Quality Assurance Management Discussion


Quality Assurance
Status: Planning

Background


Quality Assurance Management has previously slightly been discussed on the list but no development has made it back into the project.
I think it is important to have this section in webERP so that the MRP function can also be included in this project.

Definition - Goals


QA : Quality Assurance
QAA: Quality Assurance Analyst

The QA procedures can be tedious and complicated depending on the requirements of firms. Therefore, from the MRP and Manufacturer's point of view),
I will focus on these three basic functions first:
  1. After receiving purchase order, the QAA will need to approve the received item by entering reference ID and click on Released radio button (Released or Not Released) --> if the inventory item is not released, the item can not be used in any of the transaction (work order or sell to the customer)
  2. After receiving work order, the QAA will need to approve the received work order item by entering reference ID and click on Released radio button (Released or Not Released) --> if the work inventory item is not released, the item can not be used in any of the transaction (work order or sell to the customer)
  3. QAA will verify the inputs of work orders and inventory receiving are correct. -> if not, QA is able to correct it and records some notes.

Other Related Goals of this Development


Desired Forms or Functions to Be Done


Related Files and DB tables


WorkOrderReceive.php
GoodsReceived.php
....


<Phil>
Just a few thoughts ... we could add a link to the wiki relating to each work order which would provide and easily retreivable place for QA notes on each work order.

Perhaps we could make it so only QA authorised people could receive product against works orders to satisfy your requirements - it seems like the job is being done twice currently - the people receiving should be the people who authorise the product as within specification this is part of the receiving function (in my view) - much the same as inspection on arrival of raw materials or finished goods for resale - a suitable/agreed inspection and check against spec is required before the goods should be received in and an inspection report sent to the supplier where differences exist. How could we code up a suitable inspection report inside webERP for email to the supplier? We would need to record the inspection criteria for the item. Perhaps we could do this through item properties currently defined against the category of items. If we flag some of these properties as "required on receiving" we could make a check list inside webERP at the time of receiving items against a work order or purchase order.
Perhaps we could go further and require that an authorised user - who has the appropriate QA authority answers the checklist appropriately before allowing receipt of the stock to be processed. The completed check-list once entered at the time of the receipt is not open for subsequent editing but is available for reveiw against the stock movement record for the receipt of stock.


There is a school of thought that requires quality to be "built in" rather than poor quality "inspected out" - quality product being the result of proper training and tools given to each work centre and responsibility for quality squarely with the operator who has demonstrated the ability to identify out of specification product. This way out of spec product is rejected long before it gets to finished - since the subsequent processing is all wasted if a fault is found early on in the process. Better to reject early than later and the operators to be the guardians of quality (this is a cultural shift as much as anything - and requires the status of operators to be lifted). Toyota operators are famously capable and authorised to stop the entire line if they see a problem or are provided with inferior materials/tools to do their job. The management/supervisors have failed if this occurs (not the operator) since it is their job to ensure each work station is capable of producing quality. Operators who do stop the line having spotted the problem are heros since they saved the output of huge amounts of waste - (muda). Much better to focus the entire resources of the line on resolving the root problem than carry on making duds.

Until the work order is finished with good product received the items remain as work in progress as a production variance to write off. The quality inspection is part of the manufacture.

</Phil>

<JeffWang>
I like simple.
So if we can use a "QA Virtual Location" ?
Means every purchase order or production order must delievery to this Location. and Only QAA can move items from this Location to others. each item need a QA activity must be INPUT to this location, after QAA check, they can bult transfer them to Actual location(s). Items in this location means no sellable and no usable. QAA's work is check this Location and move good ones out.
I guess this solution need most mini code change, and if company don't use QA, just not use the Location.
sorry for my Chinese-English.
</JeffWang>

<AnthonyC>

Nov. 08
Hi Phil & Jeff,
After talking to the coworkers in the company, they think your idea is better than our original one. Receiving Clerk should authorize the products since we only care about whether the product meet the right descriptions and quantity, and QAA should focus on the work order. About emailing the supplier, I don't know if that is effective when resolving the discrepancy issue. Is it better to send the email to accounting department in the company because they are usually the ones who follow up the discrepancies. A report generated after the inspection would be a good idea. (Another issue comes up in my head: how to be environmental? killing less trees?)
The idea that flags the properties in each item is not bad, however usually the receiving clerks don't open up boxes when receiving. It is out of their control to check the detail properties of each item. However the place we can flag for inspection in the category property as (required on receiving) therefore the QA section can show the list of the item that need to be checked.

I like the idea of Virtual Location. It seems making the development easier. What do others think?


Nov.09 I am not sure how an item can have two status(Finished Product & Work in progress). Is this easy to change in the structures of webERP?

</AnthonyC>

<Tim>
Until the work order is completed and product received into stock (after QA approval), then the finished goods item doesn't exist. The items issued to the work order, are the work in progress.
</Tim>

<DKShukla>
Hi All
Original idea of Phil is more practical, I will want to give some suggestions from user point of view.QAM functionality should be configurable from the set up, There should be provision to enable or disable inward quality check,in process quality check and outward quality check,there should be provision to set global QA check list parameters category wise with specified criteria limits.set up of work flow departments,work center in department, work center user, QA inspector user,e-mail template for rejection note etc
Idea of virtual location is not bad but in real world we are having real locations, i suggest that there should be Four pre defined not editable locations i.e inward QA, Production floor, Outward QA and rejection store. Material routing should be 1- material receipt by store people 2- material transfer to inward QA for inspection 3- material transfer to inventory store after inspection from inward QA with QA acceptance note or material transfer to rejection store with rejection note 4 - material transfer to production floor from stores or dispatched to customer with invoice 5- material transfer from production to outward QA or material transfer to rejection store with rejection note 6- material transfer from outward QA to store with QA acceptance note or material transfer to rejection store with rejection note.7- material transfer from rejection store to supplier with rejection note or material disposed off with write off note.
There will be a provision to setup dir structure for storing QA acceptance and rejection reports.

Sometime suppliers directly send sample for approval , to handle these situations inward QA will able to receive material and return back material directly to supplier.

There should be a provision to add QA check point list at individual component level and also provision to enable or disable global QA check list parameter.

I will hope that my thoughts may help you to make webERP better and useful.
</DKshukla>
Valid XHTML :: Valid CSS: :: Powered by WikkaWikiGet webERP Accounting & Business Management at SourceForge.net. Fast, secure and Free Open Source software downloads