Chapter 23
Gus's Garage

By Jake Snyder

Gus has been anxious to go over with me the new process quality control system we installed a couple of months ago - he has been accumulating performance feedback information on his operations from the Job Control Forms that record selected processing errors, but is having some trouble in figuring out what to do with the data or information.

Procedurally, his staff is also still working out some kinks in filling-out the "Job Control Forms" that are used to record the errors discovered by Gus's staff members as the Repair Order and vehicle is handed-off from one stage of processing to the other.

A couple of months ago we explained that Gus's Garage is using Job Control Forms as a quality control mechanism for both administrative and technical repair-processing steps. Initially, we started with a single form used to monitor processing quality for both Repair Order and Pre-production steps, and for Production technical repair processing. After a month or so, we found it was easier to have two forms: one that stays in the Repair Order file jacket for recording Pre-production processing quality; and a second form that stays with the vehicle in the Work Order file jacket to record repair processing quality for shop.

It was easier for two reasons: one was to keep the control form simple, on a single page, and less intimidating for both technicians and office staff to use; secondly, it was easier for Gus to spot check and immediately address Pre-production quality control processing prior to job completion by pulling Repair Order file jackets.

Together, the two job control forms have 12 sections that are associated with 12 value-adding shop processes. Four are listed on one job control form that stays in the Repair Order File and used for monitoring Pre-production processing; and eight Production processing steps are included on the second job control form that follows the vehicle as part of the Work Order package.

We had also explained that each Job Control Sheet includes a choice of possible processing errors or failures for personnel to inspect and select from. The idea is to monitor key value-adding processing actions that enhance or improve job and service quality. When Gus and I were originally brainstorming the error choices to list on each Job Control Form, we could have selected any number of processes to inspect and processing errors to include on the form.

Gus and I had put together a list of ten possible quality-processing errors that shop personnel have to watch out for during the hand-off inspections. Each job control form includes this error list for employees to select from as they discover and record quality problems upon receiving a new job (either RO File or Damaged Vehicle).

The possible quality errors Gus selected to focus his staff on and include on each Job Control Form were chosen because he feels that when these errors are eliminated or minimized, job quality will be improved and his customers will be more satisfied.

Gus and I discussed that he can change or revise the "error list" in the future to focus on additional shop processes when improvements are needed. This method of inspecting and reporting on processes is also an ideal way to develop and present objective evidence on how well a new shop change (i.e. procedure, policy, personnel, training) is doing, instead of having to rely on guesswork or opinions.

Although employees have an option of using the "Other" choice to make manual entries of processing errors discovered, but not listed on the Job Control Forms, we are trying to limit the number of errors his staff chooses to keep reporting simple and to better manage any improvement efforts or changes that may be needed as result of negative error trends.

I told Gus his improvement efforts have to stay narrowly focused on a limited number of issues, and not be a "shotgun approach" of attempting to hit multiple targets at one time. The idea is to fix one thing at a time and make sure it stays fixed before moving on to the next problem or opportunity area.

As the Repair Order file is handed-off between Pre-production processing stages, estimators and customer care reps are instructed to inspect and report on process quality errors (by selecting a numerical code assigned to each error item) and then write down the corrective actions needed to resolve the error (by making a manual entry).

Similarly, as the vehicle is handed-off between Production processing stages, techs are instructed to inspect and report on process quality and necessary corrective actions.

Pre-production:

• Possible Quality Errors
  1. Customer authorization is not documented and recorded
  2. Billing and payment requirements are not documented and recorded
  3. Insurance authorizations are not documented and recorded
  4. Customer special requests and/or shop promises are not recorded on Work Order and Repair Order
  5. "Other" Pre-production.

  Production:

• Possible Quality Errors
  1. Work Order file is not complete
  2. Repairs have defects
  3. Rework is needed
  4. Parts are incorrect or missing
  5. "Other" Production

As I explained to Gus, effective process quality control or job control is a function of three things being done accurately and consistently:

• Recording and Measuring errors or failures for each job
• Recording and Measuring the associated corrective actions needed immediately to resolve errors and failures
• Using measurements to create the best solution or systems to stop errors or failures from re-occurring.

Gus has been able to count the number and type of errors on jobs and in which of the 12 Processing Stages they had occurred. But, the personnel had not been recording or writing down what corrective actions were being performed after an error was discovered.

From reviewing files and interviewing employees I found that "Production: Possible Quality Errors" 8 & 9 where rework and parts reordering corrected the quality error discovered during job-hand-off, were used correctly most often.

Although, numerous errors were recorded for such processes as "customer authorizations" and "repairs have defects", it appeared that these errors were just allowed to pass through the repair process with no corrective actions taken or recorded. Gus and I have to figure out why this is happening.

Is the process quality control system too difficult to use, or does Gus's staff need better training or tighter management controls?

Jake Snyder, creator of the popular Gus’s Garage series, is interested in hearing from shop owners with real-life questions.
E-mail JJ the Remote Pro, Gus’s intrepid consultant.