Don’t Let Your Project Sink: Achieving Zero Rework through Effective Supplier Quality Practices Tricia Thibodeaux, Fluor Corporation RT308 – Achieving Zero Rework through Effective Supplier Quality Practices 2014 CII Annual Conference July 21–23 • Indianapolis, Indiana Essential Question What are the most effective processes and practices for ensuring that project materials and equipment are produced, manufactured, or fabricated in strict accordance with all applicable specifications, and that they are delivered to the project site without any need for rework? RT308 – Achieving Zero Rework through Effective Supplier Quality Practices Buck Blum, CB&I Gene Nikstad, CH2M HILL Vince Carney, Southern Co. Jim Peters, Bechtel Corporation Don Ellis, DuPont Tricia Thibodeaux, Fluor Don Holte, Procter & Gamble Ken Walsh, San Diego State University Phil Klefas, Aramco Services Thais Alves, San Diego State University Terry McMillan, Alstom Power Shamail Ahmad, San Diego State University Brad Monroe, Dresser-Rand Yoshua Neuman, San Diego State University Randy Moreland, Shell Duc Huy Nguyen, San Diego State University Kim Needy, University of Arkansas Gary Weiler, Leidos Constructors Rufaidah AlMaian, University of Arkansas Methods Literature Review Inside the Construction Industry Outside the Construction Industry Data Collection Sources Supplier Quality Documents Supplier Focus Groups Supplier Quality Practices and Performance Survey Supplier Quality Data Collection Structured Interviews Reports Domestic Suppliers Tagged/ Engineered Equipment Supplier Quality Organization Procedures International Suppliers Fabricated Goods (Steel & Pipe) Supplier Quality System Manufactured / Bulk Materials Metrics, Data Assessment, Supporting Documents Supplier Supplier Quality Process Map Post Completion Feedback Project Start 1. Planning and Selection 2. Execution 3.1. Release from Shop 3.2. Received at site 3.3. Mechanical Completion Reject packages if they do not meet quality standards Supplier Quality Process Map Post Completion Feedback Project Start 1. Planning and Selection 2. Execution 3.1. Release from Shop 3.2. Received at site 3.3. Mechanical Completion Reject packages if they do not meet quality standards Key Result #1 Companies who were deemed “more effective” in their application of supplier quality practices found more defects earlier in the product cycle, thus lowering the cost of rework. • Utilize model output – Estimate the cost of non-quality – Make supplier decisions based on total delivered cost – Determine whether applying more inspection is worth the investment 0.9 Probability the inspection can catch and repair non-conformance (Pinsp) Key Result #2 0.99 Contours of constant total cost of fNQ 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.99 Probability the item is fabricated correctly (Pfab) Implementation Session • Boarding Pass • Published IR contents: – Supplier Quality Processes Map and RACI Matrix – Estimating the Impact of the Cost of Non-Quality – Glossary of Terms and Acronyms – Total Delivered Cost Discussion • Handouts Implementation Session Learning Objectives • Explain the methods used • Explain the supplier quality process map • Demonstrate the impact of identifying non-conformances across several stages of the supply process • Utilize the cost-tradeoff curves to incorporate resource decisions into supplier selection processes Will your project suffer the same fate? Come to our Implementation Session Moderator Buck Blum, CB&I Panel Don Ellis, DuPont Brad Monroe, Dresser-Rand Grand Ballroom 1-2 1:00 and 2:15 p.m. today Randy Moreland, Shell Kim LaScola Needy, University of Arkansas Ken Walsh, San Diego State University