The Origins of Layered Process Audits (LPA,) Circa 1994

“A manager cannot manage what he or she does not understand,” Dr. William Spurgeon. As a new student in the University of Michigan’s Manufacturing Systems Masters in Engineering curriculum, all student were required to listen to Dr. Spurgeon share his experience and stories. It was a one credit no test class. Sleep through it and you got an A. It was my favorite time at UM. This was roughly 1991.

I worked in industry for a while and then became an international consultant. One of my clients was Chrysler’s Advanced Manufacturing Systems Engineering (AMSE) department. They were applying for the QS9000 Automotive Quality Management Systems registration and their implementation was not on track. They already had a consulting group working with them and their registrar was set for the audit. I was hired with four weeks to spare and to pull a rabbit out of the hat. This was in roughly 1994-1995.  This will show that necessity to gain control quickly at AMSE created LPA.

I had developed five basic audit questions that if they were answered honestly, there would either be no finding or the specific thing that would need be fixed would be obvious. So, I gave an overview of QS9000 based on these five questions and how they might be reasonably understood and answered. There were many managers in the first session. I asked many of them, “How many procedures or work instructions are used by those who report directly to you?” I was applying the Dr Spurgeon competency of a manager question. In my mind, there was no chance that AMSE was going to pass an audit unless a solid force were available to correct the processes and then each fix a few documents.

I stated the five audit questions. I asked each manager and supervisor to document 100% of the procedures/instructions used by those who reported directly to them. At the end of this first session, I was taken to the side and asked if I would mind giving the same seminar to all managers of AMSE and if they could video tape the sessions. I agreed. The video was recorded and became required viewing.

I later found out that this was the origins of Layered Process Auditing. So, the basics are that a manager or supervisor knows the work their employees perform. They can recognize good/poor performance. They audit and correct their own department.

The five basic audit questions are:

1. “Can you show me what you do (many ways to ask the question)” The final question is, “Is your work documented and can you show me?” So, the employee learns that this first question means to take the auditor to their controlling document. This is where the employee starts their answer. The controlling document…or their claim of competency if there is no document.
2. “Do you comply” with the document. The manager/supervisor listens to the answer in (1) and then finds the area in the document and compares observations with what is written. The employee is trained to say, “Let me show you my procedure/instruction and that I am working on these points right here.”
3. “How did you learn to do the work?” What is competency? It is the ability to perform work that meets requirements within an allotted amount of time such as a cycle of equipment or before a meeting. It is fluid. Competency is based on Education, Training, or Experience. A person can have all three covered and still not be competent. Competency requires the ability to think of, understand, and perform work.
4. “What is your quality policy in your own words?” “Can you give me an example as to how you have applied your Quality Policy?” The quality policy, in its original terms is intended to provide guidance when work needs to be performed and that work is not covered by the QMS structure (procedures, instructions, records, forms, etc.). The answer is that the employee needed to work outside the QMS, had a few choices, and performed that which most closely aligned with the quality policy.
5. “What information do you record?” The answer then goes to where is the information, can you pull up records, how do you know when the records are complete. What happens with the records?

The results for Chysler? Zero findings and a passed audit. Disaster to competency in four weeks. A management group who knew what they were managing and the resources required to support their own business design. You simply cannot manage well what you do not understand.  The results of the improved management /worker understanding were so outstanding that Chrysler took this process throughout the company and called it Layered Process Audits.  This is how I explained it to them, each management group must audit their team to their processes and this continues down the structure until the floor is audited.  It is audited based upon management layers.

What I have seen of Layered Process Audits since its interesting start is that most are being performed by auditors and not by managers/supervisors.  The original intent is missing.  A manager finds that his or her employees really do not know what they are doing or do not have the tools required for success.  The manager finds out that they really do not understand the work and they humbly learn to understand the work they manage.  Auditors audit. They cannot perform Layered Process Audits.  Managers/supervisors manage to compliance. Only managers and supervisors can really perform and benefit from performing LPA.

What makes matters more interesting is that too many managers and supervisors cannot recognize the performance of their own employees. They base their employee performance reviews on feedback rather than on direct observation. What this does it to teach employees that it is better to get along than to make a real difference. In other words, an absence of complaint means you are successful. Make huge improvements for the company and receive complaints while so doing…and your performance review will show you lack interpersonal skills.  But, this is another topic for another time.