VDA 8D - Problem - Solving - VDA

Qualitäts Management Center
im Verband der Automobilindustrie
Quality Management in the Automotive Industry
8D – Problem Solving
in 8 Disciplines
Method, Process, Report
1st edition, November 2018

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom
VDA-QMC Internetportal am 02.07.2019 um 18:36
Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.


8D – Problem Solving
in 8 Disciplines
Method, Process, Report
1st edition, November 2018
Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V. (VDA)


ISSN 0943-9412
Print: December 2018
English edition published in May 2019
Copyright 2018 by
Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)

Qualitäts Management Center (QMC)
Behrenstrasse 35, 10117 Berlin, Germany
Production:
Henrich Druck + Medien GmbH
Schwanheimer Strasse 110
60528 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Printed on chlorine-free bleached paper


05
Non-binding VDA recommendation

The German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) recommends that members
providing services within the automotive industry or related to automobiles apply the
following guidelines when implementing and maintaining QM systems.
Exclusion of liability
This VDA volume is a recommendation that is freely available for anyone to use. Anyone who
implements it is responsible for ensuring that it is used properly in each case.
This VDA volume is based on the state of the art at the time the publication was issued. The
application of the VDA recommendations does not in any way relieve anyone of the respon
sibility for their own actions. In this respect, everyone acts at their own risk.
If errors, incorrect information or the possibility of misinterpretation are found when using
these VDA recommendations, please immediately notify the VDA so that any errors or
omissions can be corrected.
Copyright
This document and all of its constituent parts are subject to copyright. Use outside of the
strict limits of copyright law without the consent of the VDA QMC is prohibited; such use
shall constitute a criminal offense.
All rights reserved. Unless specified otherwise, it is prohibited to reproduce this document,
in part or in full, to store this document electronically or by any other means, or to transmit,
photocopy, or record this document in any way without prior written consent by the publisher.
Translations
This publication will also be issued in other languages. For the latest version, please contact
VDA QMC.


06
Joint approach of AIAG and VDA with regard to problem solving

The joint objective of the AIAG and the VDA is to ensure that organizations can find an
effective and sustainable problem solving approach by applying the 8D method set forth in
both documents described above. Both documents reference each other.
Both associations, the AIAG and VDA, understand that effective and sustainable problem
solving begins with an organization’s leadership promoting and living an open problem-
solving culture. Within this context, the AIAG and VDA have prepared the AIAG CQI-20
Problem Solving Guideline and the VDA 8D Method Description, respectively. The two
documents are based on the same process, recommend the same tools and procedures
for solving problems, and are coordinated with each other.


Table of contents 07
Table of Contents
Defect culture and the role of leadership

in problem solving9
Problem solving and complaints 10
Introduction to problem solving in 8

Disciplines11
Application of the 8D problem-solving method14
Decision criteria for application of the 8D
problem-solving method15
Prerequisites within the organization15
Assessment criteria for self-assessment15
Assessment methodology17
General assessment criteria18
Chapter structure18
1 D1 – Problem-solving team 19
1.1 Summary and objective 19
1.2 Process 19
1.3 Applicable methods and tools 20
1.4 Assessment criteria 20
1.4.1 Basic requirements 20
1.4.2 Criteria for achieving “Excellence” 21
1.5 Opportunities and risks 21
2 D2 – Problem description 22
2.2 Process 22
2.5 Opportunities and risksDokument wurde bereitgestellt vom 25

08 Table of contents
3 D3 – Containment actions 26
3.2 Process 26
4 D4 – Root cause analysis 30

4.2 Process 30
4.4.1 D4 Occurrence – Basic requirements 34
4.4.2 D4 Occurrence –Criteria for achieving “Excellence” 34
4.4.3 D4 Non-detection – Basic requirements 34
4.4.4 D4 Non-detection – Criteria for achieving “Excellence” 34
5 D5 – Selection and verification of

corrective actions 36
5.2 Process 36
5.4.1 D5 Occurrence – Basic requirements 38
5.4.2 D5 Occurrence –Criteria for achieving “Excellence” 38


Table of contents 09
6 D6 – Implementation and validation of

6.2 Process 40
6.4.1 D6 Occurence – Basic requirements 41
6.4.2 D6 Occurence – Criteria for achieving “Excellence” 42
7 D7 – Prevention of reoccurrence 43
7.2 Process 43
8 D8 – Finalization and acknowledgement of

team success 46
8.2 Process 46
9 Glossary 49
Templates for processing 8D 51


10 Table of contents


Defect culture and the role of leadership in EFFECTIVE problem solving 09
Defect culture and the role

of leadership in effective
problem solving
Effective problem solving is a vital management task at all levels and is to be understood as
an opportunity for ensuring sustainable improvement. This includes the provision of relevant
problem-solving skills, accompanied by a problem-solving culture that makes it possible to
openly deal with failures.
Defining and supporting all necessary structures and workflows within a company and
Volume
pro 8D_Figure
viding the 1_Austauschgrafik
necessary resources that enable effective, efficient and sustainable problem
solving within the scope of the 8D method are priority leadership tasks.
high
8D application
Multidisciplinary
problem solving
requires
leadership and professional competencies
as well as problem-solving and methodological expertise
Problem can be resolved individually
no leadership support necessary, alternative methods are permitted
low
Figure 1: Problem solving and complexity
Not all problems are equally complex and require the appropriate use of methods and
resources. The decision-making logic for using the 8D method is described in Decision
criteria for application of the 8D problem-solving method.


10 Problem solving and complaints
Problem solving and

complaints
This volume describes the use of the 8D method for sustainable problem solving. It does not
describe a general complaint process which contains the 8D method as a problem-solving
tool.
In complaint processes, time guidelines are usually established for processing a complaint and
thus indirectly also for 8D problem solving. When processing complaints, it must therefore
be taken into consideration that the elements of the 8D methodology can require varying
processing times.
Examples of time-consuming elements in problem solving

• Involvement of subcontractors in analyzing problems and determining the root cause
• Implementation of corrective actions (occurrence and non-detection), e.g. due to lead
times for procuring testing possibilities
• Validation of measures (occurrence and non-detection)
• Selection of measures at the systemic level
• Implementation of measures at the systemic level
When applying the 8D method, an appropriate sustainable solution to a problem must not
conflict with timelines that are established for delivering an 8D report.


Introduction to problem solving in 8 disciplines 11
Introduction to problem
solving in 8 Disciplines
A wide range of approaches to solve problems has been established in the industry. The next
few chapters of this volume will describe problem solving in 8 Disciplines (8D).
The 8D method can be used wherever the cause of the problem is unknown. The 8 disci
plines forming the problem-solving process comprehensively examine the elimination of the
problem, from the initial description of the failure to the effective prevention of reoccurrence
the cause of the problem.
It comprises three complementary aspects. The term 8D describes:

• a standard method for problem-solving
• a problem solving process
• a reporting form
Effective and efficient problem solving is based on a multidisciplinary approach, and requires
the involvement of skills from the whole organization that are necessary to solve the problem.
The nature and scope of the use of other methods and tools for problem solving in 8 Disci
plines are to be established by the problem-solving team, depending on the complexity of
the problem to be solved.
8D method
The 8D method is defined as 8 elements that are referred to as “disciplines”:
• D1 – Problem-solving team
• D2 – Problem description
• D3 – Containment actions
• D4 – Root cause analysis
• D5 – Selection and verification of corrective actions
• D6 – Implementation and validation of corrective actions
• D7 – Prevention of reoccurrence
• D8 – Finalization and acknowledgement of team success


12 Introduction to problem solving in 8 disciplines
The 8D method is based on the following principles in particular:
Fact orientation: Problem solving, decision-making and planning are based on real-world
figures, data and facts (FDF) and not on assumptions.
Cause orientation: Problem solving is characterized by the fact that root causes of the prob-
lem are analyzed and remedied in a sustainable manner through appropriate measures.
Team orientation: Problem solving is based on a multi-disciplinary approach.

Volume 8D_Figure 2_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
Other methods are used within the scope of 8D problem solving depending on the nature or
complexity of the problem.
VDA Volume „Standardized process for handling customers´ complaints“
VDA Volume 7 Quality Data Exchange „QDX“
VDA Volume
VDA Volume
Field Failure
Failure
Analysis &
Cause
Audit
Categories
standard“
VDA Volume 8D ‒ Problem Solving in 8 Disciplines
VDA Volume 3
VDA Volume 4 VDA Volume
„ Reliability Assurance of
„Quality Assurance in the „Lessons
Car Manufacturers and
Process Landscape“ Learned“
Suppliers “
Figure 2: Embedding of the 8D – Problem Solving in 8 Disciplines in the VDA volumes


8D process
The 8D process is intended to be viewed as the cooperation and interdependency between
the disciplines, which run partly in parallel. 8D problem solving often requires interaction
between the individual 8D process steps.
Therefore, it is not sufficient to exclusively treat the 8 disciplines sequentially for effective and
efficient
Volumeproblem
8D_Figuresolving.
3_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
8D ?
yes *
8D ‒ Problem-Solving Process
D1: Problem-solving team
D2: Problem description
D3: Containment actions
D4: Root cause analysis
D5: Selection and verification

of corrective action(s)
D6: Implementation and validation of

corrective action(s)
D7: Prevention of reoccurrence
D8: Acknowledgement
of the team success
8D Report
* Overview of the 8D Problem-solving process
Figure 3: Overview of the 8D Problem-solving process 3
8D report
The 8D report is the comprehensive, continuous documentation of the permanent problem
resolution in its individual steps.
The 8D report includes the documentation of the progress of problem solving and action
plans for still pending activities.
Within the scope of a customer-supplier relationship, the exchange of information using

the 8D report ensures transparency with regard to the status of systematic and structured
problem handling with permanent problem solving.
The VDA offers recommended templates (Figure 4) for the 8D report and other methods
(Ishikawa, 5 Why, Is/Is-Not analysis, decision matrix), which are available on the VDA QMC
website.

8D Report IS/IS-NOT Ishikawa 5 Why Assessment

criteria
OB IST/IST NICHT ARBEITSBLATT

Template 8D-Report Grundanforderungen Reifegrad, Bonus, Sehr gut, Zusatzleistungen --> Kriterien zur Messung des Reifegrades
• Inhalte sind effizient, sachlich und vollständig beschrieben
Datum: Nummerierung: Version: Status/Berichtsform: Bitte auswählen IST IST NICHT Worin bestehen die Was wurde geändert Potentielle Änderung Test Causes • Bericht ist durchgängig und nachvollziehbar
8D-Titel: Unterschiede • Bericht enthält zusätzlich eine inhaltliche Zusammenfassung (Management Summary, One-pager, 4-
Auslöser/Kunde: Bitte auswählen Produktname:
E-Mail: Weitere Informationen:
• Versionierung des Berichts eingehalten Quadranten-Chart etc.)
Telefonnummer: Bitte auswählen Welches Produkt/Prozess Gibt es vergleichbare • Datumsstände der Maßnahmen sind aktuell • Terminvorgaben werden eingehalten
Bitte auswählen betrifft das Problem ? Produkte/Prozesse bei dem Übergreifend • Formatierung ist übersichtlich
Bitte auswählen das Problem nicht auftrat? • Teamleiter benannt
Bitte auswählen
• Sponsor benannt
D1 Problemlösungsteam
Um welche Abweichung Werden zusätzliche • Im Team sind die betroffenen Fachbereiche vertreten, Fachexpertise gegeben • Klare und nachvollziehbare Funktionsbeschreibung und Abteilungsbeschreibung
Was
Name Abteilung Funktion Kontaktdaten

Sponsor: handelt es sich? Abweichungen des • Die Position des Sponsors in der Hierarchie entspricht der Dimension des Problems • Interdisziplinäres Team
Teamleiter: betroffenen • Kompetenzen zu 8D-Problemlösungsprozess vorhanden • 8D Moderator
Ansprechpartner: Produktes/Prozesses D1
Teammitglied 1:
erwartet. • verständliche Symptombeschreibung (Beschreibung Abweichung Soll zum Ist)
Teammitglied 2:
Teammitglied 3: • Z.D.F (Zahlen, Daten, Fakten) – basierte Problembeschreibung ; Klar und nachvollziehbare
Teammitglied 4: Wo befand sich das Wo könnte die Abweichnug Beschreibung; Es ist nachvollziehbar: Was ist die Abweichung? Wo ist die Abweichung? Wann ist die
Teammitglied n: Produkt/Prozess, als die noch auftreten? Abweichung aufgetreten? Wie häufig / Wie viele Objekte oder Sachnummern sind betroffen?
D2 Problembeschreibung Abweichung das erste Mal • Ist-Ist-Nicht durchgeführt; Potenzielle Auswirkungen auf vergleichbare Produkte, Prozesse und • Weiterführende Dokumentation mit zusätzlichen Medien (Bilder, Ton, Video) sind mit angehängt
auftrat. D2 Standorte geprüft • Ist-Ist-Nicht ist unter Einsatz weiterer Methoden dokumentiert
Beschreibung - Symptom • Maßnahmen beruhen auf Ist-Ist-Nicht-Analyse
(Auslöser/Kunde): • Wenn keine Sofortmaßnahmen, ist die Begründung zu dokumentieren
Wo
Wo am Produkt/Prozess trat Wie heißen die

die Abweichung auf? angrenzenden • Wenn Sofortmaßnahme einzuführen, dann
Beschreibung - Problem Produkte/Prozessee und o Detaillierte Beschreibung der Sofortmaßnahme
(Problemlösungsteam): welche davon sind nicht von o Verantwortlicher benannt
(Einschließlich Beschreibung o Termine (Plan/Ist) dokumentiert
der Abweichung betroffen?
der Auswirkungen, Ausmaß
o Wirksamkeitsnachweis geführt
von betroffenen Produkten
etc.) Wann trat die Abweichnung Kann das Problem bereits in o Restrisiko, Nebenwirkungen der Sofortmaßnahme betrachtet • Dokumentation der Wirksamkeit nach Einführung (Clean-point-Doku)
Weitere Informationen - um ersten Mal auf?(Datum einer früheren Phase D3 • Methodische Ermittlung des Restrisikos und der Nebenwirkungen und Dokumentation
Weitere Informationen -
Kategorisierung (z.B. Beispiel (individuell Beispiel (individuell Risikobetrachtung • Systematische Identifikation der Ursachen unter Zuhilfenahme von Methoden (bspw. Ishikawa oder
Kategorisierung (z.B. Fehlerort): des Auftretens & des /Zeitpunkt aufgetreten sein?
Fehlerart): anzupassen) anzupassen) begonnen ? - Datum
Lebenzyklus) 5xWhy)
D3 Sofortmaßnahmen
• Technische Grundursache(n) für das Auftreten sind identifiziert
Beschreibung Wirksamkeitsnachweis durch Ergebnis Wirksamkeit Einführungstermin Verantwortlich Risikobetrachtung
Wann
Ist eine Systematik der Kann seit dem Entdecken • Bestätigung der Ursachen über Ist-Ist-Nicht-Beschreibung aus D2 (kein Widerspruch)
Maßnahme 1:
Aktualisiert? -
Ausfälle erkennbar? mit zusätzlichen Ausfällen • Systemische Grundursache(n) für das Auftreten sind identifiziert • Nachvollziehbare Dokumentation; alle Ursachen für das Auftreten des Problems wurden nachweislich
Maßnahme 2: (einmaliger Ausfall, stetiges gerechnet werden? • Zu jeder identifizierten Grundursache ist eine Fehlerursachenkategorie zugeordnet ermittelt
Datum
Anwachsen/ Fallen, Zufäll • Risikobetrachtung ist aktualisiert • Die durchgängige Beschreibung des Vorgehens von der Symptombeschreibung bis hin zur Verifikation der
Maßnahme 3: D4 A Ursachen ist für Dritte nachvollziehbar
oder Zyklisch)?
• Systematische Identifikation der Ursachen unter Zuhilfenahme von Methoden (bspw. Ishikawa oder
Maßnahme n: 5xWhy)
D4 Ursachenanalyse Wie hoch ist die Anzahl der Mit wie vielen darf in
• Technische Grundursache(n) für das Nicht-Entdecken sind identifiziert
Technische Ursachen Auftreten (TUA) Verifikation durch Verifikation am Ergebnis ID aus VDA Fehlerursachenkategor Ausfälle (Anzahl & PPM's) Zukunft noch gerechnet
• Systemische Grundursache(n) für das Nicht-Entdecken sind identifiziert • Nachvollziehbare Dokumentation; alle Ursachen für das Nicht-Entdecken des Problems wurden
werden?
TUA 1: • Zu jeder identifizierten Grundursache ist eine Fehlerursachenkategorie zugeordnet nachweislich ermittelt
• Risikobetrachtung ist aktualisiert • Die durchgängige Beschreibung des Vorgehens von der Symptombeschreibung bis hin zur Verifikation der
Ausmaß
TUA 2: Welche Personen sind Was kann zu schlechteren

D4 N Ursachen ist für Dritte nachvollziehbar
betroffen? Welche Kosten /besseren Sachverhalte
TUA 3: • Mögliche Abstellmaßnahmen aufgeführt für das Auftreten mit Bezug auf alle Grundursachen
sind bis jetzt angefallen? führen?
(technisch und systemisch)
TUA n: Werden diese Steigen, Fallen
• Nachvollziehbare Effektivitäts-(Wirksamkeits-)abschätzung mit Begründung
Technische Ursachen Nicht-Entdecken (TUN) Verifikation durch Verifikation am Ergebnis ID aus VDA Fehlerursachenkategor oder bleiben diese Stabil?
• Auswahl der Abstellmaßnahmen muss nachvollziehbar sein
TUN 1: • Freigegebener, detaillierter Aktionsplan (Daten, Verantwortliche, erforderliche Ressourcen sind
freigegeben)
Figure 4: Recommended templates for implementing the 8D problem solving (provided by VDA)
The 8D report can be shared as a document or in electronic format (e.g. QDX).
Application of the 8D problem-solving method

8D problem solving is a generally applicable method. However, it is used to solve complex
problems within a team and is therefore not recommended in every case. For example, areas
4
of application include:
• 0-km complaints
• Field complaints
• Internal and external complaints
• Hardware/software problems
• Non-compliance of service agreements
(service level agreements)
• Safety-relevant non-conformities
• Audit non-conformities
• Non-availability of services (downtime)
Before starting the 8D problem solving process, a decision must be made regarding its
use on the basis of the available information: If no or only insufficient information about the
problem is available, use of this method will not be effective.


Decision criteria for application of the 8D problem-solving method
1. A complete and understandable description of the non-conformity found is available
AND
2. Solving the problem exceeds the ability of a single person
Prerequisites within the organization

The content and scope of the problem solving process must be a part of the management
system within the organization. Knowledge and outcomes arising from the problem-solving
process must be continuously taken into account in the risk evaluation and in the escala-
tion processes. The requirements relating to documentation (including 8D reports) have to
be defined specifically for the organization.
Assessment criteria for self-assessment

The assessment criteria are applied by the respective 8D team with the goal of providing
a supportive reflection tool for each individual discipline throughout the problem-solving
process. This helps to take into consideration all aspects of 8D problem solving and thus
improve the content and significance of the report.
The definition of the criteria in the VDA 8D Volume is intended to promote an equal under-
standing of the maturity level of 8D problem solving in an organization through comparable
results based on the same criteria, thus ensuring a minimum standard for the qualitative
content of an 8D report.
The assessment criteria examined based on the VDA 8D assessment criteria catalog
support the optimum application of the 8D method, the implementation of the 8D process
and the documentation in the 8D report form for the relevant organization.
The assessment criteria supplement the 8D method and can be examined during each
discipline or after completion. The preferred process is to conduct a self-assessment
according to the individual disciplines.
An assessment is useful for an 8D problem solving that describes a confirmed problem.


The VDA 8D assessment criteria catalog divides the fulfillment of the criteria into general
assessment criteria and specific criteria for each individual discipline.
The specific basic requirements described in each section must be met in each discipline.
In addition, the criteria for “Excellence” are based on the basic requirements, with the objec
tive that the findings are transparent without the need for further explanation and can be
used further in the organization.
Gene- 8D Gene- 8D
Disciplines D1 D2 D3 D4 O D4 N D5 O D5 N D6 O D6 N D7 D8 D1 D2 D3 D4 O D4 N D5 O D5 N D6 O D6 N D7 D8
ral Basic ral Excellence
Ratio 1/2 5/5 3/3 4/6 6/6 5/5 4/5 3/5 3/3 3/3 2/2 3/3 NOK 100% 33% 33% 100% 50% 0% 50% 100% 33% 100% 67% 50% 60%
Fulfilled (OK)/ Fulfilled (1)/

Basic Requirements Not fulfilled Criteria for Achieving "Excellence" Not Fulfilled
(NOK) (0)
General basic requirements NOK General criteria for achieving "Excellence" 100%
Version numbering of the report is adhered to ok Content is written efficiently, objectively and in full; abbreviations are explained 1
Dates of measures are up to date nok The report is described consistently and transparently and the formatting is clearly structured 1
General
The report also contains a summary of the content (table template or management summary, one-pager, etc.). 1
Specified dates/deadlines are adhered to 1
D1 Basic requirements OK D1 Criteria for achieving "Excellence" 33%
Team leader appointed ok Clearly defined and easy-to-follow role description and department description 1
Sponsor appointed ok The team is supported by an independent 8D moderator 0
D1
The relevant departments are represented in the team, expertise is available ok Designation of an independent third party (outside the 8D team) for assessment 0
The sponsor’s position within the hierarchy reflects the importance of the problem ok
Skills relating to the 8D problem-solving process are available in the team ok
D2 Basic requirements OK D2 Criteria for achieving "Excellence" 33%
Comprehensible symptom description (description of the non-conformity from the target state to the actual state) ok Other documentation with additional media (images, audio, video) is attached. 1
D2 Number, data, fact-based problem description; clear and easy-to-follow description: What exactly is the non-conformity? Where is the non-conformity?
ok Is/Is-Not analysis is documented using other methods 0
When did the non-conformity occur? How often does the non-conformity occur? How many items or item numbers are affected?
Is/Is-Not analysis performed ok Potential effects on similar products, processes and locations have been checked 0
D3 Basic requirements NOK D3 Criteria for achieving "Excellence" 100%
Ongoing documentation of the effectiveness of the containment actions after their introduction until confirmation of the effectiveness of the implemented
Identification and selection of immediate measures based on the Is/Is-Not analysis NOK 1
permanent corrective measures
Detailed description of the immediate measure ok Methodical investigation of the residual risk and side effects, and documentation 1
Responsible party appointed NOK Easy-to-follow documentation of the identification and selection of containment actions based on the Is/Is-Not analysis 1
D3
Dates (planned-actual) recorded ok
Proof of effectiveness kept ok
Risk and side effects of the containment actions ok
Figure 5: Assessment criteria catalog for 8D – excerpt (complete catalog in appendix)


Assessment methodology
The assessment methodology for determining the 8D quality is based on the recording of the
assessment criteria and follows the procedure described below (Figure 6).
Determination of
8D Assessment method 8D quality
Determination of
8D basic requirements
Calculation of
8D excellence %
Assessment of single Assessment of single
basic requirement criteria excellence criteria per
[OK/NOK] 8D discipline
[in %]
Assessment of Calculation of
basic requirement criteria excellence rate
per 8D discipline per 8D discipline
[OK/NOK] [in %]
8D basic Calculation of average of all

requirements not no All basic requirement
8D disciplines results in
criteria fulfilled?
fulfilled excellence rate
[OK]
[NOK] [in %]
yes
Internal approach 8D basic
to improve requirements
8D quality fulfilled
[OK]
5
Figure 6: Determining the 8D quality
The assessment methodology yields two statements:
Statement 1 - Compliance with the basic requirements

• The fulfillment of all basic requirements determines the effectiveness, i.e. the effective
and complete application of 8D problem solving. If a criterion is fulfilled, it is rated
with “OK”. If a criterion is not fulfilled, it is rated “NOK”.
• If all criteria of the basic requirements are rated as “OK”, the effective application of
the 8D problem solving is rated as “OK”.
• If one or more criteria of the basic requirements are rated as “NOK”, the effective
application of the 8D problem solving is rated as “NOK”.
Statement 2 – “Excellence”
• The achievement of the excellence criteria is shown as a key figure.
• It serves exclusively to illustrate the quality of the understandability of findings and
their possible further use in the organization in the interest of increasing efficiency.
• The key figure is displayed in values of 0-100% and is calculated as an average
value:
• the degree of fulfillment of all excellence criteria for each discipline, and
• the degree of fulfillment of the general excellence criteria.

There is no weighting between the individual assessment criteria. All individual assessment
criteria for each 8D discipline, including the general criteria, are thus equally important.
General assessment criteria

In addition to the assessment criteria applicable in the individual disciplines, the following
general assessment criteria apply to the entire 8D problem solving:
General basic requirements

• Version numbering of the report is adhered to
• Dates of measures are up to date
General criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• Content is written efficiently, objectively and in full; abbreviations are explained
• The report is described consistently and transparently and the formatting is clearly
structured
• The report also contains a summary of the content (table template or management
summary, one-pager, etc.)
• Specified dates are adhered to
Chapter structure
All of the following chapters about the individual disciplines of 8D problem solving have an
identical structure:
• Summary and objective
• Process
• Applicable methods and tools
• Assessment criteria and
• Opportunities and risks
At the beginning of the chapter, a summary of the respective section is provided and the
process of the 8D step is described in detail. They are followed by methods and tools which
can be applied in the process step. Finally, the respective assessment criteria (divided into
basic requirements and criteria for achieving “Excellence”) are explained and the opportuni-
ties and risks of the process step are outlined. The basic requirements must be met in order
to qualify.
For each of the 8 disciplines, core contents were processed symbolically and clearly in the
form of “cards”. These are available at: https://8d.vda-qmc-tools.de


1 D1 – Problem-solving team
1.1 Summary and objective
The objective of process step D1 is to determine a sponsor, a team leader and the best pos-
sible team to solve the problem in a specific case.
1.2 Process
Once a problem becomes known, the organization forms a specific team. The team members
are primarily determined based on the underlying problem and its level of complexity.
Original symptom description
Sponsor
Resources
Team leader
Methods competence Team members

Professional competence
Problem-specific team
Figure 7: Overview of the D1 problem-solving team
The persons in the team must have process and/or product expertise. The necessary
specialized knowledge must be ensured and specialists called into the team at each stage,
depending on the definition of the problem. It may be advisable to use a responsibility matrix,
depending on the size of the organization and the complexity of the problem.
The team is led by a team leader and supported by a sponsor. These roles can be assumed
by the same person (for example in small organizations).


20 1 D1 – Problem-solving team
The team leader or another team member must have knowledge and expertise in how to use
the 8D problem-solving method. The team leader also has access to other supportive meth
ods and tools (his/her own skills, or experts). He/she is in direct contact with the sponsor
and ensures communication within the whole problem-solving team.
The sponsor is responsible for providing the necessary resources and provides support in
overcoming obstacles. The sponsor should be a leader in the organization and directly affect
ed by the problem. The sponsor should have a personal interest in solving the problem.
The team members must have the time, authority and skills in the technical disciplines to
solve the problem and to implement corrective actions.
The communication channels to internal and external partners must be defined, and com
munication should take place either through the team leader or an alternative contact should
be appointed.
Depending on the definition of the problem, the customer or (sub)contractor may be includ
ed in the team.
New information (figures, dates, facts) may have a direct effect on the composition of the
team, and the team members may be changed according to requirements/tasks, even later
on during the course of the 8D process.
1.3 Applicable methods and tools

• Organizational chart
• Qualification matrix
• Responsibility matrix
1.4 Assessment criteria
1.4.1 Basic requirements

• Team leader appointed
• Sponsor appointed
• The relevant departments are represented in the team, expertise is available
• The sponsor’s position within the hierarchy reflects the importance of the problem
• Skills relating to the 8D problem-solving process are available in the team


1.4.2 Criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• Clearly defined and easy-to-follow role description and department description
• The team is supported by an independent 8D moderator
• Designation of an independent third party (outside the 8D team) for the assessment
1.5 Opportunities and risks

Opportunities:
• Sponsor supports and escalates, where necessary
• Multi-disciplinary collaboration
• Improving understanding for problem solving
• Further development of employees by acquiring experience
Risks:
• No or only insufficient access to relevant information
• Members of the team do not have the required skills
• Team size not suitable
• Difficulties in multi-disciplinary collaboration
• Communication paths not sufficiently defined


22 2 D2 – Problem description
2 D2 – Problem description
The objective of the process step D2 is to understand the problem with regard to its inter-
connections and transfer the identified non-conformity into a specific, fact-based problem
description.
A problem description is a simple, precise statement about the item and the non-conformity,
whose cause is not known.
It should be as accurate as possible, and the problem environment should also be described
if applicable (e.g. the processes/components involved within a complex system). The core of
the problem is to be identified and quantified. All necessary data are available and analyzed
sufficiently so that the extent of the problem (number of parts concerned, versions, vehicles,
etc.) can be described in a manner that is understandable.
2.2 Process
The facts are used as a basis for determining as precisely as possible what the faulty prod
ucts or processes in question are. The item with the non-conformity has to be defined at this
point.
A clear statement about the non-conformity must be drawn up (the aim is to define what re
quirement is not being met e target-actual comparison).
In order to make a clearly defined statement about the non-conformity, it is also necessary to
define which comparable products or processes do not have the non-conformity.
A description of “symptoms” must be created, which is then converted into a problem de-
scription by asking targeted questions.
• “Who observed what first?” – If possible, the person who reported the symptom
should describe exactly what was observed.
• “Is all available information at hand?”, e.g. provisional problem description and risk
assessment?



• A problem description has to be developed based on the answers to these questions,
Original symptom description
Collection of facts Is-/Is-Not Analysis

Failure collecting chart
Information content increases

Information acquisition
Histogram
What? When?
Where? How many?
olume 8D_Figure 9_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
Pareto diagram
...
Collection of facts Is-/Is-Not Analysis
Is there a target-actual deviation?
Problem-specific description
ume 8D_Figure 9_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
Figure 8: D2 Problem description Continuous/Steady Suddenly
6
Feature
Expectation Feature Expectation

and the collection of facts for each symptom must be initiated.Actual This collection of facts shouldActual
provide answers to the following questions:
_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
Time Time
• What (which product/process, which non-conformity)?
• Where (location/where on the product, where in the process)?
• When (timeline/pattern)? Continuous/Steady
Periodically/cyclic Suddenly
Random/infrequent
• How much (number/frequency/scope)?

Feature
Feature
Feature
Feature
Expectation
Expectation Expectation
Expectation
Actual
Actual Actual
Actual
A collection of facts for refining the problem description must not contain any conclusions
_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
as to the causes of the problem (not a why). TimeTime TimeTime
Continuous/Steady First daySuddenly

deviation
Periodically/cyclic Random/infrequent
Feature
Feature
Feature
Feature
Feature
Expectation
Actual Actual
Actual Actual Actual
Time Time
TimeTime Time
Continuous/Steady
Periodically/cyclic First day Suddenly
deviation
Random/infrequent
Feature
Feature
Feature
Feature
Feature
Expectation
Expectation
Expectation
Actual
Actual ActualActual
Actual
Time
Time TimeTime
Time
Figure Periodically/cyclic
9:First
Typical defect/failure patterns
day deviation Random/infrequent
Feature
Feature
Feature
Expectation
Actual
Actual Actual
24 2 D2 – Problem description
A common method used for this is, for example, the Is/Is-Not analysis, which asks questions
that support comprehensive data collection.
Similar and/or identical processes and products, potentially also at different locations, must
be taken into consideration here and integrated into the 8D process.
Identified gaps in the fact collection have to be eliminated through additional available,
important information, e.g. process diagrams, SPC data, machine logs, measurement data
from production. If necessary, a list of measures (to-do list) for acquiring information should
be drawn up.
For problems exhibiting complex symptoms, the problem can be divided with subsequent
individual problem descriptions.
In order to confirm the failure/symptom, it is then necessary to verify whether the collected
data unequivocally confirm a target-actual non-conformity. This includes the measurability of
the non-conformity.
The information (figures, data and facts) and findings obtained are to be transferred into a
specific problem description (item and non-conformity, “what is wrong with..?”). The problem
description developed at this stage forms the working basis for establishing containment
actions (D3) and the root cause analysis (D4).
Should it become necessary to amend the problem description within the scope of the later
8D process (e.g. due to new information), the amendment must be documented.

Methods that could provide support in developing the problem description are:
• Is/Is-Not facts (see 8D template)
• Histogram (failure distribution)
• Failure collection chart (time of occurrence)
• Pareto analysis (frequency distribution)
• Flow charts (workflows, schematic diagrams, processes, interfaces)
• To-do list
• ABC analysis (prioritization)



• Comprehensible symptom description (description of the non-conformity from the
target state to the actual state)
• Number, data, fact-based problem description; clear and easy-to-follow description:
What exactly is the non-conformity? Where is the non-conformity? When did the
non-conformity occur? How often does the non-conformity occur? How many items
or item numbers are affected?
• Is/Is-Not analysis performed

• Supplementary documentation with additional media (images, audio, video) is attached
• Is/Is-Not analysis is documented using other methods
• Potential effects on similar products, processes and locations have been checked

Opportunities:
• In order to assess comparable 8D cases and identify systemic problems or trends, a
user-specific characterization can be entered, for example, failure/defect location,
failure/defect type, failure/defect coding, problem classification
• Efficient root cause analysis by means of a specific problem description
• Visualization of figures, data, facts may support the description and understanding of
a problem
Risks:
• An incomplete problem description will result in an incorrect root cause analysis,
ineffective measures or inadequate resource planning
• The user-specific characterization must not be confused with the VDA failure causes
catalog. The latter is not used until after the D4 Root cause analysis
• Conclusions must not be drawn as to why the problem has occurred. Conclusions
made within the D2 problem description stage will result in an incorrect problem
description


26 3 D3 – Containment actions
3 D3 – Containment actions
The objective of D3 is to define the containment actions in order to fully eliminate the impact
of the problem on external and internal customers. The containment actions have to be
implemented and their effectiveness ensured until the implemented corrective actions (D6)
have been validated. All containment actions serve to limit immediate losses, and are based
on specific requirements (software, services, hardware, etc.)
Specific problem description
Containment actions
Risk assessment
Identify
Align
Protect against impact! Buy yourself time!
(through effective Verify (through effective
containment actions) containment actions)
Prove effectiveness
Implemented containment actions and proof of effectiveness

Figure 10: Overview of the D3 containment actions
8
3.2 Process
Depending on the initiator, containment actions including proof of effectiveness have to be
implemented, and a risk assessment conducted for the planned containment actions.
Containment actions are taken to immediately contain the problem with the intention of
eliminating or reducing the effect of the non-conformity on the product (hardware/software/
service) (e.g. warehouse or delivery quarantine, reverting to the previous software version,
resetting the password, blocking access, sorting and reworking, etc.).


Containment actions are short-term measures that remove or reduce the symptom, but do
not permanently eliminate the failure yet. This includes activities to ensure that the effects
of the problem are eliminated. The entire value and supply chain is to be considered here. It
must be ensured that information relating to the problem is forwarded to potentially affected
parties (e.g. the next shift, other production lines, similar development areas).
All information that is available must be used for the identification of possible containment
actions and for the risk assessment.
For example:
• D-FMEA, P-FMEA
• Feature description (e.g. special characteristics – SC)
• Specifications (also software and system specifications)
• Drawings and 3-D models
• Product/process audits
• Control plan (CP)
• Process flowcharts
• Testing and rework equipment
• 8D reports, complaints from the past
• Inventories (e.g. quarantine stock)
• Names of NOK products
• SPC/failure collection chart/quality control card
• Machine and tool history
Potential risks and effects of the non-conformity from the D2 problem description as well as
possible negative effects of the implementation of D3 containment actions are to be taken
into consideration.
Containment actions are defined within the team based on the existing information from the
problem description, and in addition to the outcomes of the risk assessment, and adapted in
case of changes and/or new findings.
The degree of effectiveness of the selected containment actions must be proven before they
are implemented, where possible.
They can be verified, for example, by:

• Tests and demonstrations
• Before/after comparison
• SPC or measurement system analysis (MSA)
The effectiveness of the implemented containment actions must be documented on a

c ontinuous basis, (e.g. failure collection chart).
Deadlines and responsibilities must be established for all containment actions, followed up
and documented in the 8D report.Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

28 3 D3 – Containment actions
The implemented containment actions must be adapted when new information emerges,
depending on the ongoing D4 root cause analysis or the D2 problem description. The risk
assessment must be updated continuously and documented.

Applicable methods for establishing measures
• ABC analysis
• Pareto analysis
• Risk matrix
• Before/after comparison
Applicable methods for validation/implementation

• Flow diagram
• Histogram
• Pareto analysis
• Failure collection chart
• Measurement system analysis (MSA)

• Identification and selection of containment actions based on the Is/Is-Not analysis
• Detailed description of the containment action
• Responsible party appointed
• Dates (planned-actual) recorded
• Proof of effectiveness retained and updated
• Risk and side effects of the containment action considered

• Ongoing documentation of the effectiveness of the containment actions after their
introduction until confirmation of the effectiveness of the implemented permanent
corrective measures
• Methodical investigation of the residual risk and side effects, and documentation
• Easy-to-follow documentation of the identification and selection of containment
actions based on the Is/Is-Not analysis



Opportunities
• Failure cost minimization as a result of efficient containment actions
• “Protect against impact” with effective containment actions and thus “buy time” for
the later stages of the problem-solving process
Risks:
• Containment actions do not have a sufficient effect
• Containment actions have undesirable “negative” effects
• Containment actions are set from D6 before the implemented corrective actions are
validated


30 4 D4 – Root cause analysis
4 D4 – Root cause analysis

In process step D4, the actual causes of the underlying problem - the root causes - are
determined and verified based on the problem description (D2), the Is/Is-Not analysis and
taking into consideration the findings from the containment actions (D3). The objective is to
identify both the technical root causes and the systemic root causes (see glossary) for the
occurrence of the failure and the non-detection of the failure.
4.2 Process
The root cause analysis must be performed carefully and without attributing blame. The
experience and creativity of team members should be used. Any theory that explains how the
problem
Volume could have11_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
8D_Figure arisen is regarded as a possible cause. Only facts count, rather than rash
conclusions or subjective assessments.
Specific problem description

Collection of facts Is-/Is-Not analysis Analysis results
1 Technical Examination 2 Systemic Examination

Occurence Non-detection Ocurrence Non-detection
2
1 Ishikawa FTA
Determination of potential causes
5 Why Hypothesis-
Identification of most likely causes test
...
Cross exchange
Verification of most likely causes simulation, DoE
Verified root causes

Figure 11: D4 – Root cause analysis
9


The team first uses the specific problem description to determine the potential causes for
occurrence and non-detection.
• Questioning the occurrence seeks to explain why the problem occurred
• Questioning the non-detection explains why the problem was not identified or was
not identified at an earlier stage when it occurred
The systemic causes are compiled once the technical root causes of occurrence and
non-detection have been identified. The technical root causes therefore form the starting
point for the systemic root cause analysis.
1 2
Starting point Technical examination Systemic examination
Occurence Root causes Occurence Root causes

Problem
description Non-detection Root causes
Non-detection Root causes
Figure 12: Two-step process for determining the root causes
During the technical examination, the question of why the problem occurred and was not
detected is investigated. During the systemic examination, the question of why the man
agement system permitted (allowed, not avoided) the identified technical root causes is
investigated.
It must be noted that there may be multiple causes that, when combined (through interaction
or individually), could result in the failure pattern. This necessitates a systematic investigation
of all failure causes that explain the problem. Possible interactions must be taken into consi-
10
deration. It may be necessary to consider the entire value chain.
Suitable methods and tools for identifying the cause are to be used, depending on the com-
plexity of the problem. This requires the corresponding skills within the team for using these
methods.
A tried-and-tested method is the cause-effect diagram. This method is used to collect all
possible causes, assess them and eliminates the non-applicable causes after the assess-
ment. The objective of a cause-effect diagram is first to produce an overview with all possible
causes. Only the causes with a high probability should be verified.


Occurence Non-Detection
Management Method Machine Machine Method Management
Excluded Root Cause

(according to assessment)
Potential Root Cause

(in assessment)
Indentified Potential
Root Cause
Material Man Environment (according to assessment) Environment Man Material
Figure 13: Cause-effect diagram
Use 5 Why to identify the most likely causes. By repeatedly asking the question “why”, it is
possible to find out the root cause.
Technical examination Systemic examination
Figure 14: 5 Why analysis (see attachment)
Verification of the determined cause

The determined causes are verified and confirmed in two steps:
Passive verification: Passive verification is achieved through observation. This approach is

used to check whether the most likely cause is also present when a failure occurs. Passive
verification does not provide any unequivocal evidence, but rather isolates the scope of the
solution and can serve as test planning.
If it cannot be proven that the most likely cause and the defect are present at the same time,
there is a good chance that the most likely cause is not the root cause.


The hypotheses of passive verification can be confirmed with the following methods:
• Comparing the determined causes against all facts from the Is/Is-Not analysis
• If necessary, supplementing the Is/Is-Not fact collection by recording and comparing,
including the occurrence of the non-conformity over time
Active verification: Active verification is a procedure in which the effect of the cause can be
“turned on and off”.
Methods of active verification are:
• Cross exchange
• Hypotheses confirmed by:
––Test
––Experiments
––Simulation
By combining passive and active verification, it is usually possible to obtain unequivocal

evidence that the “most likely cause” is a root cause. For this purpose, passive verification is
done out first, as this enables the possible causes to be narrowed down significantly to the
most likely causes with relatively little effort.
To enable out systemic improvements that extend beyond the problem itself, it is produc-
tive to group the root causes together. The failure cause categories, for example (see VDA
guideline: Definition of Failure Cause Categories for 8D Reporting), should be used for this
purpose. A corresponding failure cause category is assigned to each verified failure cause.
Assigning a failure cause to a failure cause category involves finding a topic-based appro-
ximation. In addition, it makes sense to establish product-/process-specific failure cause
categories in the organization.

Methods applicable for determining possible causes:
• Cause-effect diagram
• Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)
• 5 Why
• Continuing Is/Is-Not analysis (changes and differences)
• Hypotheses test


4.4.1 Occurrence – basic requirements

• Systematic identification of causes with the aid of methods (e.g. cause-effect diagram
or 5 Why)
• Technical root causes for the occurrence have been identified
• Confirmation of causes via Is/Is-Not analysis description from D2 (no contradiction)
• Systemic root causes for the occurrence have been identified
• Each identified root cause has been assigned to a failure cause category
• Risk assessment is updated (taking into consideration the analysis of the root causes
of the occurrence)
4.4.2 D4 Occurrence – criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• Easy-to-follow documentation; all causes of the occurrence of the problem have been
determined by verification
• The consistent description of the procedure for describing symptoms through to the
verification of causes is understandable for third parties
4.4.3 D4 Non-detection - basic requirements

• Systematic identification of causes with the aid of methods (e.g. cause-effect diagram
or 5 Why)
• Technical root causes of non-detection have been identified
• Systemic root causes of non-detection have been identified
• Each identified root cause has been assigned to a failure cause category
• Risk assessment is updated (taking into consideration the analysis of the root causes
of non-detection)
4.4.4 D4 Non-detection – Criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• Easy-to-follow documentation; all causes of the non-detection of the problem have
been determined by verification
• The consistent description of the procedure for describing symptoms through to the
verification of causes is understandable for third parties



Opportunities:
• Effective and efficient identification of the root causes by correctly using suitable
tools and methods
Risks:
• Hastily deciding on a suspected cause without verification
• Reciprocal effects/interactions are not recognized
• Not all causes have been identified


36 5 D5 – Selection and verification of
corrective actions
5 D5 – Selection and

verification of
corrective actions
The objective of process step D5 is the development, selection and verification of corrective
actions to eliminate the technical and systemic root causes for the occurrence and non-
detection identified in D4 (root cause analysis).
Corrective actions are selected on the basis of proven effectiveness while taking their
efficiency into account. Evidence of effectiveness must be documented.
The optimum corrective actions with long-term effect are to be selected. Suitable tests, for
example, are to be used to demonstrate that the selected corrective actions solve the prob-
lem permanently and do not have any undesirable effects.
The outcome is an approved action plan with established deadlines, resource plan and re
sponsibilities for the selected corrective actions.
5.2 Process
The process step serves to identify and verify the planned corrective actions. This process
step does not involve the implementation of corrective actions.
Potential corrective actions are developed within the team. It must be noted here that correc-
tive actions are developed to eliminate both the root causes of the occurrence and the root
causes of the non-detection of the problem. Each identified root cause must be eliminated
through actions within the scope of 8D problem solving. Any additional, overarching actions
over which the team leader or sponsor has no control will be transferred to the organization
via D7 (prevention of reoccurrence).
It can also be beneficial to consider the same or similar failure causes for which actions have
already been implemented in the past and whose effectiveness has been confirmed.
Once the potential corrective actions have been developed, a risk assessment has to be carried
out for the corrective actions, in order to determine and assess the resulting reciprocal effects.

Corrective actions are selected based on their effectiveness while taking their efficiency into
Volume
account.8D_Figure
In order to15_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
reach an objective decision, it is necessary for action plans/schedules to
already be in place for the potential corrective actions.
Verified, actual root causes
Technical Technical Systemic Systemic

Occurrence Non-detection Occurrence Non-detection
Action Action Action Action

Proof of effectiveness
Verified actions with action plans for implementation
Figure 15: Overview D5 - Selection and verification of corrective actions

11
The selected corrective actions have to be verified and documented.
The implementation plan must be announced within the organization in order to avoid the
mixing of (old/new) products or to prepare the organization for the change to a process, for
example.


38 5 D5 – Selection and verification of
corrective actions

Methods for collecting and defining corrective measures
• Creativity techniques
• Poka-yoke approach
Methods for assessing and verifying the corrective measures

• Decision matrix
• Risk analysis matrix
• Experiment plan (DOE)
• Machinery/process capabilities
• FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)
• Action plan
• Resource plan
• Project plan
• Product and process approval
• Key process indicators
5.4.1 D5 – Occurrence – basic requirements

• Possible corrective actions for an occurrence in relation to all technical and systemic
root causes are listed
• Easy-to-follow effectiveness/efficiency assessment of the achievable corrective
actions, with justification
• The selection of corrective actions for each identified root cause must be transparent
• Approved, detailed action plan (dates, responsible parties, required resources are
approved)
• Possible undesirable effects of each of the corrective actions have been analyzed and
are documented
5.4.2 D5 – Occurrence – Criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• Methods are used to verify and document the selection of corrective actions (e.g. via
a decision matrix)
• Verification for the selection of the corrective actions is described in a way that is
understandable for third parties


5.4.3 D5 – Non-detection - Basic requirements

• Possible corrective actions for non-detection in relation to all technical and systemic
root causes are listed
• Easy-to-follow effectiveness/efficiency assessment of the possible corrective actions,
with justification
• The selection of corrective actions for each identified root cause must be transparent
• Approved, detailed action plan (dates, responsible parties, required resources are
approved)
• Possible undesirable effects of each of the corrective actions have been analyzed and
are documented
5.4.4 D5 – Non-detection – Criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• Methods are used to verify and document the selection of corrective actions (e.g. via
a decision matrix)
• Verification for the selection of the corrective actions is described in a way that is

Opportunities:
• Selection of effective and efficient corrective actions
• Permanent prevention of reoccurrence of the problem, repeat failures
• Cost minimization for the organization
• Increased robustness of products and processes
Risks:
• Developed corrective actions are incomplete or selection of inappropriate corrective
actions (wrong assessment criteria)
• The planned corrective actions bear no relationship to the root causes
• Reoccurrence of the problem due to flawed or missing evidence of effectiveness
• New problems arise as a result of the undetected risks associated with corrective
actions (side effects)
• Efficiency at the expense of effectiveness


40 6 D6 – Implementation and validation of
corrective actions
6 D6 – Implementation and

validation of
corrective actions
The objective of D6 is the implementation of the selected permanent corrective actions. The
permanent corrective actions are validated and long-term results are observed. The contain-
ment actions will be removed/lifted after the implementation and validation of the permanent
corrective actions.
6.2 Process
Corrective actions must be implemented on the basis of the action plan defined in D5. The
team leader
Volume coordinates
8D_Figure and monitors the implementation of actions. The sponsor provides
16_Austauschgrafik_Stand_PH_11.04.2019
the resources necessary for implementation.
Verified actions with action plans for implementation
Action
plan
Action plan
Action
plan
Team leader
Action
plan
Validation of corrective actions
Removal of containment actions from D3
Sustainable corrective actions implemented

Figure 16: Overview D6 - Implementation and Dokument
validationwurde
of corrective measures
bereitgestellt vom 12

6 D6 – Implementation and validation of
Should changes to the planned introduction occur during implementation, or if new informa-
tion emerges, these must be included in D5 – Selection and verification of corrective actions.
Containment actions from D3 must not be withdrawn until the effectiveness of the imple-
mented corrective actions has been confirmed.
The corrective actions that are introduced have to be validated. The implementation of
actions must be documented according to the action plan.

Realization
• Action plan
• Resource plan
• Project plan
• Product and process approval
• Control plan (CP)
Validation
• Pareto chart of failures, histogram, failure collection chart
• IT/software (log files, dumps, traces)
• Machine/process capabilities
• Interaction analysis of overall process/system
• Key process indicators
• Evaluation of functional safety
• Evaluation of security (access security)
6.4.1 D6 – Occurrence – basic requirements

• Implementation of the selected permanent corrective actions based on the action
plan (from D5)
• Validation of the effectiveness of the permanent corrective actions
• Removal of containment actions after validation of permanent corrective actions


42 6 D6 – Implementation and validation of
corrective actions
6.4.2 D6 – Occurrence – Criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• The provision of evidence, particularly for validation, is carried out and documented
with the aid of methods (e.g. experiments, photos, drawings, etc.).
• The provision of evidence, particularly for validation, is described in a way that is
• Permanent incorporation of the corrective actions is documented and described in a
way that is understandable
6.4.3 D6 – Non-detection - Basic requirements

• Implementation of the selected permanent corrective actions based on the action
plan (from D5)
• Validation of the effectiveness of the permanent corrective actions
• Removal of containment actions after validation of permanent corrective actions
6.4.4 D6 – Non-detection – Criteria for achieving “Excellence”

• Verification, particularly for validation, is performed and carried out with the aid of
methods (e.g. experiments, photos and drawings, etc.).
• The provision of evidence, particularly for validation, is described in a way that is
• Permanent incorporation of the corrective actions is documented and described in a
way that is understandable

Opportunities
• Cost reduction by eliminating the containment actions with timely implementation of
the corrective actions
• Process optimization, creation of robust processes and products
Risks:
• The containment actions may distort the result during validation
• Reciprocal effects are not taken into consideration during validation
• Containment actions are removed too early
• Schedule is not adhered to
• Containment actions are not removed
• Resources are exceeded, increased demand on resources


7 D7 – Prevention of
reoccurrence

The objective of the D7 is to identify and document actions that ensure the permanent
prevention of the identified root causes for similar products or processes by adapting the
management system in the sense of standardization.
The result is the preparation and transfer of acquired information to other processes, such as
the lessons learned process.
7.2 Process
In D5 and D6, actions were assessed and implemented for each identified root cause.
Greater actions beyond this, which were identified in D5 but over which the team leader or
sponsor has no control, are transferred to the organization via D7.
To this end, the problem and the underlying technical and systemic root causes are assessed
in D7.
Information that is relevant to similar products and processes has to be identified from the
specific case. This information must be prepared and actively communicated to the relevant
departments in the organization in order to prevent failures from repeating there. The acqui-
red information is forwarded to a Lessons Learned process, for example, which ensures that
documentation is reviewed or updated.


44 7 D7 – Prevention of reoccurrence
Problem from D2, causes from D4, actions from D5 and D6
Prevention Transfer of knowledge

1 2
product-/process-related across similar products and processes
Within 8D Forwarding to Lessons Learned
Sustainable and preventive actions across similar products

Figure 17: Overview of D7 - Prevention of “reoccurrence”
13
Relevant documents include FMEA, control plan (CP), drawings or specifications, for exam
ple. If necessary, notes on relevant measures relating to the management system are to be
provided. These may include the revision of instructions, development/construction guide-
lines or test schedules.
The forwarding of information is to be documented. The reasons for not forwarding informa
tion have to be explained.

• Lessons Learned
• Knowledge management
• Expert networks (e.g. FMEA moderators)



• Documents that the problem-solving team are able to influence are reviewed and
revised if necessary (e.g. FMEA, test schedules and instructions); documentation
available and traceable
• Evaluation of whether the existing problem resolution can also be applied to compa-
rable products, processes and locations;
Note: This can be carried out with the involvement of further positions/persons (e.g. sponsor) or functions. If
necessary, the lessons learned process or the continuous improvement process (CIP), etc. is initiated.

• The party responsible for supervising the preventive measures and transferring the
acquired knowledge/information to the organization (e.g. into a lessons learned
process) is designated
• The incorporation of preventive measures in subsequent processes (e.g. lessons
learned) has been confirmed and documented
• The documentation is available and clearly described

Opportunities:
• Greater customer satisfaction; creation of trust
• Systemic failure prevention, early identification
• Cost reduction, competitive advantages
• Supplier development
• 8D problem-solving team as the initiator of continuous improvement (motivation)
Risks:
• Information is not sufficiently structured or inadequate
• Knowledge is gained here, but the actions are not implemented
• Not all locations or similar products and processes are taken into consideration


46 8 D8 – Conclusion and ACKNOWLEDGMENT of the
team’s success
8 D8 – Conclusion and

acknowledgment of the
team’s success
The purpose of process step D8 is to conclude the team’s work, to acknowledge the perfor
mance of individuals and the team, and to release the team from the task.
The result is the completed 8D report.
8.2 Process
The prerequisite for completing the problem-solving process is the completion of steps D1 to
D7 and the conclusion of all actions relating to the specific problem.
8D report with all documents
Acknowledgement
of team success
Sponsor
Team leader Team members
Relieve the team
8D problem solving completed and team success acknowledged
Figure 18: Overview D8 - Conclusion and acknowledgment of the team’s success

14


8 D8 – Conclusion and ACKNOWLEDGMENT of the
team’s success 47
The sponsor and the team leader remain responsible for the specific problem until the con-
clusion of all actions.
The problem-solving process is completed once the approval by the sponsor and the team
leader has been documented.
The solution to the problem must be presented in a final discussion with the participation of
as many participants as possible, including the team leader and sponsor. Feedback must be
provided to the participants and the team performance must be acknowledged. An assess-
ment can be conducted in the form of a structured evaluation (see “Assessment criteria”
section in the introduction).
The outcomes of 8D problem-solving processes are presented, where possible and appropri-
ate, by the sponsor as part of a management review.

• Assessment matrix
• Feedback

• Conclusion of all actions relating to the specific problem
• Report is available and is approved by the sponsor and team leader
• Team acknowledgment and release of team members

• Documentation is available for self-assessment of the problem solution based on the
assessment criteria
• Team acknowledgment during a final discussion with a focus on teamwork and
communication with the participation of as many team members as possible
• Self-assessment of the problem solution is included in the final discussion with the
sponsor
• Assessment has been conducted by independent third parties (outside the 8D team)


48 8 D8 – Conclusion and ACKNOWLEDGMENT of the
team’s success

Opportunities:
• Team motivation is increased
• Future 8D processes run more efficiently
• Improvement of problem-solving skills
Risks:
• Team success is not sufficiently acknowledged; only the conclusion of the process is
focused on
• Premature end to the 8D problem-solving process, without all actions being imple-
mented
• Assessment is not conducted in an objective manner


9 Glossary 49
9 Glossary
ABC analysis Method for identification, evaluation and

prioritization of activities based on defined influenc
ing factors. Activities are classified as A (very impor
tant), B (important) and C (less important).
AIAG CQI-20 Automotive Industry Action Group‘s Effective Pro

blemSolving Guide (description of problem-solving
process)
Assessment Evaluation, appraisal. The application of specific

documented criteria to determine acceptance,
approval or release (source: ISO/IEC 14102:2008).
Cause-effect diagram Also called “fishbone diagram”
Downtime of services Outage time, stoppage time
FMEA Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

(source: DIN EN 60300-1:2015-01)
Lessons Learned Experience gained from mistakes and successful

projects (source: DIN EN ISO 9001:2015-11)
Non-detection of the The problem has occurred or arisen, but has not
been identified as such
problem


50 9 Glossary
Occurrence of the problem In relation to the emergence of the problem itself;

in contrast to non-detection of the problem
CP Control plan (source: IATF 16949:2016)
QDX: Quality Uniform exchange format on XML basis for qual

ity data exchange between customer and supplier
Data eXchange (source: VDA Volume 7)
Responsibility matrix Structured presentation of responsibilities, communi-

cation and escalation paths
Service-Level-Agreements Service Agreement (source: DIN ISO/IEC 19086-1)
SPC Statistical process control (source: ISO 11462-2:2010)
Systemic causes Interaction of conditions that allow the technical

causes and are thus indirectly related to the problem.
The conditions lie in the organization or in processes
(management processes, value creation processes,
support processes).
Technical causes Interaction of conditions that cause the problem and

are directly causally related to the problem


8D report
Start date: 8D report number Version Status/report form: Please select
8D titel: Current date
Problem owner/customer Please select Subject of problem solving
E-mail: Additional information:
Phone Please select
D1 Problem-solving team
Name Department Position Contact info.
Sponsor:
Team leader
Contact person:
Team member 1
D2 Problem description
Append media data
Description - Symptom
Description - Problem (created

by problem-solving team):
(Including description of
effects, extent of affected
products, etc.)
More information - More information -

Risk assessment
Categorization (for example, Categorization (location of Date
started / updated?
type of defect) Example (to be customized) defect): Example (to be customized) Please select
D3 Containment actions
Templates for
Result Risk and side effect Methodology used for determining

Description of contaiment actions (CA) Proof of effectiveness by Implementation date Responsible (person, contact info.)
effectiveness of containment action the residual risk and the side effects
processing 8D
CA 1:
CA 2:
CA 3:
CA n:
D4 Root cause analysis

Technical root causes occurrence (TCO) Verification by (person) Date Results / method / report ID from VDA root cause categories
TCO 1:
Technical root cause non-detection (TCN) Verification by (person) Date Results / method / report ID from VDA root cause categories

TCN 1:
Systemic root cause occurrence (SCO) Verification by (person) Date Results / method / report ID from VDA root cause categories
SCO 1:
Systemic root cause non-detection (SCN) Verification by (person) Date Results / method / report ID from VDA root cause categories
SCN 1:

Templates for
processing 8D 51
D5 Selection and verification of corrective actions
Verification by Attach documents
Corrective actions Verification performed on Plan date of implementation Responsible for the implementation(e.g. decision matrix, allowing traceability of the selection of measures)
(person)
Reference to TCO 1:
Reference to TCO 2:
Reference to TCO n:
Reference to TCN 1:
Reference to TCN 2:
Reference to TCN n:
Reference to SCO 1:
Reference to SCN 1:
D6 Implementation and validation of corrective actions

Attach documents
Corrective actions Implementation date Effective from Validated on Responsible (validation) (e.g. validation results)
52 Templates for
processing 8D
Reference to TCO 1:
Reference to TCN 1:
Reference to SCO 1:
Reference to SCN 1:
Removal of containmet actions Responsible Removal date
Reference to CA 1
D7 Prevention of reoccurrence
Assessment of applicability (by the Attach documents
Actions for prevention (product- or process-related) Responsible Planned Hand over date
recipient) (Proof of applicability)
Assessment of applicability (by the Attach documents

Actions for prevention (across product or process) Responsible Planned Hand over date
recipient) (Proof of applicability)
D8 Conclusion and acknowledgement of the team's success

Participants of the final discussion: Result 8D assessment 8D assessment conducted by 8D assessment conducted on

Participant 1
Participant 2
Date of the final meeting (optional)
Results of the final discussion
(optional)

Signature - Team Leader Date Signature - Sponsor Date

Templates for
processing 8D 53
IS/IS NOT analysis template

Is/Is-Not-Differences and changes
OB IS/IS NOT Template
IS IS NOT What are the What was changed Potential changes Test methods
differences (including date)
Which products/processes Are there similar products/
are affected? processes that were not
affected by this problem?
What
What kind of non-conformity Are additional non-

is it? conformities expected for
this affected product/
process?
Where was the product/ Where else could the non-

process when the first non- conformity occur as well?
conformity occurred?
Where
On what part/area of the What are the names of the

product did the non- neighboring products/
conformity occur? processes and which of them
are not affected by the
non-conformity?
When did the non-conformity Could the problem have

occur for the first time? occurred in an earlier
(Date of occurrence & phase/at an earlier point in
lifecycle) time?
When
Is a systematic occurence of Can more failures be

failure detected? (Single expected since the failure
failure, constantly was detected?
increasing/decrising, random
or cyclical)?
How many failures are How many might be

there? (Number & PPMs) expected in future?
Scope
Which persons are affected? What could lead to a

Which costs have incurred worse/better situation?
so far? Are they going to
increase, decrease or will
they remain stable?


Occurence Non-Detection
Management Method Machine Machine Method Management
54 Templates for
processing 8D

Excluded Root Cause
(according to assessment)

Potential Root Cause
(in assessment)
Indentified Potential
Root Cause
Material Man Environment (according to assessment) Environment Man Material
Cause-effect diagram template for occurrence and non-detection

Templates for
processing 8D 55
Template for evaluating the cause-effect diagram


56 Templates for
processing 8D
Technical examination
5-Why


Templates for
processing 8D 57
Systemic examination


Decision Matrix:
(short statement)
Variant 1 Variant 2 Variant 3
MUST Criteria Degree of fulfillment - MUST +/- Degree of fulfillment - MUST +/- Degree of fulfillment - MUST +/-
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Weighting
TARGET Criteria Degree of fulfillment - TARGET 0-10 Points Degree of fulfillment - TARGET 0-10 Points Degree of fulfillment - TARGET 0-10 Points
1-10
1.
58 Templates for
processing 8D
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Total Points Variant 1 0 Total Points Variant 2 0 Total Points Variant 3 0


Templates for
processing 8D 59
List of assessment criteria

Fulfilled Fulfilled
(OK) (1)
Not fulfilled Criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
Basic requirements (NOK) “Excellence” (0)
General basic General criteria for

General requirements achieving “Excellence”
Version numbering of the report is Content is written efficiently,
adhered to objectively and in full; abbrevia-
tions are explained
Dates of measures are up to date The report is described consis-
tently and transparently and the
formatting is clearly structured
The report also contains a
summary of the content
(table template or management
summary, one-pager, etc.).
Specified dates are adhered to
Fulfilled Fulfilled
(OK) (1)
D1 Basic Not fulfilled D1 Criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
D1 requirements (NOK) “Excellence” (0)
Team leader appointed Clearly defined and easy-to-
follow role description and
department description
Sponsor appointed The team is supported by an
independent 8D moderator
The relevant departments are Designation of an independent
represented in the team, expertise third party (outside the 8D team)
is available for the assessment
The sponsor’s position within the
hierarchy reflects the importance
of the problem
Skills relating to the 8D problem-
solving process are available in
the team


60 Templates for
processing 8D
Fulfilled Fulfilled
(OK) (1)
Comprehensible symptom Other documentation with
description (description of the additional media (images, audio,
non-conformity from the target video) is attached.
state to the actual state)
Number, data, fact-based problem Is/Is-Not analysis is documented

description; clear and easy-to-fol- using other methods
low description: What exactly is
the non-conformity? Where is the
non-conformity? When did the
non-conformity occur? How often
does the non-conformity occur?
How many items or item numbers
are affected?
Is/Is-Not analysis performed Potential effects on similar prod
ucts, processes and locations
have been checked
Fulfilled Fulfilled
(OK) (1)
Identification and selection of Ongoing documentation of the
containment actions based on the effectiveness of the containment
Is/Is-Not analysis actions after their introduction
until confirmation of the effec-
tiveness of the implemented
permanent corrective measures
Detailed description of the Methodical investigation of the

containment actions residual risk and side effects,
and documentation
Responsible party appointed Easy-to-follow documentation of
the identification and selection
of containment actions based on
the Is/Is-Not analysis
Dates (planned-actual) recorded
Proof of effectiveness kept
Risk and side effects of the
containment actions


Templates for
processing 8D 61
Fulfilled Fulfilled
D4 (OK) D4 Occurrence (1)
Occur- D4 Occurrence basic Not fulfilled Criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
rence requirements (NOK) “Excellence” (0)
Systematic identification of caus Easy-to-follow documentation;
es with the aid of methods (e.g. all causes of the occurrence of
cause-effect diagram or 5 Why) the problem have been deter-
mined by verification
Technical root causes for the The consistent description of
occurrence have been identified the procedure for describing
symptoms through to the
verification of causes is under-
standable for third parties
Confirmation of causes via Is/
Is-Not analysis description from
D2 (no contradiction)
Systemic root causes for the
occurrence have been identified
Each identified root cause has
been assigned to a failure cause
category
Risk assessment is updated
(taking into consideration the
analysis of the root causes of the
occurrence)
Fulfilled Fulfilled
D4 (OK) D4 Non-detection (1)
Non- D4 Non-detection Not fulfilled criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
detection basic requirement (NOK) “Excellence” (0)
Systematic identification of caus Easy-to-follow documentation;
es with the aid of methods (e.g. all causes of the non-detection
cause-effect diagram or 5 Why) of the problem have been deter-
mined by verification
Technical root causes for the The consistent description of
non-detection have been the procedure for describing
identified symptoms through to the
verification of causes is under-
standable for third parties
Systemic root causes for the non-

detection have been identified
Each identified root cause has

been assigned to a failure cause
category
Risk assessment is updated
(taking into consideration the
analysis of the root causes of
non-detection )


62 Templates for
processing 8D
Fulfilled Fulfilled
D5 (OK) (1)
Occur- D5 Occurrence Not fulfilled D5 Occurrence - criteria for Not fulfilled
rence basic requirements (NOK)) achieving “Excellence” (0)
Possible corrective actions for Methods are used to verify
an occurrence in relation to and document the selection of
all technical and systemic root corrective actions (e.g. via a
causes are listed decision matrix)
Easy-to-follow effectiveness/ Verification for the selection
efficacy assessment of the of the corrective actions is de
achievable corrective actions, scribed in a way that is under-
with justification standable for third parties
The selection of corrective
actions for each identified root
cause must be transparent
Approved, detailed action plan
(dates, responsible parties,
required resources are approved)
Possible undesirable effects of
each of the corrective actions
have been analyzed and are
recorded
Fulfilled Fulfilled
Non-de- D5 Non-detection Not fulfilled criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
tection basic requirement (NOK) “Excellence” (0)
Possible corrective actions for Methods are used to verify
non-detection in relation to all and document the selection
technical and systemic root of corrective actions (e.g. via
causes are listed decision matrix)
Easy-to-follow effectiveness/ Verification for the selection of
efficacy assessment of the the corrective actions is descri-
possible corrective actions, with bed in a way that is under-
justification standable for third parties
The selection of corrective

actions for each identified root
cause must be transparent
Approved, detailed action plan

(dates, responsible parties,
required resources are approved)
Possible undesirable effects of

each of the corrective actions
have been analyzed and are
documented


Templates for
processing 8D 63
Fulfilled Fulfilled
D6 (OK) (1)
Occur- D6 Occurrence Not fulfilled D6 Occurrence - criteria for Not fulfilled
rence basic requirements (NOK) achieving “Excellence” (0)
Implementation of the selected The provision of evidence, partic
permanent corrective actions ularly for validation, is carried
based on the action plan out and documented with the aid
(from D5) of methods (e.g. experiments,
photos, drawings, etc.).
Validation of the effectiveness of The provision of evidence, parti-

the permanent corrective actions cularly for validation, is described
in a way that is understandable
for third parties
Removal of containment actions Permanent incorporation of the

after validation of permanent corrective actions is documented
corrective actions and described in a way that is
understandable
Fulfilled Fulfilled
Non-de- D6 Non-detection Not fulfilled criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
tection basic requirement (NOK) “Excellence” (0)
Implementation of the selected The provision of evidence, partic
permanent corrective actions ularly for validation, is carried
based on the action plan (from out and documented with the aid
D5) of methods (e.g. experiments,
photos and drawings, etc.).
Validation of the effectiveness of The provision of evidence, partic
the permanent corrective actions ularly for validation, is described
in a way that is understandable
for third parties
Removal of containment actions Permanent incorporation of the
after validation of permanent corrective actions is documented
corrective actions and described in a way that is
understandable


64 Templates for
processing 8D
Fulfilled Fulfilled
(OK) (1)
Not fulfilled D7 Criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
D7 D7 Basic requirement (NOK) “Excellence” (0)
Documents that the problem- The party responsible for super

solving team are able to influence vising the preventive measures
are reviewed and revised if and transferring the acquired
necessary (e.g. FMEA, test knowledge/information to the
schedules and instructions); organization (e.g. to a lessons
documentation available and learned process) is designated
traceable
Evaluation of whether the The incorporation of preven-

existing problem resolution can tive measures in subsequent
also be applied to compara- processes (e.g. lessons learned)
ble products, processes and has been confirmed and docu-
locations; this can be carried out mented.
with the involvement of further
positions/persons (e.g. sponsor)
or functions. If necessary, the
lessons learned process or the
continuous improvement process
(CIP), etc. is initiated.
The documentation is available
and clearly described.
Fulfilled Fulfilled
(OK) (1)
Not fulfilled D8 Criteria for achieving Not fulfilled
D8 D8 Basic requirement (NOK)) “Excellence” (0)
Conclusion of all actions relating Documentation is available for
to the specific problem self-assessment of the problem
solution based on the assess-
ment criteria.
Report is available and is ap Team acknowledgment during a
proved by the sponsor and team final discussion with a focus on
leader teamwork and communication
with the participation of as many
team members as possible
Team acknowledgment and relea- Self-assessment of the problem
se of team members solution is included in the final
discussion with the sponsor
Assessment has been conduc-
ted by independent third parties
(outside the 8D team)


Templates for
processing 8D 65


66
Quality Management in the Automotive Industry

The current versions of published VDA volumes related to quality management in the
automotive industry (QAI) can be found at http://www.vda-qmc.de.
You can also order volumes directly via this website.
Reference:
Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)

(German Association of the Automotive Industry)
Qualitäts Management Center (QMC) (Quality Management Center)
Behrenstrasse 35, 10117 Berlin, Germany

Phone +49 (0) 30-89 78 42 235, Fax +49 (0) 30-89 78 42 605
E-mail: info@vda-qmc.de, Internet: www.vda-qmc.de



VDA 8D - Problem - Solving - VDA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VDA 8D - Problem - Solving - VDA

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

VDA 8D - Problem - Solving - VDA

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Qualitäts Management Center

im Verband der Automobilindustrie

Quality Management in the Automotive Industry

1st edition, November 2018

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

1st edition, November 2018

Verband der Automobilindustrie e. V. (VDA)

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V. (VDA)

Printed on chlorine-free bleached paper

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Non-binding VDA recommendation

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Joint approach of AIAG and VDA with regard to problem solving

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Defect culture and the role of leadership

Problem solving and complaints 10

Introduction to problem solving in 8

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

4 D4 – Root cause analysis 30

5 D5 – Selection and verification of

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

6 D6 – Implementation and validation of

8 D8 – Finalization and acknowledgement of

Templates for processing 8D 51

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Defect culture and the role

Problem can be resolved individually

no leadership support necessary, alternative methods are permitted

Figure 1: Problem solving and complexity

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

Problem solving and

Examples of time-consuming elements in problem solving

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

It comprises three complementary aspects. The term 8D describes:

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

The 8D method is based on the following principles in particular:

Team orientation: Problem solving is based on a multi-disciplinary approach.

VDA Volume 7 Quality Data Exchange „QDX“

VDA Volume 8D ‒ Problem Solving in 8 Disciplines

Figure 2: Embedding of the 8D – Problem Solving in 8 Disciplines in the VDA volumes

Dokument wurde bereitgestellt vom

Nur zur internen Verwendung für MAGNA STEYR bestimmt.

D1: Problem-solving team

D2: Problem description

D3: Containment actions

D4: Root cause analysis

D5: Selection and verification

Problem solving and complaints 10

4 D4 – Root cause analysis 30

5 D5 – Selection and verification of

6 D6 – Implementation and validation of

8 D8 – Finalization and acknowledgement of

Templates for processing 8D 51

Within the scope of a customer-supplier relationship, the exchange of information using

1. A complete and understandable description of the non-conformity found is available

2. Solving the problem exceeds the ability of a single person