The Autopsy Process — a Benchmark in Problem Solving

AIAG’s Effective Problem Solving Leader Guide (CQI-21) helps companies get on the path leading to problem prevention.

Problem solving is the number-one concern identified in the AIAG Automotive Quality 2020 report on the current state of quality. In all the discussions leading up to the report, the message was clear that the problem with problem solving was not a technical issue because we know how to solve problems; rather, the issue is having the discipline to drill down to the true root cause and take permanent corrective action.  In other words, it is a leadership and cultural issue.

The AIAG publication Effective Problem Solving Leader Guide (CQI-21) and associated training will help build a corporate culture where problems are opportunities and their resolution is systemic, effective, and sustainable. This article illustrates one of the best benchmarks for a problem-solving process implementation that this author has seen.

The Autopsy Process started simply nearly 20 years ago, but eventually grew into the cornerstone of a very effective quality management system. The name came out of a quality improvement committee focused on the corrective-action process to signify conducting a thorough and accurate root-cause investigation. The name itself helped distinguish the effort as something different and eventually became a recognizable term that conveyed a common thought, language, and action in any conversation, and as such, became part of the culture of the organization. At first, the idea was to have professionally trained facilitators conduct problem-solving meetings, but that idea grew into a process that included:

• A steering committee with top-level representatives at each facility from customer service, purchasing, quality, manufacturing, and product development
• A dedicated room with standardized tools, process steps, fishbone whiteboard, and a computer-connected whiteboard (a big deal 20 years ago) for problem definition, notes, and assignments
• A schedule dedicating two meetings per day (one for first shift and one for second shift) for initial and any follow-up meetings
• Twenty facilitators (so each facilitator would have one meeting every two weeks) who came from all ranks but were well represented by management level personnel
• A trigger system to set priorities for problems to be solved, including:
  •  Customer line interruption
  • Customer return
  • Customer complaint
  • Major supplier issue
  • Abnormality noted in production
  • Scrap and rework
  • First-time quality, variation, and cycle-time improvement opportunities

• A master scheduler from customer service, who determined the subject for the day’s meeting and sent the invites to the participants (attendance was not optional)
• Training for participants, including guidelines on how to prepare for the meeting, what evidence to bring, the standard agenda all the meetings followed, and expectations regarding implementation and follow up
•  A schedule for evaluation and follow up to ensure the corrective actions were effective
• A means for incorporating the proven corrective action(s) into the quality management system processes and procedures to prevent a reoccurrence
• A scheduled audit six months from closure to confirm the corrective actions had been systematized and were sustainable

The steering committee provided oversight and visibility to the entire process, set and adjusted the trigger points to keep the pipeline filled with 20 meetings per week, evaluated overall results, and provided reward and recognition for outstanding achievements. As problems were solved, trigger points were tightened, leading to higher levels of performance in all categories.

Facilitators not only led the meetings but they also followed up on the assignments, notified the master scheduler if a follow-up meeting was needed, and monitored the implementation and evaluation phases for the specific problem.

Participants included subject matter experts from any department who could contribute to the problem resolution. They came prepared and followed through on the solutions.

Internal quality system auditors verified that the corrective actions were implemented as planned and that all documentation had been updated.

As with any new process — especially one that was mandatory and top priority — there was doubt and resistance, but persistence from the leadership paid off. The Autopsy Process became a fundamental part of the company culture; people knew their roles and executed them more efficiently and effectively with each meeting. 

The results?

• A lot less problems, greatly increased first-time quality, less scrap, lower cycle times, and greater customer confidence
• Facilitators were highly regarded, and their participation ultimately enhanced their careers
• Standardization and repetition took a very complex subject with the potential for perpetual reinvention and made it a habit for an entire organization (“I would not give a fig for the simplicity this side of complexity, but I would give my life for the simplicity on the other side of complexity.” — Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.)
• A tool on the road to the ultimate in quality (“We don’t have problems, and we know why.”)

Bottom line: The Autopsy Process created nearly 20 years ago is still used by facilities around the world.

When the Quality 2020 survey results came out earlier this year, a good friend of mine said, “The problem with automotive is that they believe their biggest problem is problem solving.” He is right, as our attention should be more on prevention; however, solving known problems in a way that ensures they will not return is a big step in the right direction.

Here’s some advice from the foreword of the Effective Problem Solving Leader Guide (CQI-21):

So as a leader, what should you do next?

Do what you do best: Lead and reinforce the values and behaviors that you already know are important to your business, such as:

• Protect the customer first
• Develop a good understanding of the problem-solving process
• Lead by example
• Ask the right questions, which will drive right behaviors
• View problems as opportunities for improvement
• Ensure that the organization has competency in appropriate problem-solving tools and methods
• Empower the people
• Remove roadblocks to success
• Monitor status to ensure timely resolution of issues

Leading an organization with the right Effective Problem Solving (EPS) values can ensure the right behaviors by insisting that your culture responds to the right measures and metrics of effective problem solving. 

When all is said and done, for EPS to be effective in an organization, the top leaders and managers at all levels must get involved and lead by example. AIAG’s Effective Problem Solving Leader Guide (CQI-21) provides the foundation. It’s up to you to act.

David Lalain is vice president, member services, for AIAG.