for NTF root cause
0 Actions/Solutions investigation. 0.00
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.13 The organization applies continual improvement practices to NTF
0 Actions/Solutions process. 0.00
5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 5.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working
0 Actions/Solutions and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics. 0.00
Copyright
28
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.02 The organization monitors social media to identify consumer
0 Process concerns as an early warning. 0.00
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.03 The organization follows up with dealer technicians for additional
0 Process claim information where permitted. 0.00
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.04 Warranty data is pareto charted to identify potential improvement
0 Process targets. 0.00
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.05 The organization establishes yearly improvement targets and places
0 Process higher priority on issues with high incident rates (vs. cost). 0.00
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.06 The organization implements continuous improvement activities
0 Process which meet or exceed improvement targets. 0.00
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.07 The organization periodically establishes agreed upon warranty
0 Process improvement projects with partner organizations. 0.00
6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.08 Lessons learned are applied to future programs.
0 Process 0.00
7. Implementation Assessment I.01 The organization has a senior management-level champion who
0 owns and defines the warranty management system with trained support 0.00
identified.
7. Implementation Assessment I.02 The organization has defined warranty champion(s) responsible for
0 coordinating resolution of warranty issues. 0.00
7. Implementation Assessment I.03 Warranty training is provided to all cross functional staff and supply
chain partners, including all warranty personnel. There is emphasis on
0 the objective to satisfy the consumer through risk reduction activities 0.00
that minimize incident rates.
7. Implementation Assessment I.04 The organization sets warranty metric targets annually; targets are
0 reviewed by senior management. 0.00
7. Implementation Assessment I.05 Customer warranty database access is established and data is shared
0 within the organization. 0.00
Copyright
29
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
7. Implementation Assessment I.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision
0 making process of bidding or accepting a program. 0.00
7. Implementation Assessment I.12 Problem solving tools are applied and standardized to assist root
0 cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary. 0.00
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty E.01 Incident rates meet improvement targets.
0 Management Program 0.00
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty E.02 The organization meets/exceeds warranty metric targets set by
0 Management Program organization/customer. 0.00
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty E.03 Regular data updates have been made available to the organization.
0 Management Program 0.00
8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty E.04 There is increased evidence of cross function engagements with
0 Management Program partners/suppliers with the problem solving of warranty concerns. 0.00
Copyright
30
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Copyright
31
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.15 The organization focuses on incident rate reduction over cost
0 Establishing the Baseline recovery as a priority, working collaboratively with partners to achieve 0.00
improvements.
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.16 The organization encourages activities that drive early problem
0 Establishing the Baseline detection and identification. 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.17 The organization provides adequate training to those involved with
Establishing the Baseline warranty data analysis, root cause problem solving including field return
0 analysis, validation methods and adjoining systems training. 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.18 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept
0 Establishing the Baseline ownership for warranty risk reducing actions. 0.00
1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 1.19 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer
0 Establishing the Baseline satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the 0.00
root cause is determined and eliminated.
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.01 The consumer's concern is thoroughly and accurately captured as a
0 verbatim. 0.00
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.02 "CCNDs" are captured and explanations are documented for
0 potential future review. 0.00
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.03 The repair order is completely and accurately filled out by the
0 Service Manager/Advisor. 0.00
Copyright
32
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.07 Parts properly tagged for identification and stored for possible
0 return per the OEM's procedure. 0.00
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.08 When requested by the OEM, parts are sent to the appropriate
0 return center with correct identification and claim data. 0.00
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.09 Consideration is given to having the OEM and/or supplier
0 participate in the diagnosis and repair of vehicles at dealerships or fleet 0.00
centers.
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.10 The OE organization has a formal procedure for creating / updating
TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, owner's manuals, and call
0 center service procedures which include where applicable supplier 0.00
input / review of the material and these materials are made accessible to
supply chain partners.
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.11 The supply chain has an opportunity to participate in the
0 development and review of the TSBs, service manuals, diagnostic 0.00
processes, and call center procedures.
2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.12 Components from early launch claims, preferably 100%, are
0 returned for investigation. 0.00
Copyright
33
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.02 Past T-G-W, T-G-R and corrective actions (like 8Ds, 5 Whys and
Program Activities other problem solving activity) are routinely reviewed for potential
0 improvements to reduce incident rate risk by the organization. 0.00
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.03 Does the organization utilize a procedure prior to launching a new
Program Activities production line; which entails a thorough review of all corrective
0 actions, poke yoke, and error proofing implementations on previous lines 0.00
is undertaken to identify potential issues on the new model.
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.04 The organization has established Lessons' Learned database that
0 Program Activities captures information such as reasons for FMEA and Control Plan 0.00
changes, manufacturing or assembly improvements etc.
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.05 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related
0 Program Activities risks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates 0.00
data, scorecards, etc.
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.06 The organization routinely reviews internal quality records and
0 Program Activities supply chain quality data for potential warranty risks. 0.00
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.07 Past FMEA's are reviewed by the organization for potential risks
0 Program Activities and "needs improvement" identification, including development needs. 0.00
Copyright
34
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.12 The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks
0 Program Activities and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements. 0.00
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.13 The organization has sufficient warranty process training for supply
0 Program Activities chain partners. 0.00
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.14 TSB's are made accessible for review and improvement input.
0 Program Activities 0.00
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.15 The company actively promotes the use of Layered Audit
0 Program Activities Procedures. 0.00
3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.16 An Error-Proofing checklist for design and process to include
Program Activities manufacturing and assembly is utilized. Following launch, the assembly
0 checklist for Error-Proofing effectiveness is incorporated in the Layered 0.00
Audit Process.
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.01 The organization's FMEA's identify all risks from component and
0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for 0.00
Serviceability.
4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.02 The organization considers NTF's and how risk reducing activities
0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) can be reflected in the FMEA's. 0.00
Copyright
35
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Copyright
36
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.03 This agreement(s) includes who is responsible (ownership) for each
0 Actions/Solutions improvement step and timing (reference question #2). 0.00
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.04 The organization and partner organization's FMEA's, Control Plans
0 Actions/Solutions and other quality/engineering documents are updated after a warranty 0.00
concern is addressed.
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.05 Cross-functional teams are engaged in the updating of FMEA's,
0 Actions/Solutions Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents. 0.00
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.06 Corrective actions are shared with partner organization;
0 Actions/Solutions confirmation exists that their FMEA's test and/or measurement methods 0.00
are updated.
Copyright
37
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.08 The organization has a formal process(es) for obtaining, reviewing
0 Actions/Solutions and updating OEM: TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, call 0.00
center procedures and safety recall notifications.
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.09 The organization has a defined Design for Service process.
0 Actions/Solutions 0.00
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.10 The organization participates in preparation of training materials
0 Actions/Solutions and service personnel where allowed. NOTE: Not Applicable to OEM. 0.00
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.11 The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the
0 Actions/Solutions system environment. 0.00
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.12 The organization uses a defined process for NTF root cause
0 Actions/Solutions investigation. 0.00
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.13 The organization applies continual improvement practices to NTF
0 Actions/Solutions process. 0.00
6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 6.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working
0 Actions/Solutions and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics. 0.00
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 7.01 The organization establishes yearly improvement targets and places
0 Process higher priority on issues with high incident rates (vs. cost). 0.00
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 7.02 The organization has an established warranty lessons learned
0 Process database. 0.00
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 7.03 Lessons learned are applied for future programs.
0 Process 0.00
7. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 7.04 The organization manages warranty improvement projects with
0 Process supply chain partner organizations. 0.00
Copyright
38
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
8. Implementation Assessment 8.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision
0 making process of bidding or accepting a program. 0.00
8. Implementation Assessment 8.12 Problem solving tools are applied and standardized to assist root
0 cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary. 0.00
Copyright
39
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)
CQI-14
Automotive Warranty Management Assessment
Version 3, Issued 4/2015
Copyright
40
© 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)