| D | Name | Content | Typical customer deadline | Why customers reject it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D0 | Prepare / emergency response | Is an 8D needed? Immediate safety or line-stop actions | Same day | - |
| D1 | Team | Champion with authority + cross-functional team (quality, process, production, design, supplier) | 24 h | Quality engineer alone |
| D2 | Problem description | 5W2H and is / is-not; the effect only, no cause | 24 h | Vague ("bad parts"), cause in the statement |
| D3 | Interim containment | Protect the customer now: sort stock, WIP, transit, customer; clean-point identification; verify it works | 24 h | Not verified; customer stock forgotten |
| D4 | Root cause | Occurrence cause and escape (non-detection) cause, each verified; systemic cause recommended | 5-10 working days | Human error; one cause only; not verified |
| D5 | Permanent corrective actions | One action per verified cause; chosen and verified (trial) before implementation | 10-15 working days | Training only; no action for escape |
| D6 | Implement and validate | Implement, validate with production data, then remove D3 containment | 30-60 days | No data; containment left forever or removed too early |
| D7 | Prevent recurrence | PFMEA, control plan, work instructions, similar products and sites (read-across), lessons learned | With D6 | No FMEA update; no read-across |
| D8 | Close and recognise | Confirm with customer; recognise the team | 60 days | Closed without customer agreement |
Occurrence, escape, systemic
| Leg | Question | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Occurrence | Why was the defect made? | Tray has no dividers; parts rub in transport |
| Escape (non-detection) | Why did our controls not catch it? | Visual inspection is before packing |
| Systemic | Why did our system allow both? | APQP checklist has no packaging validation |
Each leg gets its own 5 Why chain and its own action. Most OEM templates (VDA, Ford Global 8D, GM, Stellantis) require at least occurrence and escape.
Verification vs validation
- D5 verification: before full implementation, prove the action removes the cause (trial run, capability study, switch the cause on and off).
- D6 validation: after implementation, prove the problem is gone in production over enough volume and time (zero defects over N parts, Cpk, customer feedback).
Clean point
Mark the first shipment made after containment (label, lot number, date) so the customer knows which parts are certified. Keep marking until D6 validation is complete.
acceptance-sampling-plan-selector
Select and evaluate acceptance sampling plans for incoming, in-process and final inspection: ANSI/ASQ Z1.4 / ISO 2859-1 single sampling under normal inspection (code letter from lot size and inspection level I, II, III, S-1 to S-4; sample size, Ac and Re from AQL, following the table's arrows to the correct plan; 100% when n reaches the lot size; AQLs above 10 per 100 units), operating characteristic curves (Pa at any quality, producer's quality level, indifference point, LTPD, AOQ and AOQL, binomial or hypergeometric), plans designed from producer and consumer risk, and c = 0 zero-acceptance plans. Covers AQL choice by defect class, switching rules between normal, tightened and reduced inspection, when sampling is not appropriate, and random sampling.
approved-supplier-list-manager
Manage and audit an approved supplier list (ASL) / external provider register for ISO 9001 8.4.1, IATF 16949 8.4 and AS9100 8.4.1: supplier status (approved, conditional, probation, pending, disqualified), scope of approval by commodity and process, risk class, certification and expiry, re-evaluation intervals by risk, conditions with end dates, single-source contingency, approver and customer-directed sources. Audits the list for expired or expiring certificates, overdue re-evaluations, conditional or probation status past its decision date, high-risk suppliers without the required certification, single-source suppliers without backup and missing approvers, and checks purchase orders for suppliers that are off-list, disqualified or pending, or buying outside the approved scope. Covers ERP blocks, PO requirements, off-list and emergency purchases.
apqp-phase-planner
Plan and track Advanced Product Quality Planning (AIAG APQP 3rd edition, IATF 16949) for a new or changed automotive part: back-schedule the five phases (plan and define, product design, process design, product and process validation, launch and feedback) from the start-of-production date by program complexity, with overlap, PPAP lead and safe-launch period; list the deliverables and gate for each phase (DFMEA, DVP&R, feasibility, process flow, PFMEA, control plans, MSA, Ppk, run at rate, PPAP, safe launch, lessons learned); adjust for build-to-print suppliers; flag compressed timelines and late or untracked deliverables against a status list. Covers gate reviews, red/yellow/green status reporting, run at rate and safe-launch exit criteria.
as9100-gap-analyzer
Run an AS9100D / EN 9100:2018 gap analysis for aviation, space and defence suppliers on the requirements added to ISO 9001: on-time delivery and conformity focus, management representative, ethics and human-factors awareness, operational planning and operational risk management, configuration management, product safety, counterfeit-part prevention, special requirements, critical items and key characteristics, external provider register and flow-down, FOD prevention, tooling and NC program control, special process validation, first article inspection (AS9102), traceability, in-service data and nonconforming product control. Generates and scores a worksheet, grades missing core controls as major, and checks invalid n/a claims. Covers AS9101/AS9104, OASIS, AS9102 FAI forms, counterfeit standards (AS5553, AS6174, AS6081), NADCAP and the planned IA9100 transition.
audit-report-writer
Write internal, supplier and pre-certification audit reports with the content ISO 19011:2018 6.5 expects: audit objectives, scope, criteria with revisions, dates, team and auditees, method and sampling statement, specific strengths, findings table and three-part finding details (requirement, evidence, statement), conclusion on the degree of fulfilment of criteria, diverging opinions, follow-up deadlines and distribution. Builds a Markdown report from a JSON audit record, generates the conclusion from the findings (major / minor / none) and flags reports missing required content or findings without clause or evidence. Covers conclusion wording, closing meetings, response expectations and verifying corrective actions.
capa-effectiveness-checker
Verify whether a corrective action actually worked (ISO 9001 10.2.1 d, IATF 16949, 8D D6) with statistics instead of 'no complaints so far': before/after defect-rate comparison with an exact conditional binomial test for Poisson counts and a minimum practical reduction, zero-defect demonstration size (n = ln(1-C)/ln(1-p), rule of three) with progress so far, and exact Clopper-Pearson upper bounds on the post-action defect rate. Returns effective, not yet demonstrated (with the units still needed) or not effective. Covers setting effectiveness criteria when the CAPA is opened, choosing the window by problem frequency, leading indicators for rare failures (Cpk, SPC stability, error-proofing checks, LPA), and traps such as volume changes, detection changes and containment masking.