iSixSigma

Who Should Participate in FMEAs?

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums General Forums Tools & Templates Who Should Participate in FMEAs?

This topic contains 6 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  Peder Skov-Hansen 2 months, 3 weeks ago.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #240599

    mannemv
    Participant

    Can some one explain why the legal, risk, compliance, audit, information technology, and process owner groups would participate in a FMEA.? what are the potential ramifications if the above groups not participated in FMEA?

     

     

     

    0
    #240601

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    @mannemv I would think IT and Process Owners would be self explanatory.

    When you look at the categories you have one called “severity” and that needs to be scored. Legal and risk fit very nicely into deciding that. Simply look at automotive failures. First if you identify it in a FMEA you just created an opportunity for a law suite. If you do identify it and it occurs and you didn’t do anything about it you just need to write a check because your court case will last a nano second.

    You also have a section call “detection.” Compliance and audit should have a large amount of input on those categories.

    All that being said I have never had legal, risk or compliance sit in on a FMEA process. You write it and put it out for review because they are such a pain to get to attend. You send it out on email so if there is ever an issue you have a file that says “you were invited”, “you chose to not attend,” and “you got a copy before it was released.” It isn’t worth the fight but leaving yourself culpable for their passive aggressive behavior would be negligent on your part.

    0
    #240602

    mannemv
    Participant

    Thank you

    0
    #240606

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    @mannemv Your welcome. I would wait for some input from other people as well.

    0
    #240615

    Andrew Parr
    Participant

    I never used to have the Governance guys in the meetings as they were real party poopers but as Mike says they need to be involved. I usdd to coach this by starting with a range of things under the “what could possibly go wrong” banner ranging from the most mundane to the possibility of Alien invasion. Whilst it was often hard to handle in terms of keeping on track I always felt the more disruptors I had the more comprehensive the outcome.  Your list would bore my ass and potentially miss a lot of things that should be considered.

     

    As someone says – just my opinion.

    1
    #240616

    Andrew Parr
    Participant

    And dont forget, the people working the process know where the worst problems exist.

    1
    #240686

    Peder Skov-Hansen
    Participant

    The real ramifications are that you miss important input.

    The groups you mention may not see the point in participating, but they should according to your procedures, or because you want and need them to.

    You should then of course only invite relevant people, meaning those who can spot potential failure modes and how often it may happen. Also people who can gauge severity of the failures as well as ways to avoid it. Avoid those grey elephants that always get invited just because they’re there. Avoid management unless it makes good sense – they tend to not bother with details, and see time and cost issues everywhere.

    Not more than about 10 people, then it becomes hard to control the discussions. But don’t write it up alone or with a few people just within your own field.

    If important people are not present then postpone. Or get someone to cover their field. To me the real benefit with an FMEA is the discussion. Yes it is a pain to get people to attend, but it is an even greater pain to not take actions on actual failures waiting to happen.

    You didn’t say what type of risk analysis you’re doing. Design or process? In the former case R&D should be present, in the latter Process owners.

    0
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.