CQI-14 Assessment Tool Final

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

Establishing the Baseline: Introduction to Warranty Number Circumstance or Condition The organization clearly defines ownership of the warranty P1 management process. P2

The organization defines a warranty strategy that drives behaviors and practices (e.g. annual improvement projects, APQP projects) which reduce warranty risk throughout the company.

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section 1.2

1.2, 1.8, 3.8, 7.3

Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities (OEM Only) Number Circumstance or Condition

P3

The consumer's concern is thoroughly and accurately captured as a verbatim and after repair, the documentation is written up completely with accurate codes and diagnostic information, test data and replacement parts listed, including any digital media to support the repair.

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section

2.2, 2.7

Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre-Program Activities Number

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section

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 P4

The organization has established Lessons' Learned database that captures information such as reasons for FMEA and Control Plan changes, manufacturing or assembly improvements etc.

P5

The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements.

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

3.1, 4.1

3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

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) Circumstance or Condition

Number P6

The organization's FMEA's identify risks from component and systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for Serviceability.

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section 3.4, 4.1, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6

Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production Circumstance or Condition

Number

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section

P7

The organization currently makes use of available warranty data systems and parts return resources which enables timely/regular communication to the warranty stakeholders.

1.3 , 1.4 , 1.5 , 5.1 , 5.2 , 6.1

P8

Organizations expand investigations beyond the component level to include system interactions, assembly, mating component, and handling/logistics conditions.

5.2 , 5.3 , 5.4 , 6.6

Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions Number

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section

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

P9

The organization establishes agreements and reviews issues and corrective actions with partner organizations for improvements in design, specifications, logistics, handling, service procedures and other areas to reduce the potential for warranty events.

P10

The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the system environment.

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

6.1, 6.7

6.6

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 Number

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section

P11

The organization establishes yearly improvement targets and places higher priority on issues with high incident rates (vs. cost).

1.6, 7.1

Implementation Assessment Number

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section

P12

The organization has an overall warranty management champion and defined, trained support identified.

Section 1

P13

There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision making process of bidding or accepting a program.

1.8, 3.8

Effectiveness Assessment Circumstance or Condition

Number P14

Customer concerns and warranty performance are improving by showing a measurable difference in warranty events.

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Applicable CQI-14 Manual Section 1.6, 7.1

5

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

alysis of a warranty management process

Finding/Observation

Scoring Guideline

Score 0-5

Yes = 5, No = 0

Yes = 5, No = 0

Score 0-5

Finding/Observation

Yes = 5, No = 0

Finding/Observation

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Score 0-5

6

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

alysis of a warranty management process 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

alysis of a warranty management process

Score 0-5

Finding/Observation Yes = 5, No = 0

Score 0-5

Finding/Observation Yes = 5, No = 0

Yes = 5, No = 0

Finding/Observation

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Score 0-5

8

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

alysis of a warranty management process

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

alysis of a warranty management process

Score 0-5

Finding/Observation Yes = 5, No = 0

Score 0-5

Finding/Observation Yes = 5, No = 0

Yes = 5, No = 0

Score 0-5

Finding/Observation Yes = 5, No = 0

Pre-Assessment Total: Pre-Assessment Score: Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

0.00 0.00

10

CQI-14

Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Organization

Responsible Area

Section

Circumstance or Condition

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.01 The organization has a defined warranty management process with defined ownership.

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.02 There is upper management oversite of warranty management activities.

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.03 Warranty management is part of the organization's business plan.

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.04 Roles and responsibilities for warranty management processes within the organization are clearly documented and understood.

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

Supplier

Applicable Manual Section

Recommended Evidence / Indicator

Evidence / Indicator Provided

Scoring Guideline

Organization chart information / structure, Procedures

Yes = 5, No = 0

Section 1, 7.3

Records of management reviews with teams

Yes = 5, No = 0

Section 1

Business plan shows warranty identified as a target area

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.2, 5.2

Warranty management roles and responsibilities are defined in job descriptions/procedure

Use scoring method table

1.05 The organization recognizes the consumer's expectations for warranty performance by establishing warranty management policy that incorporates the OEM's and Supply Chain's expectations, processes and targeted improvements.

1.2

Warranty policy, procedures, targets/objectives/metrics/ goals

Yes = 5, No = 0

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.06 The organization defines a warranty strategy that drives behaviors and practices (e.g. annual improvement projects, APQP projects) which reduce warranty risk throughout the company.

1.2, 1.8, 3.8, 7.3

Warranty plan, procedures, metrics, lessons learned database, documentation information shows reduction in start up / CPV/IPTV/PPM

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.07 The organization holds regularly scheduled reviews of: warranty management performance (warranty trend charts), and on-going assessment of the warranty management culture.

1.2

Comparison: Trend Charts

Use scoring method table

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.08 Do the meetings include a review of customer warranty metrics.

1.2, 1.6

Meeting minutes reflect review of customer warranty data

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.09 The organization regularly carries out on-going assessment of its warranty management culture and identifies opportunities for improvement.

1.2, 7.3

Meeting minutes, reviews, assessments, etc.

Use scoring method table

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.10 The organization shares warranty performance metrics with employees, customers and supply chain as an indication of the commitment to reduce incident rates.

Records of employee meetings demonstrating sharing of warranty performance

Use scoring method table

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.11 The organization's management provides a supportive environment, and resources, at all levels, for employees to be Consumer-Centric focused to achieve reductions in warranty incident rates.

Organization chart information

Use scoring method table

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.12 There is a mechanism for program risks to be assessed by the organization when reviewing, (a) Potential programs;(b) Terms and Conditions;(c) Applicable warranty agreements;(d) Program deliverables;(e) Expectations and requirements communicated to program partners;(f) Legal, regulatory and/or legislative requirements.

1.8, 3.8

Metric reviews

Use scoring method table

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.13 The organization focuses on incident rate reduction over cost recovery as a priority, working collaboratively with partners to achieve improvements.

Forward, Introduction, 1.2

Review of goals

Use scoring method table

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.14 The organization is accessing and utilizing available customer warranty data systems.

Procedures/passwords and visible access to customer warranty data systems/demonstrated

Use scoring method table

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.15 The organization is proactively receiving and analyzing warranty field returns sent by the OEM or Supply Chain Partners and results are shared.

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.16 The organization encourages activities that drive early problem detection and identification.

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.17 The organization shares warranty data with supply chain partners.

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.18 The organization provides adequate training to those involved with warranty data analysis, root cause problem solving including field return analysis, validation methods and adjoining systems training.

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Section 1

1.2, 1.6, 3.9, 6.1

1.2

1.3, 5.2, 5.3

1.4, 1.6, 3.9, 5.1 , 5.2, 5.5, 5.7, Field returned product review 5.8, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7 reports/procedure 1.2, 6.5, 7.2 1.6, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2

1.1, 1.2, 3.10

Score 0 - 5

Use scoring method table

Procedures, documentation

Use scoring method table

Evidence of warranty data sharing with suppliers

Use scoring method table

Training records

Use scoring method table

11

CQI-14

Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Organization

Responsible Area

Section

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable Manual Section

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.19 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept ownership for warranty risk reducing actions.

1.2

Supplier

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.20 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the root cause is determined and eliminated.

1.2, 6.6

Supplier

2.01 Previous and current warranty 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 organization 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Preassembly plant issues;(d) Past serviceability issues;(e) Organization's 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.

Supplier

2.02 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Prerisks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates Program Activities data, scorecards, etc.

Supplier Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in PreProgram Activities 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in PreProgram Activities

2.03 NHTSA and other government databases are consistently reviewed for recalls and campaign information to help define risks. 2.04 TSB's are obtained, when available, and made accessible for review and improvement input.

Recommended Evidence / Indicator

Evidence / Indicator Provided

Scoring Guideline

LPA records, maintenance records information shared with employees

Use scoring method table

NTF records, NTF Metric, Case studies

Use scoring method table

Metrics

Use scoring method table

3.2

Product development shows records of identified surrogate and review of issues/etc. and changes effected to design/process

Use scoring method table

3.6

NHTSA information review records

Yes = 5, No = 0

Records of TSB review inputs

Use scoring method table

1.3, 1.6, Section 3

3.10, 4.8, 5.6, 6.3

Supplier

2.05 Past T-G-W, T-G-R and corrective actions (like 8Ds, 5 Whys and 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Preother problem solving activity) are routinely reviewed for potential Program Activities improvements to reduce incident rate risk by the organization.

3.1, 3.3, 4,4

Process & Design FMEA evidence, meeting records/process line review records

Use scoring method table

Supplier

2.06 Does the organization utilize a procedure prior to launching a new production line; which entails a thorough review of all corrective 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Preactions, poke yoke, and error proofing implementations on previous lines Program Activities regardless of customer is undertaken to identify potential issues on the new line.

3.2, 3.3, 3.4

Procedure

Use scoring method table

Supplier

2.07 The organization has established Lessons' Learned database that 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Precaptures information such as reasons for FMEA and Control Plan Program Activities changes, manufacturing or assembly improvements etc.

3.1, 4.1

Evidence of Lessons Learned database

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.08 The organization routinely reviews internal quality records and Program Activities supply chain quality data for potential warranty risks.

1.6, 3.3, 5.2, 5.3

Reviews of project records

Use scoring method table

Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.09 Past FMEA's are reviewed by the organization for potential risks Program Activities and "needs improvement" identification, including development needs.

3.4, 4.1, 6.2

Records of FMEA reviews and improvements

Use scoring method table

Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.10 The organization reviews available high mileage data to verify or Program Activities identify potential reliability and durability performance issues.

3.5, 4.5, 5.8

High mileage data review records

Use scoring method table

Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.11 Design for Six Sigma opportunities are identified and/or Program Activities implemented to reduce warranty incident risks.

Program reviews include DFSS review records

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.12 The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks Program Activities and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements.

3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

Records show supply chain improvements

Use scoring method table

Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.13 The organization has sufficient warranty process training for supply Program Activities chain partners.

3.9, 3.10

Training records

Use scoring method table

Supplier

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre2.14 Is the organization actively involved in Layered Audit Procedures? Program Activities

Referenced industry Layered Process Audit procedures

LPA records

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

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 Program Activities checklist for Error Proofing effectiveness is incorporated in the Layered Audit Process.

Referenced industry Layered Process Audit procedures

LPA records

Use scoring method table

Supplier

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.01 The organization considers consumer use differences, by market, Product Quality Planning (APQP) for global platforms for both systems and components.

Documents, function analysis records, FMA. FMEA, QFD checklist, field benchmarking

Use scoring method table

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

3.7

3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7, 4.1, 4.5

Score 0 - 5

12

CQI-14

Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Organization

Responsible Area

Section

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable Manual Section

Supplier

3.02 End-Of-Life products are captured, analyzed and compared to 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced design validation conditions to understand high mileage risks and Product Quality Planning (APQP) improvements.

Supplier

3.03 The organization's FMEA's identify all risks from component and 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for Product Quality Planning (APQP) Serviceability.

Supplier

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.04 The organization considers NTF's and how risk reducing activities Product Quality Planning (APQP) can be reflected in the FMEA's.

Supplier

3.05 The organization links FMEA's of the supply chain/customer to 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced their own FMEA's to increase risk detection and buy-in of reduction Product Quality Planning (APQP) activities.

Supplier

3.06 The organization correlates DVP&R results with actual field 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced performance data including warranty investigation results to verify that Product Quality Planning (APQP) the correct failure modes are being evaluated.

Supplier

3.07 The organization considers diagnostic methods and best practices to 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced allow for cost effective and timely root cause analysis and repair in the Product Quality Planning (APQP) design phase.

4.3, 4.7, 4.8, 6.3

Supplier

3.08 The organization applies effective problem solving tools (reference 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced AIAG CQI-20) to optimize: functional performance, manufacturing Product Quality Planning (APQP) operations, shipping/handling efficiency, defect free assembly and effective repairs.

3.7, Section 5

Supplier

3.09 The organization engages the supply chain with the OEM's Vehicle 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced Parts and Service organization to allow improvements in diagnosis, Product Quality Planning (APQP) repair tools and repair methods.

Supplier

Recommended Evidence / Indicator

Evidence / Indicator Provided

Scoring Guideline

End of Life product vs. design validation documentation

Use scoring method table

FMEA records

Use scoring method table

3.7, 4.1, 6.6, 7.3

Documentation, FMEA checklist, information

Use scoring method table

3.4, 4.1, 6.2, 6.7

Organization/supplier FMEA linked

Use scoring method table

3.5, 4.1, 4.5, 5.5, 5.8

DVPR results correlated to field and warranty investigation results

Use scoring method table

Diagnostic methods such as, fault tree, fish bone etc., used in design phase

Use scoring method table

Problem solving tools such as AIAG ref. CQI-20 used to optimize operations etc. Documentation

Use scoring method table

4.3, 6.2

Evidence of involvement with Vehicle Parts and Service to support improvements

Yes = 5, No = 0

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.10 The organization allows supply chain partners to participate in the Product Quality Planning (APQP) review and validation of the Vehicle Service Manual.

4.3

Organization and supply chain involved in Vehicle Service Manual reviews. meeting minutes etc.

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

3.11 The organization provides training to partners to improve parts 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced handling, component assembly processes, issue diagnosis and problem Product Quality Planning (APQP) resolution.

4.3, 4.7

Documented evidence of training supply chain partners in product handling, assembly and problem issue resolution

Use scoring method table

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.01 The organization has a process to develop knowledgeable and trained staff to facilitate warranty monitoring.

3.10, 5.2

Organization chart, training records, goals.

Use scoring method table

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.02 The organization has a documented procedure for managing and analyzing warranty returns, subsequent problem solving activities and utilization of investigation findings in future product development activities.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.03 The organization currently makes use of all available warranty data systems and parts return resources which enables timely /regular communication to the warranty stakeholders.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.04 The organization expands investigations beyond the component level to include system interactions, assembly, mating component, and handling/logistics conditions.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.05 The organization and partner(s) reach agreement for implementation of counter measures.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.06 The organization communicates implemented corrective action clean point dates and applies increased warranty monitoring at the time of new platform launch or change implementation.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.07 Applicable repair procedures and TSB's are pulled/reviewed/generated to support improvement in diagnostic and repair activities.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.08 The organization participates, when allowed, with diagnosis and repair of a vehicle at dealerships/fleet repair centers/OEM fleet service garages or other partner available vehicles.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.09 The organization has a process(es) defined to request a vehicle(s) for testing and investigative purposes from the OEM, other supply chain partners, vehicle rental companies, or employees.

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.10 The organization prepares an investigative plan when reviewing dealer vehicles.

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

3.5, 4.5, 5.8

3.4, 4.1, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6

1.4, 1.5, 1.7, 5.1, 5.5, 6.6, 6.8 Procedure, records

1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1

5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 6.6 6.1 1.6, 5.4, 6.1, 6.5

5.5, 6.3

5.7

5.7, 5.8

5.7

Score 0 - 5

Yes = 5, No = 0

Passwords and records etc. which demonstrate usage of all available data systems etc.

Use scoring method table

Investigation records show system interaction/mating product reviews

Use scoring method table

Records, audits

Use scoring method table

Records of clean point date communication contained in 8D's, 5Whys etc.

Use scoring method table

Procedure and record of TSB reviews

Use scoring method table

Records of contact and participation where allowed

Yes = 5, No = 0

Procedure and process for requesting test vehicles

Yes = 5, No = 0

Dealer vehicle procedure and specific investigative plans on record

Use scoring method table

13

CQI-14

Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Organization

Responsible Area

Section

Circumstance or Condition

Supplier

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4.11 The organization has defined process to notify the customer of potential suspect or nonconforming parts (service parts and supply chain).

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.01 Warranty agreements are clearly defined at the time of sourcing for directed source components.

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

Supplier

Applicable Manual Section

Recommended Evidence / Indicator

Evidence / Indicator Provided

Scoring Guideline

Customer notification document (i.e., containment records)

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.8, 3.8, 6.7

Warranty agreement dates match source dates

Use scoring method table

5.02 The organization establishes agreements and reviews issues/corrective actions with partner organizations for improvements in design, specifications, logistics, handling, service procedures and other areas to reduce the potential for warranty events.

6.1, 6.7

Records of agreements and reviews with supply partners

Use scoring method table

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.03 This agreement(s) includes who is responsible (ownership) for each improvement step and timing (reference question #2).

6.1, 6.7

Agreements indicate ownership/responsibilities

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.04 The organization and partner organization's FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents are updated after a warranty concern is addressed.

6.2, 6.7

Engineering documents, quality documents

Use scoring method table

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.05 Cross-functional teams are engaged in the updating of FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents.

6.2, 6.7

Records show CROSS FUNCTIONAL TEAM involvement

Use scoring method table

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.06 Corrective actions are shared with partner organization; confirmation exists that their FMEA's test and/or measurement methods are updated.

3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

Records show corrective action sharing with supply chain partners

Use scoring method table

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.07 Warranty lessons learned are applied to all product lines, systems, processes, materials, etc. where applicable, to leverage improvement across a broader base of the business (i.e., Yokoten, Poka-Yoke, etc.).

3.9, 6.7, 6.8

Warranty lessons learned database/records show application across systems and product lines

Use scoring method table

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.08 The organization has a formal process(es) for obtaining, reviewing and updating OEM: TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, call center procedures and safety recall notifications.

6.3

Process

Yes = 5, No = 0

4.3, 6.3

Procedure

Yes = 5, No = 0

4.8, 6.3

Records of training material involvement with service personnel where allowed

Use scoring method table

Records of NTF reviews

Use scoring method table

Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions 5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions 5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions 5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions 5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.09 The organization has a defined Design for Service process. 5.10 The organization participates in preparation of training materials and service personnel where allowed. 5.11 The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the system environment. 5.12 The organization uses a defined process for NTF root cause investigation. 5.13 The organization applies continual improvement practices to NTF process.

Supplier

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

Supplier

6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.01 The organization tracks the available warranty data and understands Process the warranty trends including detection of emerging field issues.

Supplier

6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.02 The organization monitors social media to identify consumer Process concerns as an early warning.

Supplier

6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.03 The organization follows up with dealer technicians for additional Process claim information where permitted.

Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

6. Continuous Improvement: Process 6. Continuous Improvement: Process 6. Continuous Improvement: Process 6. Continuous Improvement: Process 6. Continuous Improvement: Process

5.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics.

Institutionalize the 6.04 Warranty data is pareto charted to identify potential improvement targets. Institutionalize the 6.05 The organization establishes yearly improvement targets and places higher priority on issues with high incident rates (vs. cost). Institutionalize the 6.06 The organization implements continuous improvement activities which meet or exceed improvement targets. Institutionalize the 6.07 The organization periodically establishes agreed upon warranty improvement projects with partner organizations. Institutionalize the 6.08 Lessons learned are applied to future programs.

7. Implementation Assessment

I.01 The organization has a senior management-level champion who owns and defines the warranty management system with trained support identified.

5.9

6.6 6.6, Fig 9 (Ref. AIAG/OESA NTF Decision Tree) 6.6, Fig 9 (Ref. AIAG/OESA NTF Decision Tree)

Records of Decision tree use for NTF root cause investigation Decision tree expanded to show new and/or specific NTF paths

6.5, 7.2

Verification of corrective actions by metric tracking

Use scoring method table

1.3, 1.6, 5.2, 6.5, 7.1, 7.2

Trend charts, Pareto charts, specific issue lists, part return analysis results

Use scoring method table

Documented process

Yes = 5, No = 0

Dealer contact records

Use scoring method table

Pareto charts

Yes = 5, No = 0

Annual targets on metric

Yes = 5, No = 0

5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 6.5, 7.2 5.5, 5.6, 7.2 7.1 1.6, 7.1 1.6, 7.1, 7.3 6.1, 7.1 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 7.1 Section 1

Improvement targets are supported with action plans - records Supply chain partner warranty improvement project records Lessons Learned review records during program reviews Organization chart information

Score 0 - 5

Yes = 5, No = 0 Yes = 5, No = 0

Use scoring method table Use scoring method table Use scoring method table Yes = 5, No = 0

14

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

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

I.02 The organization has defined warranty champion(s) responsible for coordinating resolution of warranty issues.

1.1

Job description

Yes = 5, No = 0

Supplier

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 the objective to satisfy the consumer through risk reduction activities that minimize incident rates.

Section 1, 3.9, 3.10

Training records Internal metrics

Use scoring method table

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

Annual metrics set

Yes = 5, No = 0

Evidence of database access, passwords etc. Show me

Use scoring method table

Incident rate tracking tied to action plan

Use scoring method table

Warranty data deployed to all affecting areas

Use scoring method table

Warranty records/lessons learned database shows look across references and actions

Use scoring method table

6.6, 7.3

NTF defined process being applied and updated

Use scoring method table

3.5, 4.5, 5.8

End of life product analysis records, and records of updated Lessons Learned database

Use scoring method table

I.04 The organization sets warranty metric targets annually; targets are reviewed by senior management. I.05 Customer warranty database access is established and data is shared within the organization. I.06 Active projects to reduce the incident rates of NTF's involve partners/suppliers.

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

I.07 Associates are involved with using the warranty data to perform their job functions.

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

I.08 Warranty-related Lessons Learned database is populated with appropriate Look-Across activities.

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

I.09 The organization applies and updates its defined NTF process as necessary.

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

I.10 There is increased effort to analyze End-Of-Life products to validate DVP, FMEA's, durability performance and OEM reliability requirements. This data is applied to further improve quality /performance to meet consumer satisfaction targets and fed forward into Lessons Learned database for new program review.

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

Supplier

7. Implementation Assessment

Supplier Supplier Supplier

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program 8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program 8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program

I.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision making process of bidding or accepting a program. I.12 Problem solving tools are applied and standardized to assist root cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary.

1.8, 3.8 1.7, Section 5

Yes = 5, No = 0 Use scoring method table

1.6, 7.1

Charts

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.6, 7.3

Reporting of warranty data, lessons learned data base

Yes = 5, No = 0

Project records

Yes = 5, No = 0

Evidence of improvement in measures demonstrated by project / issue documentation

Yes = 5, No = 0

Organization measures NTF vs. total claims

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.6, 7.1

NTF resolution - number of open items is decreasing

Use scoring method table

1.2

Organization chart information / structure

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.8, 3.8

Cross Functional Team reviews of contracts, warranty terms and conditions

Use scoring method table

Warranty plan, procedures, metrics, lessons learned database, documentation information shows reduction in start up / CPV/IPTV/PPM

Yes = 5, No = 0

Warranty management metrics report

Yes = 5, No = 0

Warranty policy, procedures, targets/objectives/metrics/ goals

Yes = 5, No = 0

Field returned product review reports/procedure

Use scoring method table

E.03 Regular data updates have been made available to the organization.

E.05 Detection-to-Correction measures are improving. E.06 Does the organization measure the NTF ratio to total claims? E.07 NTF resolution performance (e.g., ratio of NTF to total parts, time to resolve, etc.) is improving. 1.01 The organization clearly defines ownership of the warranty management process. 1.02 The organization performs cross functional reviews of warranty terms & conditions including warranty agreements.

3.9, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

1.6, 7.3 1.7

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.03 The organization defines a warranty strategy that drives behaviors and practices (e.g. annual improvement projects, APQP projects) which reduce warranty risk throughout the company.

1.2, 1.8, 3.8, 7.3

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.04 The organization uses benchmark data to drive warranty reduction to enhance consumer satisfaction.

1.6, Section 3, 6.5, 7.1

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.05 The organization recognizes the consumer's expectations for warranty performance by establishing warranty management policy that incorporates the OEM's and Supply Chain's expectations, processes and targeted improvements.

1.2

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.06 The organization is proactively receiving and analyzing warranty field returns.

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Warranty risk reviews in contract / program reviews - records Evidence of problem solving tool use, fishbones, decision trees etc.

Yes = 5, No = 0

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program

OEM

Section 3, 6.8, 7.3

Trend charts

Supplier

OEM

1.7, 1.8, 5.2

1.6, 7.1

E.04 There is increased evidence of cross function engagements with partners/suppliers with the problem solving of warranty concerns.

Supplier

6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 7.1

E.02 The organization meets/exceeds warranty metric targets set by organization/customer.

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program 8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program 1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline 1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.3, Section 3, 5.2, 5.3

E.01 Incident rates meet improvement targets.

Supplier

Supplier

1.6, 7.1

1.4, 5.1 , 5.5 ,5.7,5.8

Score 0 - 5

15

CQI-14

Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Organization

Responsible Area

Section

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable Manual Section

Recommended Evidence / Indicator

1.6, 3.9, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

Evidence of supplier involvement/reviews of product returns etc.

Use scoring method table

Comparison: Trend Charts

Use scoring method table

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.07 Supply chain partners are integrated into the warranty management process.

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.08 The organization holds regularly scheduled reviews of: warranty management performance (warranty trend charts), and on-going assessment of the warranty management culture.

1.2

1.09 Do the meetings include a review of customer warranty metrics.

1.2, 1.6

1.10 The organization shares warranty data with supply chain partners.

1.6, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2

OEM OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline 1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.11 Field returned warranty parts investigation results are shared with supply chain partners.

1.6, 3.9, 5.2, 6.1, 6.2

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.12 The organization regularly carries out on-going assessment of its warranty management culture and identifies opportunities for improvement.

1.2, 7.3

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.13 The organization shares warranty performance metrics with employees, customers and supply chain as an indication of the commitment to reduce incident rates.

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.14 The organization's management provides a supportive environment, and resources, at all levels, for employees to be Consumer-Centric focused to achieve reductions in warranty incident rates.

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.15 The organization focuses on incident rate reduction over cost recovery as a priority, working collaboratively with partners to achieve improvements.

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.16 The organization encourages activities that drive early problem detection and identification.

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

OEM

Meeting minutes reflect review of customer warranty data Evidence of warranty data sharing with suppliers

Evidence / Indicator Provided

Scoring Guideline

Yes = 5, No = 0 Use scoring method table

Evidence that product/review reports are shared with customer/supply chain

Use scoring method table

Meeting minutes, reviews, assessments, etc.

Use scoring method table

Records of employee meetings demonstrating sharing of warranty performance

Use scoring method table

Organization chart information

Use scoring method table

Review of goals

Use scoring method table

1.2, 6.5, 7.2

Procedures, documentation

Use scoring method table

1.17 The organization provides adequate training to those involved with warranty data analysis, root cause problem solving including field return analysis, validation methods and adjoining systems training.

1.1, 1.2, 3.10

Training records

Use scoring method table

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.18 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept ownership for warranty risk reducing actions.

1.2

LPA records, maintenance records information shared with employees

Use scoring method table

OEM

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.19 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the root cause is determined and eliminated.

1.2, 6.6

NTF records, NTF Metric, Case studies

Use scoring method table

OEM

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities

1.2, 1.6, 3.9, 6.1

1.2

Forward, Introduction, 1.2

2.01 The consumer's concern is thoroughly and accurately captured as a verbatim. 2.02 "CCNDs" are captured and explanations are documented for 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities potential future review. 2.03 The repair order is completely and accurately filled out by the 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities Service Manager/Advisor.

2.2

Record

Use scoring method table

2.3, 2.2

Record

Yes = 5, No = 0

2.4, 2.7

Record

Use scoring method table

OEM

2.04 The Technician is able to access the necessary TSBs, repair 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities procedures, hot lines and other tools to adequately diagnose and repair a vehicle.

2.6, 4.8, 5.6, 6.3

Database access demonstrated/file records

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities

2.3

Record

Use scoring method table

OEM

2.06 After repair, the documentation is written up completely with 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities accurate codes and diagnostic information, test data and replacement parts listed, including any digital media to support the repair.

2.7

Records/documentation

Use scoring method table

OEM

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities

Tagged parts/records

Use scoring method table

Record

Use scoring method table

Meeting minutes, records

Use scoring method table

OEM OEM

OEM OEM

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

2.05 The Technician documents and reproduces the consumer concern (cc) and root cause before proceeding with a repair.

2.07 Parts properly tagged for identification and stored for possible return per the OEM's procedure. 2.08 When requested by the OEM, parts are sent to the appropriate 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities return center with correct identification and claim data. 2.09 Consideration is given to having the OEM and/or supplier 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities participate in the diagnosis and repair of vehicles at dealerships or fleet centers.

2.10, 2.11 2.11, 5.1, 5.5,1.3 5.7, 5.8, 6.6

Score 0 - 5

16

CQI-14

Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Organization

Responsible Area

Section

Circumstance or Condition

Applicable Manual Section

OEM

2.10 The OE organization has a formal procedure for creating / updating TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, owner's manuals, and call 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities center service procedures which include where applicable supplier input / review of the material and these materials are made accessible to supply chain partners.

OEM

2.11 The supply chain has an opportunity to participate in the 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities development and review of the TSBs, service manuals, diagnostic processes, and call center procedures.

OEM

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities

OEM

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 Preorganization assembly plant (d) Past serviceability (e) Organization's 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.

OEM

3.02 Past T-G-W, T-G-R and corrective actions (like 8Ds, 5 Whys and 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Preother problem solving activity) are routinely reviewed for potential Program Activities improvements to reduce incident rate risk by the organization.

OEM

3.03 Does the organization utilize a procedure prior to launching a new 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- production line; which entails a thorough review of all corrective Program Activities actions, poke yoke, and error proofing implementations on previous lines is undertaken to identify potential issues on the new model.

OEM

3.04 The organization has established Lessons' Learned database that 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Precaptures information such as reasons for FMEA and Control Plan Program Activities changes, manufacturing or assembly improvements etc.

3.1, 4.1

OEM

3.05 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Prerisks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates Program Activities data, scorecards, etc.

3.2

OEM

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.06 The organization routinely reviews internal quality records and Program Activities supply chain quality data for potential warranty risks.

OEM

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.07 Past FMEA's are reviewed by the organization for potential risks Program Activities and "needs improvement" identification, including development needs.

OEM OEM OEM

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in PreProgram Activities 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in PreProgram Activities 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in PreProgram Activities

2.12 Components from early launch claims, preferably 100%, are returned for investigation.

3.08 The organization reviews available high mileage data to verify or identify potential reliability and durability performance issues. 3.09 NHTSA and other government databases are consistently reviewed for recalls and campaign information to help define risks. 3.10 Design for Six Sigma opportunities are identified and/or implemented to reduce warranty incident risks.

6.3, 6.4

Evidence / Indicator Provided

Scoring Guideline

Procedures

Use scoring method table

Records of supply chain involvement

Yes = 5, No = 0

5.1, 5.5

Record

Use scoring method table

1.3, 1.6, Section 3

Metrics

Use scoring method table

3.1, 3.3, 4,4

Process & Design FMEA evidence, meeting records/process line review records

Use scoring method table

3.2, 3.3, 3.4

Procedure

Use scoring method table

Evidence of Lessons Learned database

Yes = 5, No = 0

Product development shows records of identified surrogate and review of issues/etc. and changes effected to design/process

Use scoring method table

Reviews of project records

Use scoring method table

3.4, 4.1, 6.2

Records of FMEA reviews and improvements

Use scoring method table

3.5, 4.5, 5.8

High mileage data review records

Use scoring method table

4.8, 5.6, 6.3

1.6, 3.3, 5.2, 5.3

3.6 3.7

OEM

3.11 There is a mechanism for program risks to be assessed by the organization when reviewing the following areas: (a) Potential programs; 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre(b) Terms and Conditions;(c) Applicable warranty agreements;(d) Program Activities Program deliverables;(e) Expectations and requirements communicated to program partners;(f) Legal, regulatory and/or legislative requirements.

1.8, 3.8

OEM

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.12 The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks Program Activities and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements.

3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

OEM

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.13 The organization has sufficient warranty process training for supply Program Activities chain partners.

3.9, 3.10

OEM

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre3.14 TSB's are made accessible for review and improvement input. Program Activities

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Recommended Evidence / Indicator

3.10, 4.8, 5.6, 6.3

NHTSA information review records quarterly (minimum) Program reviews include DFSS review records

Score 0 - 5

Yes = 5, No = 0 Use scoring method table

Metric reviews

Use scoring method table

Records show supply chain improvements

Use scoring method table

Training records

Use scoring method table

Records of TSB review inputs

Use scoring method table

17

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

OEM

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.15 The company actively promotes the use of Layered Audit Program Activities Procedures.

Referenced industry Layered Process Audit procedures

LPA records

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

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 Program Activities checklist for Error-Proofing effectiveness is incorporated in the Layered Audit Process.

Referenced industry Layered Process Audit procedures

LPA records

Use scoring method table

OEM

4.01 The organization's FMEA's identify all risks from component and 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for Product Quality Planning (APQP) Serviceability.

3.4, 4.1, 4.3, 4.5, 4.6

FMEA records

Use scoring method table

OEM

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.02 The organization considers NTF's and how risk reducing activities Product Quality Planning (APQP) can be reflected in the FMEA's.

Documentation, FMEA checklist, information

Use scoring method table

OEM

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.03 The organization considers consumer use differences, by market, Product Quality Planning (APQP) for global platforms for both systems and components.

3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7, 4.1, 4.5

Documents, function analysis records, FMA. FMEA, QFD checklist, field benchmarking

Use scoring method table

OEM

4.04 The organization links FMEA's of the supply chain/customer to 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced their own FMEA's to increase risk detection and buy-in of reduction Product Quality Planning (APQP) activities.

3.4, 4.1, 6.2, 6.7

Organization/supplier FMEA linked

Use scoring method table

OEM

4.05 The organization correlates DVP&R results with actual field 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced performance data including warranty investigation results to verify that Product Quality Planning (APQP) the correct failure modes are being evaluated.

3.5, 4.1, 4.5, 5.5, 5.8

DVPR results correlated to field and warranty investigation results

Use scoring method table

OEM

4.06 The organization considers diagnostic methods and best practices to 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced allow for cost effective and timely root cause analysis and repair in the Product Quality Planning (APQP) design phase

4.3, 4.7, 4.8, 6.3

Diagnostic methods such as, fault tree, fish bone etc., used in design phase

Use scoring method table

OEM

4.07 The organization applies effective problem solving tools (reference 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced AIAG CQI-20) to optimize: functional performance, manufacturing Product Quality Planning (APQP) operations, shipping/handling efficiency, defect free assembly and effective repairs.

3.7, Section 5

Problem solving tools such as AIAG ref. CQI-20 used to optimize operations etc. Documentation

Use scoring method table

OEM

4.08 End-Of-Life products are captured, analyzed and compared to 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced design validation conditions to understand high mileage risks and Product Quality Planning (APQP) improvements.

3.5, 4.5, 5.8

End of Life product vs. design validation documentation

Use scoring method table

OEM

4.09 The organization engages the supply chain with the OEM's Vehicle 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced Parts and Service organization to allow improvements in diagnosis, Product Quality Planning (APQP) repair tools and repair methods.

4.3, 6.2

Evidence of involvement with Vehicle Parts and Service to support improvements

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.10 The organization allows supply chain partners to participate in the Product Quality Planning (APQP) review and validation of the Vehicle Service Manual.

4.3

Organization and supply chain involved in Vehicle Service Manual reviews. meeting minutes etc.

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

4.11 The organization provides training to partners to improve parts 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced handling, component assembly processes, issue diagnosis and problem Product Quality Planning (APQP) resolution.

4.3, 4.7

Documented evidence of training supply chain partners in product handling, assembly and problem issue resolution

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

5.01 The organization communicates implemented corrective action clean point dates and applies increased warranty monitoring at the time of new platform launch or change implementation.

1.6, 5.4, 6.1, 6.5

Records of clean point date communication contained in 8D's, 5Whys etc.

Use scoring method table

OEM

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

5.02The organization and partner(s) reach agreement for implementation of counter measures.

Records, audits

Use scoring method table

OEM

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

5.03 The organization expands investigations beyond the component level to include system interactions, assembly, mating component, and handling/logistics conditions.

5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 6.6

Investigation records show system interaction/mating product reviews

Use scoring method table

OEM

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

5.04 Applicable repair procedures and TSB's are generated to support improvement in diagnostic and repair activities.

5.5, 6.3

Procedure and record of TSB reviews

Use scoring method table

OEM

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

5.05 The organization makes available to its supply chain partners access to dealership investigations, problem resolution, and consumer concerns data.

Section 2

Dealer vehicle procedure and specific investigative plans on record

Use scoring method table

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.01 Warranty agreements for directed source components are defined at the time of sourcing.

1.8, 3.8, 6.7

Warranty agreement dates match source dates

Use scoring method table

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.02 The organization establishes agreements and reviews issues/corrective actions with partner organizations for improvements in design, specifications, logistics, handling, service procedures and other areas to reduce the potential for warranty events.

6.1, 6.7

Records of agreements and reviews with supply partners

Use scoring method table

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

3.7, 4.1, 6.6, 7.3

6.1

Score 0 - 5

18

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

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.03 This agreement(s) includes who is responsible (ownership) for each improvement step and timing (reference question #2).

6.1, 6.7

Agreements indicate ownership/responsibilities

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.04 The organization and partner organization's FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents are updated after a warranty concern is addressed.

6.2, 6.7

Engineering documents, quality documents

Use scoring method table

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.05 Cross-functional teams are engaged in the updating of FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents.

6.2, 6.7

Records show CROSS FUNCTIONAL TEAM involvement

Use scoring method table

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.06 Corrective actions are shared with partner organization; confirmation exists that their FMEA's test and/or measurement methods are updated.

3.9, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

Records show corrective action sharing with supply chain partners

Use scoring method table

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.07 Warranty lessons learned are applied to all product lines, systems, processes, materials, etc. where applicable, to leverage improvement across a broader base of the business (i.e., Yokoten, Poka-Yoke, etc.).

3.9, 6.7, 6.8

Warranty lessons learned database/records show application across systems and product lines

Use scoring method table

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.08 The organization has a formal process(es) for obtaining, reviewing and updating OEM: TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, call center procedures and safety recall notifications.

6.3

Process

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.09 The organization has a defined Design for Service process.

4.3, 6.3

Procedure

Yes = 5, No = 0

OEM

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.10 The organization participates in preparation of training materials and service personnel where allowed. NOTE: Not Applicable to OEM.

4.8, 6.3

Records of training material involvement with service personnel where allowed

Use scoring method table

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions 6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions 6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.11 The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the system environment. 6.12 The organization uses a defined process for NTF root cause investigation. 6.13 The organization applies continual improvement practices to NTF process.

Records of NTF reviews

Use scoring method table

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics.

OEM OEM OEM OEM OEM OEM OEM OEM

7. Continuous Improvement: Process 7. Continuous Improvement: Process 7. Continuous Improvement: Process 7. Continuous Improvement: Process

Institutionalize the 7.01 The organization establishes yearly improvement targets and places higher priority on issues with high incident rates (vs. cost). Institutionalize the 7.02 The organization has an established warranty lessons learned database. Institutionalize the 7.03 Lessons learned are applied for future programs. Institutionalize the 7.04 The organization manages warranty improvement projects with supply chain partner organizations.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.01 The organization has a senior management-level champion who owns and defines the warranty management system with trained support identified.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.02 The organization has defined warranty champion(s) responsible for coordinating resolution of warranty issues.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.03 Warranty training is provided to all cross functional staff and supply chain partners, including all warranty personnel. There is emphasis on the objective to satisfy the consumer through risk reduction activities that minimize incident rates.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.04 The organization sets warranty metric targets annually; targets are reviewed by senior management.

8. Implementation Assessment

8.05 Customer warranty database access is established and data is shared within the organization.

8. Implementation Assessment

8.06 Active projects to reduce the incident rates of NTF's involve partners/suppliers.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.07 Associates are involved with using the warranty data to perform their job functions.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.08 Warranty-related Lessons Learned database is populated with appropriate Look-Across activities.

OEM OEM

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

6.6 6.6, Fig 9 (Ref. AIAG/OESA NTF Decision Tree) 6.6, Fig 9 (Ref. AIAG/OESA NTF Decision Tree)

Records of Decision tree use for NTF root cause investigation Decision tree expanded to show new and/or specific NTF paths

6.5, 7.2

Verification of corrective actions by metric tracking

Use scoring method table

1.6, 7.1

Annual targets on metric

Yes = 5, No = 0

Warranty Lessons Learned database

Yes = 5, No = 0

3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 7.3 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 7.1 6.1, 7.1 Section 1

Lessons Learned review records during program reviews Supply chain partner warranty improvement project records

Yes = 5, No = 0 Yes = 5, No = 0

Use scoring method table Use scoring method table

Organization chart information

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.1

Job description

Yes = 5, No = 0

Section 1, 3.9, 3.10

Training records Internal metrics

Use scoring method table

Annual metrics set

Yes = 5, No = 0

Evidence of database access, passwords etc. Show me

Use scoring method table

Incident rate tracking tied to action plan

Use scoring method table

Warranty data deployed to all affecting areas

Use scoring method table

Warranty records/lessons learned database shows look across references and actions

Use scoring method table

1.6, 7.1 1.3, Section 3, 5.2, 5.3 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 7.1 1.7, 1.8, 5.2 Section 3, 6.8, 7.3

Score 0 - 5

19

CQI-14

Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Organization

Responsible Area

Section

Circumstance or Condition

8. Implementation Assessment

8.09 The organization applies and updates its defined NTF process as necessary.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.10 There is increased effort to analyze End-Of-Life products to validate DVP, FMEA's, durability performance and OEM reliability requirements. This data is applied to further improve quality /performance to meet consumer satisfaction targets and fed forward into Lessons Learned database for new program review.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

8.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision making process of bidding or accepting a program.

OEM

8.12 Problem solving tools are applied and standardized to assist root cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary. 9.01 Incident rates meet improvement targets. 9.02 The organization meets/exceeds warranty metric targets set by organization/customer.

OEM

8. Implementation Assessment

OEM

9. Effectiveness Assessment

OEM

9. Effectiveness Assessment

OEM

9. Effectiveness Assessment

9.03 Regular data updates have been is made available to the organization.

OEM

9. Effectiveness Assessment

9.04 There is increased evidence of cross function engagements with partners/suppliers with the problem solving of warranty concerns.

OEM

9. Effectiveness Assessment

9.05 Detection-to-Correction measures are improving.

OEM

9. Effectiveness Assessment

9.06 Does the organization measure the NTF ratio to total claims?

OEM

9. Effectiveness Assessment

9.07 NTF resolution performance (e.g., ratio of NTF to total parts, time to resolve, etc.) is improving.

Copyright © AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Applicable Manual Section

Recommended Evidence / Indicator

Evidence / Indicator Provided

Scoring Guideline

6.6, 7.3

NTF defined process being applied and updated

Use scoring method table

3.5, 4.5, 5.8

End of life product analysis records, and records of updated Lessons Learned database

Use scoring method table

Warranty risk reviews in contract / program reviews - records

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.8, 3.8

1.6, 7.1

Evidence of problem solving tool use, fishbones, decision trees etc. Trend charts

1.6, 7.1

Charts

Yes = 5, No = 0

1.6, 7.3

Reporting of warranty data, lessons learned data base

Yes = 5, No = 0

Project records

Yes = 5, No = 0

Evidence of improvement in measures demonstrated by project / issue documentation

Yes = 5, No = 0

Organization measures NTF vs. total claims

Yes = 5, No = 0

NTF resolution - number of open items is decreasing

Use scoring method table

1.7, Section 5

3.9, 4.1, 6.1, 6.2, 6.7

1.6, 7.3 1.7 1.6, 7.1

Score 0 - 5

Use scoring method table Yes = 5, No = 0

20

CQI-14

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015

Scoring Guide For CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Please note: For the purposes of this survey, "the organization" can mean "Company," "Division," "Department"

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Organization

Supplier

Average - Score 0 - 5

Responsible Area

Section

0

Total Result

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

0.00

0.00

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre-Program Activities

0.00

0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP)

0.00

0.00

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

0.00

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

0.00

0.00

6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the Process

0.00

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

0.00

0.00

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty Management Program

0.00

0.00

Total Result

0.00

0.00

21

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

Circumstance or Condition 1.01 The organization has a defined warranty management process with defined ownership.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.02 There is upper management oversite of warranty management activities.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.03 Warranty management is part of the organization's business plan.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.04 Roles and responsibilities for warranty management processes within the organization are clearly documented and understood.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.05 The organization recognizes the consumer's expectations for warranty performance by establishing warranty management policy that incorporates the OEM's and Supply Chain's expectations, processes and targeted improvements.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.06 The organization defines a warranty strategy that drives behaviors and practices (e.g. annual improvement projects, APQP projects) which reduce warranty risk throughout the company.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.07 The organization holds regularly scheduled reviews of: warranty management performance (warranty trend charts), and on-going assessment of the warranty management culture.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.08 Do the meetings include a review of customer warranty metrics.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.09 The organization regularly carries out on-going assessment of its warranty management culture and identifies opportunities for improvement.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.10 The organization shares warranty performance metrics with employees, customers and supply chain as an indication of the commitment to reduce incident rates.

0.00

0

0

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

1.11 The organization's management provides a supportive environment, and resources, at all levels, for employees to be Consumer-Centric focused to achieve reductions in warranty incident rates.

Score 0 - 5

Prior Score

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00

22

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline 0

Circumstance or Condition 1.12 There is a mechanism for program risks to be assessed by the organization when reviewing, (a) Potential programs;(b) Terms and Conditions;(c) Applicable warranty agreements;(d) Program deliverables;(e) Expectations and requirements communicated to program partners;(f) Legal, regulatory and/or legislative requirements.

Score 0 - 5

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.13 The organization focuses on incident rate reduction over cost recovery as a priority, working collaboratively with partners to achieve improvements.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.14 The organization is accessing and utilizing available customer warranty data systems.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.15 The organization is proactively receiving and analyzing warranty field returns sent by the OEM or Supply Chain Partners and results are shared.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.16 The organization encourages activities that drive early problem detection and identification.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.17 The organization shares warranty data with supply chain partners.

0.00

1.18 The organization provides adequate training to those involved with warranty data analysis, root cause problem solving including field return analysis, validation methods and adjoining systems training.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.19 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept ownership for warranty risk reducing actions.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.20 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the root cause is determined and eliminated.

0.00

0

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

23

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.01 Previous and current warranty is pulled for review to help Program Activities 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 organization assembly plant issues;(d) Past serviceability issues;(e) Organization's own manufacturing or assembly issues;(f) Field return investigations 0 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.

Score 0 - 5

0.00

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.02 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related risks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates 0 Program Activities data, scorecards, etc.

0.00

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 actions, poke yoke, and error proofing implementations on previous lines 0 regardless of customer is undertaken to identify potential issues on the new line.

0.00

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.07 The organization has established Lessons' Learned database that captures information such as reasons for FMEA and Control Plan 0 Program Activities changes, manufacturing or assembly improvements etc.

0.00

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

24

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.08 The organization routinely reviews internal quality records and 0 Program Activities supply chain quality data for potential warranty risks.

Score 0 - 5 0.00

2. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 2.09 Past FMEA's are reviewed by the organization for potential risks and "needs improvement" identification, including development needs. 0 Program Activities

0.00

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 and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements. 0 Program Activities

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 Audit Process.

0.00

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 design validation conditions to understand high mileage risks and 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) improvements.

0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.03 The organization's FMEA's identify all risks from component and systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) Serviceability.

0.00

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 © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

25

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.05 The organization links FMEA's of the supply chain/customer to their own FMEA's to increase risk detection and buy-in of reduction 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) activities.

Score 0 - 5 0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.06 The organization correlates DVP&R results with actual field performance data including warranty investigation results to verify that 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) the correct failure modes are being evaluated.

0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.07 The organization considers diagnostic methods and best practices to allow for cost effective and timely root cause analysis and repair in the 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) design phase.

0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.08 The organization applies effective problem solving tools (reference Product Quality Planning (APQP) AIAG CQI-20) to optimize: functional performance, manufacturing 0 operations, shipping/handling efficiency, defect free assembly and effective repairs.

0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.09 The organization engages the supply chain with the OEM's Vehicle Parts and Service organization to allow improvements in diagnosis, 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) repair tools and repair methods.

0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.10 The organization allows supply chain partners to participate in the 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) review and validation of the Vehicle Service Manual.

0.00

3. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 3.11 The organization provides training to partners to improve parts handling, component assembly processes, issue diagnosis and problem 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) resolution.

0.00

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

4.01 The organization has a process to develop knowledgeable and trained staff to facilitate warranty monitoring.

0.00

4.02 The organization has a documented procedure for managing and analyzing warranty returns, subsequent problem solving activities and utilization of investigation findings in future product development activities.

0.00

4.03 The organization currently makes use of all available warranty data systems and parts return resources which enables timely /regular communication to the warranty stakeholders.

0.00

0

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

26

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

Circumstance or Condition 4.04 The organization expands investigations beyond the component level to include system interactions, assembly, mating component, and handling/logistics conditions.

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

4.05 The organization and partner(s) reach agreement for implementation of counter measures.

0.00

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

4.06 The organization communicates implemented corrective action clean point dates and applies increased warranty monitoring at the time of new platform launch or change implementation.

0.00

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

4.07 Applicable repair procedures and TSB's are pulled/reviewed/generated to support improvement in diagnostic and repair activities.

0.00

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

4.08 The organization participates, when allowed, with diagnosis and repair of a vehicle at dealerships/fleet repair centers/OEM fleet service garages or other partner available vehicles.

0.00

0.00

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

4.10 The organization prepares an investigative plan when reviewing dealer vehicles.

0.00

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

4.11 The organization has defined process to notify the customer of potential suspect or nonconforming parts (service parts and supply chain).

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.01 Warranty agreements are clearly defined at the time of sourcing for directed source components.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.02 The organization establishes agreements and reviews issues/corrective actions with partner organizations for improvements in design, specifications, logistics, handling, service procedures and other areas to reduce the potential for warranty events.

0

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

0.00

4.09 The organization has a process(es) defined to request a vehicle(s) for testing and investigative purposes from the OEM, other supply chain partners, vehicle rental companies, or employees.

0

4. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of Production

Score 0 - 5

0.00

27

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

Circumstance or Condition 5.03 This agreement(s) includes who is responsible (ownership) for each improvement step and timing (reference question #2).

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.04 The organization and partner organization's FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents are updated after a warranty concern is addressed.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.05 Cross-functional teams are engaged in the updating of FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.06 Corrective actions are shared with partner organization; confirmation exists that their FMEA's test and/or measurement methods are updated.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

5.07 Warranty lessons learned are applied to all product lines, systems, processes, materials, etc. where applicable, to leverage improvement across a broader base of the business (i.e., Yokoten, Poka-Yoke, etc.).

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.08 The organization has a formal process(es) for obtaining, reviewing and updating OEM: TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, call center procedures and safety recall notifications.

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.09 The organization has a defined Design for Service process.

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.10 The organization participates in preparation of training materials and service personnel where allowed.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.11 The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the system environment.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.12 The organization uses a defined process for NTF root cause investigation.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.13 The organization applies continual improvement practices to NTF process.

0.00

5. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

5.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics.

0.00

0

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Score 0 - 5

Prior Score

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

28

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 6. Continuous Improvement: Institutionalize the 6.01 The organization tracks the available warranty data and understands the warranty trends including detection of emerging field issues. 0 Process

Score 0 - 5 0.00

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

I.01 The organization has a senior management-level champion who owns and defines the warranty management system with trained support identified.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

I.02 The organization has defined warranty champion(s) responsible for 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 the objective to satisfy the consumer through risk reduction activities that minimize incident rates.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

I.04 The organization sets warranty metric targets annually; targets are reviewed by senior management.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

I.05 Customer warranty database access is established and data is shared within the organization.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment 0 0

0

0 0

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

29

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area 0 0 0 0

Section 7. Implementation Assessment

Circumstance or Condition I.06 Active projects to reduce the incident rates of NTF's involve partners/suppliers.

7. Implementation Assessment

I.07 Associates are involved with using the warranty data to perform their job functions.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

I.08 Warranty-related Lessons Learned database is populated with appropriate Look-Across activities.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

I.09 The organization applies and updates its defined NTF process as necessary.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

I.10 There is increased effort to analyze End-Of-Life products to validate DVP, FMEA's, durability performance and OEM reliability requirements. This data is applied to further improve quality /performance to meet consumer satisfaction targets and fed forward into Lessons Learned database for new program review.

0.00

7. Implementation Assessment

I.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision 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 cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary.

0.00

0

0 0

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty 0 Management Program

E.01 Incident rates meet improvement targets.

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty 0 Management Program

E.02 The organization meets/exceeds warranty metric targets set by organization/customer.

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty 0 Management Program

E.03 Regular data updates have been made available to the organization.

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty 0 Management Program

E.04 There is increased evidence of cross function engagements with partners/suppliers with the problem solving of warranty concerns.

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty 0 Management Program

E.05 Detection-to-Correction measures are improving.

8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty 0 Management Program

E.06 Does the organization measure the NTF ratio to total claims?

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Score 0 - 5

Prior Score

0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

30

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 8. Effectiveness Assessment of Warranty 0 Management Program

Circumstance or Condition E.07 NTF resolution performance (e.g., ratio of NTF to total parts, time to resolve, etc.) is improving.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.01 The organization clearly defines ownership of the warranty management process.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.02 The organization performs cross functional reviews of warranty terms & conditions including warranty agreements.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.03 The organization defines a warranty strategy that drives behaviors and practices (e.g. annual improvement projects, APQP projects) which reduce warranty risk throughout the company.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.04 The organization uses benchmark data to drive warranty reduction to enhance consumer satisfaction.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.05 The organization recognizes the consumer's expectations for warranty performance by establishing warranty management policy that incorporates the OEM's and Supply Chain's expectations, processes and targeted improvements.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.06 The organization is proactively receiving and analyzing warranty field returns.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.07 Supply chain partners are integrated into the warranty management process.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.08 The organization holds regularly scheduled reviews of: warranty management performance (warranty trend charts), and on-going assessment of the warranty management culture.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.09 Do the meetings include a review of customer warranty metrics.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.10 The organization shares warranty data with supply chain partners.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.11 Field returned warranty parts investigation results are shared with supply chain partners.

0

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Score 0 - 5

Prior Score

0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

31

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

Circumstance or Condition 1.12 The organization regularly carries out on-going assessment of its warranty management culture and identifies opportunities for improvement.

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.13 The organization shares warranty performance metrics with employees, customers and supply chain as an indication of the commitment to reduce incident rates.

0

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

1.14 The organization's management provides a supportive environment, and resources, at all levels, for employees to be Consumer-Centric focused to achieve reductions in warranty incident rates.

Score 0 - 5 0.00

0.00

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.15 The organization focuses on incident rate reduction over cost recovery as a priority, working collaboratively with partners to achieve improvements.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.16 The organization encourages activities that drive early problem detection and identification.

0.00

1.17 The organization provides adequate training to those involved with warranty data analysis, root cause problem solving including field return analysis, validation methods and adjoining systems training.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.18 Employees in the company have a stake in recognizing and accept ownership for warranty risk reducing actions.

0.00

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / 0 Establishing the Baseline

1.19 NTF's are viewed as an opportunity to further improve consumer satisfaction by applying continued, disciplined problem solving until the root cause is determined and eliminated.

0.00

0

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.01 The consumer's concern is thoroughly and accurately captured as a verbatim.

0.00

0

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.02 "CCNDs" are captured and explanations are documented for potential future review.

0.00

0

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.03 The repair order is completely and accurately filled out by the Service Manager/Advisor.

0.00

0

1. Management Introduction to Warranty / Establishing the Baseline

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

32

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.04 The Technician is able to access the necessary TSBs, repair procedures, hot lines and other tools to adequately diagnose and repair a 0 vehicle. 0

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.05 The Technician documents and reproduces the consumer concern (cc) and root cause before proceeding with a repair.

Score 0 - 5 0.00 0.00

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.06 After repair, the documentation is written up completely with accurate codes and diagnostic information, test data and replacement 0 parts listed, including any digital media to support the repair.

0.00

0

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.07 Parts properly tagged for identification and stored for possible return per the OEM's procedure.

0.00

0

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.08 When requested by the OEM, parts are sent to the appropriate 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 participate in the diagnosis and repair of vehicles at dealerships or fleet 0 centers.

0.00

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 center service procedures which include where applicable supplier 0 input / review of the material and these materials are made accessible to supply chain partners.

0.00

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.11 The supply chain has an opportunity to participate in the development and review of the TSBs, service manuals, diagnostic 0 processes, and call center procedures.

0.00

2. Consumer Event and the Dealership Activities 2.12 Components from early launch claims, preferably 100%, are returned for investigation.

0.00

0

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

33

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.01 Previous and current warranty from areas listed below, is pulled for Program Activities 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 organization assembly plant (d) Past serviceability (e) Organization's own manufacturing or assembly issues;(f) Field return investigations 0 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. 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. 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 actions, poke yoke, and error proofing implementations on previous lines 0 is undertaken to identify potential issues on the new model.

Score 0 - 5

0.00

0.00

0.00

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.04 The organization has established Lessons' Learned database that captures information such as reasons for FMEA and Control Plan 0 Program Activities changes, manufacturing or assembly improvements etc.

0.00

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.05 Surrogate program data is applied to understand warranty related risks such as: like components or systems, JD Powers and Associates 0 Program Activities data, scorecards, etc.

0.00

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 and "needs improvement" identification, including development needs. 0 Program Activities

0.00

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

34

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.08 The organization reviews available high mileage data to verify or 0 Program Activities identify potential reliability and durability performance issues.

Score 0 - 5 0.00

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.09 NHTSA and other government databases are consistently reviewed 0 Program Activities for recalls and campaign information to help define risks.

0.00

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.10 Design for Six Sigma opportunities are identified and/or 0 Program Activities implemented to reduce warranty incident risks.

0.00

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.11 There is a mechanism for program risks to be assessed by the Program Activities organization when reviewing the following areas: (a) Potential programs; (b) Terms and Conditions;(c) Applicable warranty agreements;(d) 0 Program deliverables;(e) Expectations and requirements communicated to program partners;(f) Legal, regulatory and/or legislative requirements.

0.00

3. Proactive Prevention: Lesson's Learned in Pre- 3.12 The organization engages the supply chain to reduce warranty risks and there is a mechanism for the supply chain to share improvements. 0 Program Activities

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 Audit Process.

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.01 The organization's FMEA's identify all risks from component and systems, Design for Manufacturing, Design for Assembly and Design for 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) Serviceability.

0.00

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 © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

35

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section Circumstance or Condition 4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.03 The organization considers consumer use differences, by market, 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) for global platforms for both systems and components.

Score 0 - 5 0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.04 The organization links FMEA's of the supply chain/customer to their own FMEA's to increase risk detection and buy-in of reduction 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) activities.

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.05 The organization correlates DVP&R results with actual field performance data including warranty investigation results to verify that 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) the correct failure modes are being evaluated.

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.06 The organization considers diagnostic methods and best practices to allow for cost effective and timely root cause analysis and repair in the 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) design phase

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.07 The organization applies effective problem solving tools (reference Product Quality Planning (APQP) AIAG CQI-20) to optimize: functional performance, manufacturing 0 operations, shipping/handling efficiency, defect free assembly and effective repairs.

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.08 End-Of-Life products are captured, analyzed and compared to design validation conditions to understand high mileage risks and 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) improvements.

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.09 The organization engages the supply chain with the OEM's Vehicle Parts and Service organization to allow improvements in diagnosis, 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) repair tools and repair methods.

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.10 The organization allows supply chain partners to participate in the 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) review and validation of the Vehicle Service Manual.

0.00

4. Implementing the Lessons Learned: Advanced 4.11 The organization provides training to partners to improve parts handling, component assembly processes, issue diagnosis and problem 0 Product Quality Planning (APQP) resolution.

0.00

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

5.01 The organization communicates implemented corrective action clean point dates and applies increased warranty monitoring at the time of new platform launch or change implementation.

Prior Score

0.00

36

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

Circumstance or Condition 5.02The organization and partner(s) reach agreement for implementation of counter measures.

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

5.03 The organization expands investigations beyond the component level to include system interactions, assembly, mating component, and handling/logistics conditions.

0.00

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

5.04 Applicable repair procedures and TSB's are generated to support improvement in diagnostic and repair activities.

0.00

5. Containing Warranty Issues: Post-Start of 0 Production

5.05 The organization makes available to its supply chain partners access to dealership investigations, problem resolution, and consumer concerns data.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.01 Warranty agreements for directed source components are defined at the time of sourcing.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

6.02 The organization establishes agreements and reviews issues/corrective actions with partner organizations for improvements in design, specifications, logistics, handling, service procedures and other areas to reduce the potential for warranty events.

0

Score 0 - 5 0.00

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.03 This agreement(s) includes who is responsible (ownership) for each improvement step and timing (reference question #2).

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.04 The organization and partner organization's FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents are updated after a warranty concern is addressed.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.05 Cross-functional teams are engaged in the updating of FMEA's, Control Plans and other quality/engineering documents.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.06 Corrective actions are shared with partner organization; confirmation exists that their FMEA's test and/or measurement methods are updated.

0.00

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

37

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: Actions/Solutions

Circumstance or Condition 6.07 Warranty lessons learned are applied to all product lines, systems, processes, materials, etc. where applicable, to leverage improvement across a broader base of the business (i.e., Yokoten, Poka-Yoke, etc.).

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.08 The organization has a formal process(es) for obtaining, reviewing and updating OEM: TSB's, service manuals, diagnostic processes, call center procedures and safety recall notifications.

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.09 The organization has a defined Design for Service process.

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.10 The organization participates in preparation of training materials and service personnel where allowed. NOTE: Not Applicable to OEM.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.11 The organization routinely investigates NTF in relation to the system environment.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.12 The organization uses a defined process for NTF root cause investigation.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.13 The organization applies continual improvement practices to NTF process.

0.00

6. Preventing Future Warranty Events: 0 Actions/Solutions

6.14 The organization confirms that the corrective actions are working and are effective based on ongoing warranty and quality metrics.

0.00

0

Score 0 - 5 0.00

0.00 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 © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

38

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 8. Implementation Assessment 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.03 Warranty training is provided to all cross functional staff and supply chain partners, including all warranty personnel. There is emphasis on the objective to satisfy the consumer through risk reduction activities that minimize incident rates.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.04 The organization sets warranty metric targets annually; targets are reviewed by senior management.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.05 Customer warranty database access is established and data is shared within the organization.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.06 Active projects to reduce the incident rates of NTF's involve partners/suppliers.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.07 Associates are involved with using the warranty data to perform their job functions.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.08 Warranty-related Lessons Learned database is populated with appropriate Look-Across activities.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.09 The organization applies and updates its defined NTF process as necessary.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.10 There is increased effort to analyze End-Of-Life products to validate DVP, FMEA's, durability performance and OEM reliability requirements. This data is applied to further improve quality /performance to meet consumer satisfaction targets and fed forward into Lessons Learned database for new program review.

0.00

8. Implementation Assessment

8.11 There is evidence of warranty risk factor review in the decision 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 cause analysis of warranty concerns, updated as necessary.

0.00

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

0.00

8.02 The organization has defined warranty champion(s) responsible for coordinating resolution of warranty issues.

0

0

Score 0 - 5

8. Implementation Assessment

0

0

Circumstance or Condition 8.01 The organization has a senior management-level champion who owns and defines the warranty management system with trained support identified.

39

CQI-14 Automotive Warranty Management Assessment Version 3, Issued 4/2015 Responsible Area

Section 0 9. Effectiveness Assessment 9. Effectiveness Assessment 0

Circumstance or Condition 9.01 Incident rates meet improvement targets. 9.02 The organization meets/exceeds warranty metric targets set by organization/customer.

Score 0 - 5 0.00 0.00

9. Effectiveness Assessment

9.03 Regular data updates have been is made available to the organization.

0.00

9. Effectiveness Assessment 0

9.04 There is increased evidence of cross function engagements with partners/suppliers with the problem solving of warranty concerns.

0.00

0 9. Effectiveness Assessment 0 9. Effectiveness Assessment 9. Effectiveness Assessment 0

9.05 Detection-to-Correction measures are improving. 9.06 Does the organization measure the NTF ratio to total claims? 9.07 NTF resolution performance (e.g., ratio of NTF to total parts, time to resolve, etc.) is improving.

0

Copyright © 2015 AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group)

Prior Score

0.00 0.00 0.00

40