Problem Resolution Analysis By André Vondran

The “CARF” (Corrective Action Report Form) Problem Resolution Analysis is a disciplined process which addresses problem solving in a team oriented methodical and analytical way. The “CARF” form contains the seven steps used to assist the team. 

These steps define, identify, verify and validate the problem description, root cause and corrective actions suggested in route to solving internal and external problems and assist in preventing similar problems from reoccurring. 

The “CARF” form will allow to store completed forms in a computer system that can be used to communicate the lessons learned.  In doing so, the teams can become more efficient and effective, and problems will be solved more quickly. 

The Seven Steps of “CARF” are as follows:

Step 1: Team Contact

Usually the Team Leader or Champion holds the position of Team Contact. He/she establishes a small group of people with the necessary process and/or product knowledge, allocates time, authority, and skill in the required technical disciplines to solve the problem and implement Corrective Actions.

Step 2:  Problem Description

Describe the internal/external Customer problem by identifying “What is wrong with what”, and/or using the 5 WHY method.  Detail the problem in quantifiable terms by answering the 5 W’s and 2 H’s (Who, What, Where, When, What, How and How many). Below is an example of data collected and “Bad” and “Good” Problem Statements.

Data Collected:  (Findings)    S-60, Rust, May 5th, Receiving Inspection, Truck Plants only,

Two out of ten rejected First shift, and Gear Case.

Ask questions about the problem:

Who is finding/experiencing the problem? (An auditor, receiving inspector, customer, assembly)

What is being affected? (Missing bolt, coolant leak)

What are the symptoms? (Engine noise, warped head)

When does it occur?  (Engine oil fill, testing, 1st shift, Jan 3rd)

Where does it appear? (Assembly, Machining, Test)

How was the concern discovered?  (Customer audit, testing, customer installation, containment)

How Many products or lines are affected? (2 per shift, entire shipment of 100)

Find out if problem is recurring.  Investigate to see if this has happened before on the same product line or a different one; is this the same part or assembly line that had this problem before? Has a similar problem happened before?  Where?

Bad Problem Statement:  Customers are complaining the engines are rusty.

Good Problem Statement:  Since May 5th, 1st shift, the Receiving Inspection areas of two out of ten truck plants have noticed that there is rust on the back of the gear case for S-60 engines.

Step 3:  Develop Interim Containment Action’s  (ICA’s)

Describe, define, verify and implement the Interim Containment Actions to isolate effects of the problem from any internal/external customer until Permanent Corrective Actions (PCA’s) are implemented. Validate the effectiveness of the Containment Actions.

Step 4:  Define and verify Root Cause and Escape Point

The root cause is the cause that accounts for the problem. It can be verified passively and actively, by making the problem come and go. It is the last answer when answering the 5-why questions to the problem description. The escape point is the earliest location in the process, closest to the root cause, where the problem could have been detected, but was not.

Step 5:  Choose and Verify Permanent Corrective Actions (PCAs)

Select the best PCA to remove the root cause. Also select the best PCAs to contain the effect of the root cause.  Verify that both decisions will be successful when implemented without causing undesirable effects.

Step 6:  Implement and validate Permanent Corrective Actions (PCAs)

Plan and implement selected Permanent Corrective Actions. Remove the Interim Corrective Actions (ICAs).  Validate the actions and monitor the long-term results. It is a good idea to develop validation measurables to prove the unwanted effect has been totally eliminated.

Step 7:  Prevention

Have all the necessary systems--including policies, practices and procedures-- to prevent recurrence of this problem and similar ones been modified?

Make recommendations for systematic improvements as necessary.

Purpose

The purpose of the Problem Solving Resolution Analysis is to provide the basic tools and knowledge needed for associates to participate in a team to assist with problem solving. Basic tools consist of instructing the team on initiating the Problem Resolution Analysis and completing the “CARF” Form to aid in obtaining product excellence and customer satisfaction. 

The Problem Resolution Analysis is used after a symptom has been identified as being too complex and exceeds the ability of one person to resolve the problem. By identifying the symptom the team can protect the internal and external customers from adverse effects of the problem. The teams can then concentrate on resolving problems and achieving customer satisfaction. 

When should the tool be applied/not applied?

CARF Problem Resolution Analysis should be initiated or reviewed:

· For on-going repetitive issues internal /external where quick fixes didn’t work.

· For major significant events which cause serious consequences to

Production Capability, Quality Levels, or Customer Expectations.

· For any Customer Identified Concern:

        A.  Quality Rejections or Quality Deficiency Report (QDR)

        B.  Written Customer Concerns

                 On-Going production

                 Customer Audit Calls

                 Customer Field Reports Concerns

                 Warranty and TGW Improvement

· For Significant Internal Concerns

                 Repetitive Concerns

     Internal Indicator Data

                 Continued System Breakdowns

                QOS Improvement Actions

                 Housekeeping Concerns

· To remove any Containment Program Element

· From Suppliers for Quality Rejections

                 Customer Initiated

     DDC Initiated

Who uses the tool?

In General 3-4 core people, “A Champion” or Team Leader (Designated by Area of Greatest Control of Resolution)

Representatives from any Contributing or Affected Area

(Must have a Level of Experience that is empowered and capable of enacting solutions and changes.)

Team Members may consist of:

- Quality Manager

- Program Manager                                         - Floor Supervisors

- Project Manager                                           - Implementation Managers

- Cross Functional team                                 - Test Engineers

- Manufacturing/Process engineers              - Suppliers

Resources Required

…  A Team of representatives from all appropriate departments/areas

…  Administration, i.e. completing form, arranging meetings, following up on recommended actions and completing CARF and CARF Log updates, per Department or Product Lines.

Benefits

Correctly executed, the DDC CARF Problem Resolution Analysis can:

…  Reduce Scrap and Rework

…  Improve Working conditions

…  Increase Customer Satisfaction

…  Improve Sales and Profits

…  Increase Productivity and Job Security

Stages of MSRP

“CARF” Problem Resolution Analysis is useful during the following stages of MSRP.

Product and Process Development Stage:

The CARF Problem Resolution Analysis process can help the Cross-Functional Team (CFT) with developing an analytical and methodical approach to solving open or questionable Risk Assessment action items. The methodology can also be used to assist with Recommended Action items.

Validation Stage:

Problem Resolution Analysis is a tool that can be used in the validation stage to assist the CFT’s with the validation of any production tooling or processes. Used early enough within the Validation Stage the “CARF” can assist the team with solving tooling or process non- conformities with the main goal of staying on schedule (whether they be for new production tooling or improvements to an already existing process).

Continuous Improvement Stage:

The “CARF” and Problem Resolution Analysis is utilized in the Continuous Improvement Stage to assist the CFT’s with identifying the symptoms and to protect the internal and external customers from adverse effects of the problem.  When a department or a product line implements a ROBUST Problem Resolution Analysis process (an in depth review of product line measurables which will address positive and negative trends proactively before the symptom becomes a problem), the CFT can concentrate on identifying the symptoms before they become problems in achieving the goal of customer satisfaction.

Evaluate Effective Use

Below are basic questions that will help to ensure consistency in application of the process. The following list of questions have been developed to assist the team in evaluating the effectiveness of their use of  “CARF” Problem Resolution Analysis tool. This is not a comprehensive list of everything that should be reviewed, only a guideline.

1. Have the symptoms been defined or qualified?

2. Have the customer(s) who experienced the symptom(s) been identified?

3. Have measurements been taken to quantify the symptom(s)?

4. Were the people affected by the problem represented on the team?

5. Is the customer(s) viewpoint represented?

6. Did the team members agree on the team membership?

7. Was a Champion or Team Leader identified?

8. Were the team member’s roles and responsibilities clearly defined?

9. Was prior experience considered to determine if this problem occurred before?

10. Have similar components and/or parts been reviewed for the same problem?

11. Has all required data been collected and analyzed?

12. Has a specific problem statement been identified?

13. Does the Interim Corrective Action (ICA) protect the customer 100% from the effect of the problem?

14. Has the customer’s viewpoint been considered for this ICA?

15. Has a validation method been determined?

16. Have Control Points closest to the Root Cause been identified?

17. Has a Risk Assessment been completed on the Permanent Corrective Action (PCA)?

18. Evidence (proof) exist that these actions will resolve the problem at the Root Cause level?

19. Were the customer and all affected parties consulted on the selected PCA?

20. Did the ICA continue to be in effect until the PCA was implemented?

21. Were all changes documented to the FMEA, Control Plan, Process Flow, etc.?

22. Are measuarbles in place to track PCA?

23. After validating the PCA was the ICA discontinued?

24. Are long term results continuing to be monitored?

25. Has a method for communicating to those affected by the changes been determined?

26. Has the CARF been loaded into QuAD for historical data and /or reference and updates?

Best Regards · Mit freundlichem Gruß · Cordialmente · 

André Vondran

Think Green! Please don’t print if it’s not necessary.

Follow Me on Instagram