APQP Process Overview and Supplier Engagement

APQP (Advanced Product Quality
Planning)
Supplier Version
Supplier Technical Assistance

Business Office
Training Purpose
• It is intended to be an overview of the APQP process.

• It is not intended to be a detailed training instruction in the use
of the APQP Assessment.
• Basic Industry Tools (e.g. FMEA & PPAP) are unchanged.
However, the format of the APQP assessment has changed.
• Important to focus on the tools not just the format
• Where to find additional information is given at the end of this
presentation
Contents
• Background
 APQP - Key Features when considering GPDS
 JLR & Supply Base Integration
 Process overview
 PMST: Key Deliverables
Contents (continued)
• Reporting Process Overview

 APQP Assessment
 APQP Reporting
• Priority / High Impact Supplier Engagement Overview
 Priority / High Impact Supplier Selection
 Team Make up
 Supplier Evaluations
Note: The terms Priority supplier & High Impact
supplier are interchangeable.
APQP – Key Features when considering
GPDS
• Emphasis on “Front-End Loading” of a programme to support earlier
activities
• Failure Mode Avoidance through Compatibility before Completion
• Powertrain (PT), Under Body (UN) & Upper Body (UP) start at different
points
• Higher reliance on Virtual Engineering, Virtual Builds
• Virtual Prove-Out = early & cheap: before FDJ
• Physical Prove-Out = late & expensive…
• Synchronised Compatibility Check at FDJ
• Single Point of Release
• VP Build to verify total vehicle Specs.
• Shorter launch period
JLR & Supply Base Integration
PMST Compatibility verification with

the supplier’s manufacturing site:
Product Design  Process Design
Ongoing Communication of
requirements, changes, effects,
issues, solutions, re-planning
= PMST Core Business
Supplemented by STA Site
activities ~ (Priority Supplier
Manufacturing sites)
APQP: Approach
• Suppliers are required to use Advanced Product Quality Planning &

Production Part Approval Process (TS16949 & Customer Specifics)
• From Sourcing to Launch APQP is the prime method of planning &
communication between JLR & Supplier: Status is critical to JLR
• Some Suppliers will be designated Priority Suppliers. Degree of
engagement will be determined by
> Supplier Manufacturing Site Capability
> Part Criticality
• Designation will be reviewed during the course of the programme
• Jaguar Land Rover multifunctional teams will evaluate Priority
suppliers a minimum of four (4) times
> PMST Deep Dive Confirmation
APQP – PMST Additional emphasis
• STA Role: Confirming programme viability at each

Milestone based upon Supplier Readiness
• STA’s involvement is critical in Failure Mode
detection & countermeasure development =
compatibility of Product Design & Process Design
(Feasibility)
• Facilitated by:
• Formalised Cross-functional Team Engagement
• Early Supplier Manufacturing involvement
APQP Process Overview
Topic: APQP process overview Principles: Early cross functional engagement, integrates GPDS, APQP & PPAP
Enter Plan Dates into APQP.

Agree Priority Communicate to all Suppliers
Rate actual & predicted status of Deliverables &
Supplier directing use of Supplier APQP
Expectations.
Sourcing Manufacturing Sites Assessment as planning and
Specify corrective actions where not Green
PD, STA & Purchase status reporting tool
or not Complete. Complete Summary for Reds
Programme STA
All Suppliers
Programme
Start
Share Assessment Document with

Achieve consensus that
Submit APQP PD Engineer & STA Site Engineer
status is accurate
215 Timed Expectations Assessment Monthly (and other team members as
Supplier, PD, STA & other
All Suppliers required)
team members as required
All Suppliers
49 Timed APQP
Deliverables
31 APQP Unit Unit
For Priority Suppliers
PTC PA
Elements
PTC/ M1 LR/
PTCC M1DJ PA FDJ VP PEC FEC TT PP MP1
Mail box
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
For Priority suppliers, engagement will be centred around a series of
evaluations by a cross-functional team that includes the PD Engineer,
Priority Buyer, STA Site Engineer and representatives from other JLR
Element Summary Suppliers
Selected functions as required
Report - All Suppliers
Deliverables: Completion Cross-
vs Due GPDS Milestone
Functional Resolve Open Issues
Teams Formed
Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation

Supplier Scorecard Evaluation #1: #2: Verify Decision #3: Verify #4: Confirm
Team Kick-
Each Function Verify FMA Strategy Launch Prep to Proceed to Supplier Supplier
Summary by Supplier of Status, Off
& VP Parts. Run-at- Capability. Capacity.
responsible for Meetings & M/f Plan. PD Lead
Issues & Action Plans Begin
Joint Lead Rate STA Lead STA Lead
their Lead Items
PD Lead
Monthly Update of APQP Assessment

APQP Process Overview:
Team Consensus of Status
liers Enter Plan Dates into Assessment Document.

er Review & Assess due Expectations and rate Due
ent & Forecast Deliverables. Specify corrective
status actions where not Green
All Suppliers

Achieve consensus that PD Engineer & STA Site Engineer
status is accurate (and other team members as
Supplier, PD, Site STA & other
team members as req'd required)
All Suppliers

/ M1 LR/

Expectations.
Programme STA
All Suppliers
Programme
Start

status is accurate
All Suppliers
49 Timed APQP
Deliverables
31 APQP Unit Unit
PTC PA
Elements
PTC/ M1 LR/
Mail box
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
Teams Formed

Team Kick-
their Lead Items
PD Lead

Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
Suppliers
Cross-
Teams Formed

Evaluation #1: #2: Verify Decision #3: Verify #4: Confirm
Team Kick-
Verify FMA Strategy Launch Prep to Proceed to Supplier Supplier
Off
& M/f Plan. PD Lead & VP Parts. Run-at- Capability. Capacity.
Meetings
Begin
PD Lead


Expectations.
Programme STA
All Suppliers
Programme
Start

status is accurate
All Suppliers
49 Timed APQP
Deliverables
31 APQP Unit Unit
PTC PA
Elements
PTC/ M1 LR/
Mail box
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
Teams Formed

Team Kick-
their Lead Items
PD Lead

Principles of APQP Priority Supplier Engagement
1. Supplier launch success is a cross-functional, shared

responsibility – PD, STA, Buyers are core team members
(Other JLR team members, e.g. MP&L and AME can be called
upon as and when necessary)
2. JLR cross-functional teams will work proactively with the
highest leverage suppliers on a programme
3. Supplier engagement will begin early in a programme –
immediately after sourcing
Principles of APQP Priority Supplier Engagement
4. JLR cross functional teams (PMST) will review Priority

Suppliers a minimum of four (4) times (PMST to decide if all
reviews need to be at the Supplier manufacturing site)
5. The teams will provide the supplier with a single JLR voice on
key launch matters
6. Underlying APQP and PPAP processes and roles &
responsibilities will remain the same
7. Team engagement will continue until the supplier has
successfully completed all PPAP requirements and fully met all
program ramp-up volumes
APQP Supplier Engagement – Priority Sites
• A programme’s suppliers are defined as “Priority” or “Non-

Priority.”
• Priority suppliers have parts that present major risks to
the launch (site, part, or programme risk).
• The list is reviewed at decision points in the programme
• Early in the programme the focus has to be on suppliers
where enhanced Failure Mode Avoidance effort is critical
• Suppliers affected by late change should join the Priority
list
The APQP Supplier Engagement Process will focus cross-
functional JLR resources on the Priority suppliers.
APQP Process Overview – 49 Key Deliverables
Reporting will focus on measurable “Deliverables” that highlight APQP

Element completion at a given programme milestone
APQP Element Lead Due* Deliverables
1. Sourcing decision Buyer <PTCC> 1. Required Sourcing Agreement Signed
Pre APQP: Site STA <PA> 2. Required Supplier Commercial & Program Agreements Signed
objective is:
If STA Approves Non-Q1 <FDJ> 3. All Production Tool Orders Issued to Suppliers
Sourcing then there is a <PA> 4. Final Mix, Maximum Weekly Volume Communicated and Agreed
sound basis for viability.
2. Customer input requirements PD <PA> 5. Program Expectations Cascaded to Suppliers
3. Craftsmanship/ PD <TT> 6. AAR Approved

appearance approval report
<PP> 7. Color Changes Completed Supporting Color Harmony
4. DFMEA PD <PA> 8. DFMEA Completed
<PA> 9. Special Characteristics Cascaded to Suppliers
5. Design/manufacturing reviews PD/STA <PP> 10. Quality Issues Closed and Effective
6. DVP&R material, PD <TT> 11. DV Testing Complete

performance test results
7. Subcontractor APQP status STA <FDJ> 12. Sub-supplier PPAP Timing Plan Completed
<TT> 13. Sub-supplier PPAP Phase 1 (or equivalent) Completed

*UP Timing Shown
<MP1> 14. Sub-supplier PPAP Phase 3 (or equivalent) Completed
Reporting will focus on measurable “Deliverables” that highlight APQP
Element completion at a given programme milestone
8. Facilities, Tools & Gauges STA <FDJ> 15. Facility and Tooling Timing Plan Completed
<TT> 16. Facilities/Tools/Gauges are at the Final Production Location
<PTC> 17. Supplier’s OEE plan is Confirmed by Surrogate Data
<PA> 18. Gauge Plan (Including Released Gauge Drawings) Completed
<TT> 19. Supplier’s Demonstrated OEE (Phase 0) supports capacity

requirements
9. Prototype Control Plan PD <FDJ> 20. Prototype Build Control Plan Completed
10. Prototype Build PD <FDJ> 21. All Prototype Tool Orders Issued to Suppliers
<FDJ> 22. Prototype Parts Ordered
<FDJ> 23. Prototype Parts Achieve 100% of Required Print Specs.
11. Drawings & Specifications PD <PSC> 24. Design Styling Confirmation
<FDJ> 25. Design Release (WERS) Completed
12. Engineering Change PD <TT> 26. All JLR Engineering Changes Approved & Recognized by the
Supplier
13. Team Feasibility PD/STA <FDJ> 27. Design, Process, & Timing Feasibility Confirmation
14. Manufacturing Process Flow STA <PEC> 28. Final Process Flowchart Supports PPAP Phase 0 Event
*UP Timing Shown

Reporting will focus on measurable “Deliverables” that highlight
APQP Element completion at a given programme milestone
15. PFMEA STA/PD <VP> 29. Final PFMEA Completed with Linkages
16. Measurement System Analysis STA <TT> 30. Gauge R&R Results <= 10% per PPAP Ford Customer Specifics
17. Qualified Laboratory Documents STA <TT> 31. Supplier Internal & External Laboratory Compliance
18. Checking Aids STA <TT> 32. Checking Aids Compliant With Part Specifications
19. Pre-Launch Control Plan STA <PEC> 33. Pre-Launch Control Plan Completed with Linkages
20. Operator Instructions STA <PEC> 34. Operator Process Instructions Completed
21. Packaging Specifications MP&L <TT> 35. Packaging Approval Process Completed
22. Production Trial Run STA <TT> 36. PPAP Phase 0 (Including Sub-suppliers) Completed
23. Production Control Plan STA <TT> 37. Production Control Plan Complete with Linkages
24. Initial Process Capability STA <TT> 38. Initial Process Capability Results (Ppk >= 1.67)
*UP Timing Shown

Reporting will focus on measurable “Deliverables” that highlight
APQP Element completion at a given programme milestone
25. Dimensional Results STA <TT> 39. 100% of Required Measured Points within Tolerance
26. PV Testing PD <TT> 40. PV Testing Complete
27. PSW STA/PD <TT> 41. PPAP Phase 1 Completed
<PEC> 42. Demonstrate Compliance with RSMS
<PP> 43. PPAP Phase 2 Completed
<MP1> 44. PPAP Phase 3 completed
<MP1> 45. Suppliers Demonstrated OEE Support Capacity Req.
28. Bulk Material Requirements STA <TT> 46. Bulk Materials Checklist Included in PPAP Submission
29. Sample Product STA <TT> 47. Sample Product Produced with JLR Identification
30. Master Sample STA <TT> 48. Master Sample Approved
31. Record of Compliance STA <TT> 49. JLR Specific Requirements Documented
*UP Timing Shown

Supplier Sourcing
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
Supplier The APQP process begins once the suppliers are

Sourcing
Begins
sourced.
GPDS breaks the vehicle into Powertrain (PT),
Priority
Suppliers Underbody (UN), and Upperbody (UP). Sourcing
Selected
completion is generically required by:
Cross-
Functional PT: <PTCC> Resolve Open Issues
Teams Formed
UN: <PTCC>
Team Decision
to
Kick-Off UP: <PTCC>Evaluation
Evaluation + 90 Days Proceed
Evaluation Evaluation
Meetings #1 #2 #3 #4
to Run-
Begin At-Rate
Update of APQP Assessment

APQP Assessment
Principles of Use:
• Completed by all NTEI Suppliers
• Submitted to JLR monthly after <PTCC>
• Consolidated automatically to produce rolled-up supplier
deliverables & readiness reports
Summary View (OFF) Click Here to Clear Entries Formatted to Print A4 (EU) Highlight Next Deliverable (ON) Import Previous APQP
APQP JLR Version 1 JLR Contact Information
Final
Current Milestone FDJ
FDJ
Assessment
Priority Site Select Vehicle PartitionUnderbody
Underbody Select Vehicle PMT Chassis
Chassis Supplier Contact Information
(Corporate Directory System ID)
Manufacturing Supplier Site Code: XXXXX Base Part Number: AC123456 Program Contact Name: AS MITH
Information
Program Code: L405 LEAD PD ENGINEER: CSMIYJ

Program
Program Name: RANGE ROVER Supplier Name: XXXXX Base Part Name: WIDGET Program Contact Phone: 0044 123456 Lead STA Site Engineer: DSNITH
Model Year: 2013 Location: XXXXX Total Number of Parts: 99 e-mail Address: ASMITH@SUPP Lead Buyer: ESMITH
APQP Current Date: 15/01/2010 Q1 Status: Y Y User Plant: JLR Plant Contact Name: BS MITH
DD-MMM-YY
Submission
Dates
Previous APQP Date: 18/11/2009 Q1 Score: 1000 Plant Contact Phone: 0044 234555 MP&L Analyst: FSMITH
email Address: BSMITH@SUPP Program Mailbox: APQPL405
Program Milestones PTCC PTC PA VP LR LS J1

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
DD-MMM-YY Actual Action Plan/
VPP Timing
Planned Completion Counter

Completion Engineering Milestones M-1DJ AA1 AA2 FDJ PEC FEC Action Plan/
Evidence Dates Action Plan/ Measure
ELEMENT Date Expectations / Deliverables Dates
Counter Measure
(Metric) Counter Measure Description Date
05-Feb-10 05-Feb-11 Responsibility
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
MP1 DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
Builds UNV0 UNV1 UNV2 UPV0 UPV1 UPV2 TT MRD PP MRD
MRD
MP2
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
1. Sourcing Decision
All Quality, Cost, Weight, and Functional (QCWF) targets have been reviewed, documented and
1 agreed as part of the Sourcing Agreement Process.
The Preliminary Engineering, Development & Testing (ED&T) budget has been defined in the
2 Sourcing Agreement.
Supplier agreement letter has been issued and the supplier manufacturing site has been
a) Sourcing Agreement 1 C
identified.
3 Cost model has been developed and agreed, including process to manage change control.
4 There are no outstanding issues on the Final ED&T budget and QCWF targets.
All required Supplier Commercial and Program Agreements (CPA) have been signed.
b) Commercial and 2 Note: UN and UP due 2 months before <PA>, PTO scale 1-4 due 1 month before <PTC>, PTO C
Program Agreement scale 5 and 6 due 2 months before <PA>.
3 All Production tooling orders have been issued to suppliers. C
Final Mix (estimated Take Rate), Average Production Weekly (APW) and Maximum Production
c) Volume and Mix 4 C
Weekly (MPW) have been communicated and agreed by the supplier via the SA/CPA document.
2. Customer Input Requirements

Supplier has received a list of the key contact personnel within Jaguar Land Rover, including
names, locations, and phone numbers of the Program Managers, Product Development
5 Engineers, Buyer, Supplier Technical Assistance (STA) Engineer, Material Planning and Logistics
(MP&L) and others as appropriate.
Supplier has received specifications, as they become available, to understand Product
6 Assumptions, Functional Performance, Dimensions, Weights, Materials, and Craftsmanship
requirements. Requirements for service parts (if applicable) have also been cascaded.
Supplier has received Reliability and Quality Goals including Functional Performance Specs, 10
7 yr/150 mileage Useful Life Reliability Initiative (ULRI) Targets, Warranty Targets, and Incoming
Quality Targets (PPM, etc.).
Supplier has received the Program Timing Dates for APQP requirements, Program Status
Reviews, Design Freeze, Prototype Builds, Material Required/In Plant Dates, and Job#1. The
8 Supplier has used this timing information to create a timing plan in support of the APQP elements
noted in the PDP and in this APQP Assessment.
Supplier has received applicable affordable cost targets, as they are defined for the Program,
9 including capacity and peak volumes.
Supplier has received and understood any related logistics and volume requirements (including
10 packaging concerns, density of containers and frequency of shipment).
Supplier has received all necessary information identified in the expectations of the Customer
5 Input Requirements element, to plan, design, manufacture and ship the product. C
APQP Assessment: Functionality
Functionality:
• The APQP Assessment uses Excel macros to function
properly.
• The user must always select ENABLE macros. Failure to
enable the macros will result in loss of functionality.
• The APQP assessment is designed for use with Excel 2003
and Excel 2007.
• Using previous versions of Excel will result in a loss of
functionality.
• For further guidance please refer to the APQP User Guide
APQP Assessment: Meeting cadence
Priority Suppliers:
• Submit the APQP Assessment monthly as required by the
STA programme team.
• Site STA to review the APQP Assessment with the rest of
the PMST prior to this monthly submission.
Non Priority Suppliers:
• Submit the APQP Assessment as per Priority Suppliers
• Send copy of APQP Assessment to STA and PD engineers
prior to submission to the JLR programme team
APQP Assessment -- Detail
2. Element Status Section Structure
31
Structure:
APQP
Elements The Element Status section
49
of the Assessment is
Deliverables structured in a hierarchy that
(minimum 1 includes:
per element)
Team QoE -- APQP Elements
215 -- Deliverables
Business Expectations Criteria -- Expectations
The suppliers will enter their
specific status ratings in this
Final
FDJ
Assessment
Underbody Chassis
Select Vehicle PMT Chassis Supplier Contact Information
Manufacturing Supplier Site Code: XXXXX Base Part Number: AC123456 Program Contact Name: AS MITH
Information

Program
APQP Current Date: 15/01/2010 Q1 Status: Y Y User Plant: JLR Plant Contact Name: BS MITH
DD-MMM-YY
Submission
Dates
Plant Contact Phone: 0044 234555
section of the document

Previous APQP Date: 18/11/2009 Q1 Score: 1000 MP&L Analyst: FSMITH

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
VPP Timing

against each programme

Counter Measure
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
MRD
MP2
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
milestone or build event.

identified.

The APQP Assessment contains 3 sections:

1) Header Section
2) Element Status Section
3) Summary Section
Final
FDJ
Assessment
Underbody Chassis
Manufacturing Supplier Site Code: XXXXX Base Part Number: AC123456 Program Contact Name: ASMITH
Information

Program
APQP Current Date: 15/01/2010 Q1 Status: Y Y User Plant: JLR Plant Contact Name: BSMITH
DD-MMM-YY
Submission
Dates

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
VPP Timing

Counter Measure
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
MRD
MP2
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
identified.

1. Header Section
Final
FDJ
Assessment
Underbody Chassis
Manufacturing Supplier Site Code: XXXXX Base Part Number: AC123456 Program Contact Name: ASMITH
Information

Program
APQP Current Date: 15/01/2010 Q1 Status: Y Y User Plant: JLR Plant Contact Name: BSMITH
DD-MMM-YY
Submission
Dates

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
VPP Timing
Counter Measure
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
MRD
MP2
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
identified.
There are no outstanding issues on the Final ED&T budget and QCWF targets.
The header section of the Assessment provides general information about part,
4
supplier, team contacts, and key programme dates.


There are also selection boxes that indicate Priority/Non-Priority, GPDS Vehicle
Partition (Powertrain – PT, Underbody – UN, Upperbody – UP), and PMT. These
selection boxes are important because they are required for management reports, and
they will display the proper rows to reflect differences in UP and UN timing, for
example.
Denotes Selection Box

2. Element Status Section -- Definitions

Program Milestones PTCC PTC
Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
VPP Timing
Planned
Completion Engineering Milestones M-1DJ
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
Builds UNV0 UNV1 UNV2 UPV0
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
11. Drawing & Specifications / Design Records
All Jaguar Land Rover engineering drawing requirements and specifications have been made
available to the supplier. Supplier, working jointly with JLR Engineering, has included the
86 following requirements on the applicable drawings: weld, dimensions, SC and CCs, Safety and
regulatory, sufficient control points and datum surfaces, tolerances and part specifications
compatible with existing manufacturing processes; special material characteristics.
Identify any specified requirements and specifications that cannot be evaluated using known
87 inspection techniques and request appropriate adjustments from engineering.
24 Design Styling is completed
Plan to complete P-Authority Release by FDJ + 4 weeks.
25 NOTE: Some long-lead parts may be required to be released earlier (T-Release for PTO).
Confirm with the JLR PD Engineer that the release plan supports program requirements.
12. Engineering Change Document
Develop and implement a process to manage change to ensure that any product (either revised
or new) affected by revisions in design and process shall continue to meet all applicable
88 specifications. Reference can be obtained in the "Change Implementation Plan" Checklist
provided in the Supplier Request for Engineering Approval (SREA) form.
All Jaguar Land Rover engineering changes have been recorded, approved and recognised on
26 an authorised engineering change document.
Element:
One of the 31 unique requirements of the APQP and PPAP process

2. Element Status Section – Deliverables

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
VPP Timing
Planned
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
Deliverables are the metrics used to define the status (RED/YELLOW/GREEN/COMPLETE) of the
individual 31 elements.
There is at least one Deliverable for each element, but there can be multiple deliverables for each
element. As noted previously, there are a total of 49 Deliverables.
Deliverables are intended to reflect, where possible, quantifiable evidence of element success or
completion. Deliverables can reflect key in-process metrics like Cpk or OEE, for example.
2. Element Status Section -- Deliverables

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
VPP Timing
Planned
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
Dates
DD-MMM-YY
All 49 Deliverables are required to be rated with every submission of the Assessment
Against the program milestones, Deliverables will show two colour schemes:
• Light Grey With No Box – Forecast Period (activity is not expected in this time period, but the
supplier must enter a rating to show whether or not they forecast risk to the deliverable completion
in the future.
• Dark Grey With Black Box – Deliverable Start & End Points (activity is expected to begin and end
between these milestones)
2. Element Status Section -- Deliverables

Program Milestones PTCC PTC PA
Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
09-Sep-09 14-Sep-09 16-Nov-09
DD-MMM-YY
VPP Timing
Planned
Completion Engineering Milestones M-1DJ AA1 AA2 FDJ
ELEMENT Date Expectations / Deliverables Dates 05-Feb-10
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
Builds UNV0 UNV1 UNV2 UPV0 UPV1 UPV2
Dates
10-Sep-09 11-Sep-09 12-Sep-09 15-Sep-09
DD-MMM-YY
25 NOTE: Some long-lead parts may be required to be released earlier (T-Release for PTO). G G G G G G G C
Example:
This deliverable is rated GREEN in the Forecast period denoting there was no expected risk to
completion by FDJ.
The Deliverable Start & End point spans <PA> to <FDJ>. The <PA> milestone is rated GREEN, and the
<FDJ> milestone is rated COMPLETE. Per GPDS convention, the Deliverable end point can only be
rated RED (if not finished) or COMPLETE (if finished).
2. Element Status Section -- Expectations

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
09-Sep-09 14-Sep-09 16-Nov-09
DD-MMM-YY
VPP Timing
Planned
05-Feb-10
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
Dates
10-Sep-09 11-Sep-09 12-Sep-09 15-Sep-09
DD-MMM-YY
Expectations are guidelines used to assist team members in the successful completion of the
elements, and where applicable, help rate completion of the related deliverables.
While expectations can be rated RED/YELLOW/GREEN/COMPLETE, they will not drive the element
rating – only deliverables are rolled-up to drive element ratings.
The ratings for expectations are intended only for internal use and communication.
Expectations should be thought of as Quality of Event criteria

2. Element Status Section -- Expectations

Expectation Number
Deliverable Number
Dates
09-Sep-09 14-Sep-09 16-Nov-09
DD-MMM-YY
VPP Timing
Planned
05-Feb-10
DD-MMM-YY DD-MMM-YY
Dates
10-Sep-09 11-Sep-09 12-Sep-09 15-Sep-09
DD-MMM-YY
86 following requirements on the applicable drawings: weld, dimensions, SC and CCs, Safety and Y Y G C
87 inspection techniques and request appropriate adjustments from engineering. Y Y G C
24 Design Styling is completed G G G C
Example:
These Expectations were rated YELLOW at <PTC> and AA1 showing a potential risk.
By <FDJ>, the Expectation end points, they were rated COMPLETE.
Note: Expectations are not used to drive Element status.
There is no requirement to provide a Forecast rating for an Expectation.

3. Summary Section
This part of the Assessment is intended to summarise the element status for the entire document.
There are 4 parts to the summary:
1. Current Milestone Deliverable Status
2. Forecast Milestone Deliverable Status
3. Phased PPAP Element Dates
4. Supplier Evaluation Summary (Priority sites only)
3. Summary Section
Current Milestone Deliverable Status:
Indicates the status for only those elements with deliverables required to be completed by the
currently assessed milestone. These fields are automatically generated based upon input in the
Element Status.
The one exception are the words for the Action Plan Summary – these must be manually entered and
should be limited to the Key Escalation Issues, and not made up from a cut
and paste of the Element status section.
3. Summary Section
Forecast Milestone Deliverable Summary:
Indicates the status of remaining deliverables not yet required for completion at a given milestone. The
majority of these fields are automatically generated based upon input in the Element Status. The
Action Plan Summary fields must be manually entered.
This provides a forward looking view of future deliverables for use by the team.
3. Summary Section
PPAP Element Dates: Supplier Evaluation Summary:
A summary of PPAP dates outline in the Required for Priority suppliers only. The team
Element Status. The dates are automatically manually tracks planned and actual visit dates.
populated from the deliverables, while Build The data is rolled up on Element Summary
Support Plans must be manually entered Report.
APQP: Summary of Deliverable Rating Criteria
Summary of Deliverable Rating Criteria
Prior to Required Deliverable Completion Timing:
Deliverables can be rated RED, YELLOW, GREEN, or COMPLETE
At Required Deliverable Completion Timing:
Deliverables must be rated either COMPLETE or RED.
A deliverable must be tracked until it is complete
After Required Deliverable Timing Completion Timing (Red items only):
A deliverable will continue to be rated RED until it is COMPLETE. It will no longer

required to be rated at subsequent milestones after it is COMPLETE.
Summary of Reporting Process
• APQP Assessments will be completed by every

NTEI supplier and submitted to JLR on a monthly
basis from <PTCC> to PPAP Completion
• For Priority suppliers, the cross-functional team
shall achieve consensus on Deliverable ratings
• Programme Reports will be generated from the
Assessments
• Key Escalation Issues and Actions must be
explained in the Action Plan Summary – the
audience includes Board Members
Priority Supplier Selection
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
Once sourcing is complete, the STA Programme
Lead and the PD Programme Lead will work with the
Priority STA Site Managers & Engineers, and PD
Suppliers
Selected Programme Leaders & PMST Leaders to complete
the Selection of “Priority” suppliers for the
Cross- Resolve Open Issues
Functional programme.
Teams Formed
A specific risk model is used to guide the Priority
Decision
Team
Kick-Off
suppliers.
Evaluation Evaluation to Evaluation Evaluation
Proceed #4
Meetings #1 #2 #3
to Run-
Begin At-Rate

Priority Supplier Selection Process – Initial Model
Supplier Selection process is led by program STA and PD and

reviewed by Site STA. This process shall take place by the following:
• Underbody: <PTCC> + 90 days
• Upperbody: <PTC>
Site OR Part OR Programme

Readiness Criticality Induced Risk = Programme
Priority
Suppliers
Team Formation
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins The STA and PD Programme leads will notify the
Priority appropriate PD Engineers, Buyers, and STA Site
Suppliers
Selected Engineers, that their suppliers are designated as
Cross-
Priority for a given programme. This notification
Functional will include specific timing and reporting
Resolve Open Issues
Teams Formed
requirements for the programme.
Team Decision
Kick-Off Evaluation Evaluation to Evaluation Evaluation
Proceed #4
Meetings #1 #2 #3
to Run-
Begin At-Rate

Team Member Responsibilities
While there is a team lead at all times, each team member

still has the responsibility between meetings to:
• Resolve open concerns

• Communicate with other team members as needed
• Bring together other team members to close out concerns
as necessary
It is recognised that all team members will interface with the

supplier regularly between Evaluations, and viability issues
are raised immediately
Team Kick-Off Meetings
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
Supplier
Sourcing
Begins
Priority
Prior to the Evaluations, the cross-functional JLR
Suppliers team members will meet with their supplier team
Selected
to review programme expectations and begin the
Cross- preparations for siteResolve
visits.Open Issues
Functional
Teams Formed
This is called the “Kick-Off” meeting.
Team Decision
On-Site to On-Site On-Site
Kick-Off Evaluation Evaluation
Evaluation Proceed Evaluation
Meetings #1 to Run- #4
#2 #3
Begin At-Rate

Team Kick-Off Meeting – Key Points
Purpose:
Introduce JLR and supplier team members
• JLR and supplier team agree on the required programme and process timing.
• Communicate team expectations in preparation for Evaluation #1.
 Plan to exploit opportunities that on-site activity will give (e.g. surrogate
process & design review)
Timing: PT: Unit <PTC> -- <PTCC>
UN: <PSC> - <PTCC>+90 Days
UP: <PTCC> – <PTC/M1DJ>

Note: Actual review timing will depend upon the specific needs of the component and program.
Participants:
Lead: PD Engineer
Support: STA Site Engineer, Buyer
Location:
JLR facility, supplier facility, or teleconference (according to team preference). Meetings will typically
last 2 – 3 hours.
Evaluation #1
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
The cross-functional team’s first detailed review is

called Evaluation #1 – Verification of Supplier
Supplier
Sourcing Failure Mode Avoidance Strategy, Manufacturing
Begins
Feasibility & Planning.
Priority
Suppliers
Timing for this visit will depend on the section of the
Selected vehicle where the part resides – PT, UN, or UP
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Kick-Off Proceed
to Run-
Begin At-Rate

Evaluation #1 – Key Points
Purpose:
• Failure Mode Avoidance through detailed FMEA and Control Plan reviews:
• Feasibility & actions to resolve by FDJ
• Manufacturing Planning
• Capacity Planning
Timing: PT: <PTCC> - <PTC/M1DJ>

UN : <PTCC> - <PTC/M1DJ>
UP : <PTC/M1DJ> - <PA>
Note: Actual review timing will be dependant upon the specific needs of the component and the program.
Participants:
• JLR Lead: PD Engineer
• JLR Support: STA Site Engineer, Buyer

Evaluation #1– APQP Focus
APQP Element Focus 5 of 31 Elements / 8 Deliverables
APQP Element + Deliverables Lead
1 Sourcing decision Buyer

1. Required Sourcing Agreement Signed
2. Required Supplier Commercial & Program Agreements
Signed
4. Final Mix, Maximum Weekly Volume Communicated and
Agreed
2 Customer input requirements PD
5. Program Expectations Cascaded to Suppliers
4 DFMEA PD
8. DFMEA: Identify Potential Failure Modes and associated
Potential Causes. Ensure that effective Countermeasures are
defined against all Potential Causes to reduce risk to acceptable
levels
9. Special Characteristics Cascaded to Supplier
8 Facilities, tools, & gauges STA
17. Supplier’s OEE Plan is Confirmed by Surrogate Data
11 Drawing & specification/design records PD
24. Design Styling Confirmation
These deliverables are due for completion
Others are started but not completed
APQP emphasis for supplier : Objectives for Evaluation #1
Evaluation #1 is aimed at achieving a successful FDJ event

Objective: Manufacturing Feasibility Signed off or AIMS raised
Deadline: FDJ
Why? Supplier confirming that PD has communicated the design, that the supplier
understands the design and that planned process is capable of producing the
design, and that no design changes will be requested to solve manufacturing
problems after FDJ. PD & STA confirm this within JLR.
If issues are found that have no known solution then these should be escalated to
JLR STA & PD and an AIMS raised
Assessment Expectations 90,91,92

Demonstrate that the feasibility analysis gives confidence
APQP Element 13 that all of the engineering requirements and specifications
Team feasibility Lead Support will be met and that the product can be manufactured to
commitment/customer PD/STA All meet the requirements of Ppk >= 1.67 and CPE>=1.33 for
engineering approval the lifetime of the product.
Demonstrate that the manufacturing process as planned will
have the capacity to meet the volume requirements.
Evaluation #1 is aimed at achieving a successful FDJ event

Objective: Manufacturing Installation & Validation Plan for PPAP Phase 1
@ TT has been reviewed and deliverable in APQP Assessment is shown
as complete
Deadline: FDJ
Why? Confirm that Tier 1 can support Phased PPAP requirements. Note -
the Facilities & Tooling timing plan must support a Phase 0: Run-at-Rate
that in turn allows Phase 1 to be achieved for TT IPD - allowing sufficient
time for activities such as PV testing, Capability Studies etc.
APQP Element 8 Assessment Deliverable 15

Support
Facilities, tools, & Lead STA Verify that Facilities & Tooling timing plan can meet
All
gauges Phased PPAP requirements
Evaluation #1– Expected Outputs
Output Responsibility
Supplier (with Cross

1 Updated APQP Assessment – Confirmation of 8 Required Functional Team
Deliverable Status Consensus)
2 All
Agreement on Failure Mode Avoidance Strategy (All DFMEA’s up to
date & Agreement on Special Characteristics): Feasibility &
actions to be resolved by FDJ
3 Agreement that Capacity Plan is Achievable and Consistent with STA

JLR Requirements, and that the Facilities & tooling timing plan can
meet Phased PPAP requirements
4 Plan developed to support prototype builds (prototype control plan & PD
build plan)
5 STA
Updated Manufacturing Site Assessment (MSA) – As required
6 Agreement of timing for next visits All

Evaluation #2
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
The cross-functional team’s second detailed review

Supplier
is called Evaluation #2 – Verification of Supplier
Sourcing Launch Preparation.
Begins
Priority
Suppliers
Selected This Evaluation shall occur prior to the supplier’s
shipment of parts of VP builds
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Kick-Off Proceed
to Run-
Begin At-Rate

Scope:
• Facilities & Tooling Planning/Installation
• PFMEA & Control Plans
• Gauging
• Staffing & Training Planning
• VP Prototype Build Readiness
• Run-at-Rate Preparation
Timing: PT/UN/UP: Between <FDJ> and Prior to <VP> In Plant Date (IPD)
Participants:
• JLR Joint Lead: PD Engineer , STA Site Engineer
• JLR Support: Buyer

Evaluation #2– APQP Focus

1 Sourcing Decision Buyer
3. All Production Tool Orders Issued to Suppliers
7 Subcontractor APQP Status STA
12. Sub-supplier PPAP Timing Plan Completed
8 Facilities Tools & Gauges STA
15. Facility and Tooling Timing Plan Completed
18. Gauge Plan (including Released Gauge Drawings) Completed
9 Prototype Build Control Plan PD
20. Prototype Build Control Plan Completed
10 Prototype Builds PD
21. All Prototype Tool Orders Issued to Supplier
22. Prototype Parts Ordered
23. Prototype Parts Achieve 100% of Required Print Specifications
11 Drawing & Specification Design Records PD
25. Design Release (WERS) Completed
13 Team Feasibility Commitment/Customer Engineering PD/STA
Approval
27. Design, Process, & Timing Feasibility Confirmation
15 PFMEA STA/PD
29. Final PFMEA Completed with Linkages
Evaluation #2 is aimed at achieving successful VP & Phase 0 events

Objective: Understand the current state of the assembly process, tooling
and associated equipment used to manufacture the VP parts & produce
a Future State map with timing to close off all the deviations to support
Phase 1 PPAP at TT Build
Deadline: VP
• Why? Review the manufacturing process employed for VP part supply as a failure mode
detection opportunity (if applicable to intended production process). Confirming that supplier's
execution of plan to install tools, equipment etc. is on schedule to meet Phased PPAP
requirements.
• If issues are found that have no known solution then these should be escalated in STA & PD and
an AIMS raised - these are the parts that will be tracked by the programme to PPAP sign-off (the
“exceptions”).
APQP emphasis for supplier: Objectives for Evaluation #2
Evaluation #2 is aimed at achieving successful VP & Phase 0 events
Objective: PFMEA Completed

Deadline: VP
Why? Confirm the linkages (Using the Special Characteristics Summary
Sheet) in Failure Mode Avoidance activities extend from Design through
to Process Control. Use VP part build as a Failure Mode detection event
(confirming known ones, checking new ones). If issues are found that
have no known solution then these should be escalated to STA & PD
and an AIMS raised
Assessment Deliverable 29
APQP Element 15 Lead Support
PFMEA is complete and has linkages to DFMEA &
PFMEA STA/PD All
Control Plans

1 Updated APQP Assessment – Confirmation of 11 Required Functional Team
Deliverable Status Consensus)
2 PD/STA
Acceptance of parts to support VP Prototype Build (prior to
shipment)
3 STA
Concurrence on manufacturing plans in support of Run-at-Rate
event
4 Agreement on PFMEA STA/PD
5 STA
6 Agreement of timing for next evaluations All

Decision to Proceed to Phase 0: Run-at-Rate
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
This decision is a cross-functional team decision
Supplier
Confirming that NO further changes are required to:
}
Sourcing
Begins • Design All the Inputs to
Phase 0 Shown on
Priority • Tooling & Equipment
Suppliers the Phased PPAP
Selected • Process & Process Parameters Flowchart
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Kick-Off Proceed
to Run-
Begin At-Rate

The Path to Phase 0 : Run-at-Rate
The Path to Phase 0 : Run-at-Rate
• Phase 0: Run at Rate timing is established and committed/reported to

pre-FDJ
• From Single Point of Release to achieving a successful Phase 0 the
following must be achieved:
> Off tool Development
> Off-Tool in Home Line Development
> Off Tool & Off Process in Home Line – all tooling, equipment
operating as a system Development
> Off Tool & Off Process in Home Line – all tooling, equipment
operating as a system AND all parameters fully developed
> Only Ready for Phase 0 if there is agreement that no further
development is necessary for Job#1
• PPAP simply measures how well this was done
Why focus on PPAP & PSW?
• The activities that precede & enable Phase 0: Run-at-Rate to take

place are critical.
• Phase 0: Run-at-Rate marks the end of planning & development
• Phase 0: Run-at-Rate parts are used for confirming:
> Production Validation & Material Tests
> Dimensional Conformance (& Appearance)
> Process Stability & Capability
• The information that PPAP yields confirms that the supplier is ready
to supply parts to JLR.
• PPAP status is therefore a key measure at Launch Readiness
> At part level, at sub-assembly level, at option level.
Evaluation #3
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
The cross-functional team’s third detailed review is

Supplier
Sourcing Capability.
Begins
This evaluation shall occur prior to the supplier’s
Priority shipment of parts for production Tool Tryout (TT)
Suppliers
Selected builds
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Evaluation Evaluation to Evaluation
Kick-Off Proceed Evaluation
Meetings #1 #2 #4
to Run- #3
Begin At-Rate

Purpose:
• Completion of PPAP Phase 1
> Dimensional Results
> Production Validation Testing
> Process Capability
> Appearance Approval
Timing:
UN/UP: Between <PEC> and Prior to TT Build In Plant Date (IPD)
Participants:
• Lead: STA Site Engineer
• Support: PD Engineer , Buyer

Evaluation #3 – APQP Focus
3 Craftsmanship/Appearance Approval Report PD

6. AAR Approved
6 DVP&R Material/Performance Test Results PD

11. DV Testing Complete

13. Sub-supplier PPAP Phase 1 (or equivalent) Completed
8 Facilities, Tools, and Gauges

16. Facilities/Tools/Gauges are at the Final Production Location STA
19. Suppliers Demonstrated OEE (Phase 0) Supports Capacity Requirements
12 Engineering Change Documents PD

26. All JLR Engineering Changes Approved & Recognized by the Supplier
14 Manufacturing Process Flowchart/Process Flow Diagram STA

28. Final Process Flowchart Supports PPAP Phase 0 Event
16 Measurement System Evaluation/Measurement Systems Analysis Studies STA

30. Gauge R&R Results <= 10% per PPAP Customer Specifics
17 Qualified Laboratory Documentation STA

31. Supplier Internal & External Laboratory Compliance
18 Checking Aids STA

32. Checking Aids Compliant with Part Specifications
Evaluation #3 – APQP Focus (continued)
19 Pre-Launch Control Plan STA

33. Pre-Launch Control Plan Completed with Linkages
20 Operator Process Instructions STA

34. Operator Process Instructions Completed
21 Packaging Specifications MP&L

35. Packaging Approval Process Completed
22 Production Trial Run STA

36. PPAP Phase 0 (Including Sub-Suppliers) Completed
23 Production Control Plan STA

37. Production Control Plan Completed with Linkages
24 Initial Process Capability STA

38. Initial Process Capability Results (Ppk >= 1.67)
25 Dimensional Results STA

39. 100% of Required Measurement Points within Tolerance
Evaluation #3 – APQP Focus (continued)
26 Production Validation Testing PD

40. PV Testing Complete
27 Part Submission Warrant STA/PD

41. PPAP Phase 1 Complete
42. RSMS Compliance
43. PPAP Phase 2 Complete (if Single Workstream)
28 Bulk Materials Requirement STA

46. Bulk Materials Checklist Included in PPAP Submission
29 Sample Product STA

47. Sample Product Produced with Ford Identification
30 Master Sample STA

48. Master Sample Approved
31 Record of Compliance STA

49. Specific Requirements Documented
APQP emphasis for STA : Objectives for Evaluation #3
Evaluation #3 is aimed at achieving Phase1 and hence a successful TT
event
Objective: Ensure Phase 0: Run-at-Rate is completed & Data set is
available.
Deadline: LR, & continues until completed
• Why? Confirm that Phase 0: Run-at-Rate has taken place, that the verification activities to achieve Phase 1 can
continue, and no known problems exist that would invalidate the PPAP process - these affect Programme viability.
Exceptions must be managed.
• If Phase 0: Run-at-Rate has been completed but Phase 1 is not yet achieved, STA must be able to state that the Run-
at-Rate event was successful i.e. all inputs to the event were acceptable, the Control Plan was adhered to, the cycle
time and process yield were as planned. Why? To ensure that the only obstacles to Phase 1 Approval are the
completion of the tests/studies/analyses.
• If the signed Capacity Analysis Report shows a risk to volume it and the CCAR raised to fix the problem should be
escalated in STA. This allows known & predicted volumes to be used at LR milestone decision making (LR decisions
determine MP1 content)

Evaluation #3 is aimed at achieving Phase1 and hence a successful TT

event
Objective: Support Programme Launch Decisions for parts that are not
PPAP Phase 1 for TT (Exceptions)
Deadline: LR, continues until PPAP Phase 2 completed
• Why? For parts that are not PPAP Phase 1 by TT, Supplier must provide quality
data to allow JLR Programme team to make a informed decision.
• This means warranting all completed PPAP Elements, and providing a risk / confidence
statement for those PPAP Elements that are not complete
• Data should be available to support this statement and would normally include details of a
modified Control Plan. (Basis of IPSW as mandated for saleable units - see Phased PPAP
Exception Management Process).


1 Functional Team
Updated APQP Assessment -Confirmation of 24 Required
Consensus)
Deliverable Status
2 STA/PD
Signed Phase 1 PPAP warrant
(and Phase 2 PPAP if single production workstream)
3 STA
Updated Manufacturing Site Assessment (MSA) – As
required
4 All
Agreement of timing for next evaluations
Evaluation #4
Unit Unit
PTC PA
PTC/ M1 LR/
The cross-functional team’s fourth evaluation is

Supplier
Sourcing
Capacity.
Begins
This visit should always occur prior to the supplier’s
Priority shipment of parts for Mass Production 1 (MP1)
Suppliers
Selected builds. Opportunities to complete this visit before
PP should be exploited
Functional
Teams Formed
Team Decision
Kick-Off Proceed
to Run-
Begin At-Rate

Purpose:
• Completion of PPAP Phase 3
> Operators Staffed and Trained
> Ability to Meet Launch Ramp-Up Curve
> Ability to Meet Ongoing Production
> OEE Confirmation
> ToPT/UN/UP:
Timing: determine capacity
Betweenrisks,
PECongoing work
and MP1 & monitoring
Build In Plant Date (IPD)
Participants:
• Lead: STA Site Engineer
• Support: PD Engineer, Buyer

Evaluation #4 – APQP Focus
3 Craftsmanship PD
7. Colour Changes Completed Supporting Color Harmony
5 Design/Manufacturing Reviews STA/PD

10. Quality Issues Closed and Effective

14. Sub-Supplier PPAP Phase 3 (or equivalent) Completed
27 Part Submission Warrant STA/PD

42. RSMS Compliance
43. PPAP Phase 3 completed
45. Supplier’s Demonstrated OEE (Phase 3) Supports Capacity Requirements
Evaluation #4 is aimed at achieving Phase 3 and hence successful PP & J1

events
Objective: Support Programme Launch Decisions for parts that are not
PPAP Phase 3 (Exceptions)
Deadline: LR, continues until PPAP Phase 3 completed
• Why? For parts that are not PPAP Phase 3 supplier must provide data to allow
JLR Launch to make an informed decision.
• This means warranting all completed PPAP Elements, and providing a risk / confidence
statement for the PPAP Elements that are not complete, including making a statement of
the volume that can be achieved
• Data should be available to support this statement and would normally include details of a
modified Control Plan. (Basis of IPSW as mandated for saleable units - see Phased PPAP
Exception Management Process).

Evaluation #4 – Expected Outputs

1 Functional Team
Updated Supplier APQP Assessment – Confirm Required
Consensus)
Deliverable Status (Final Status)
2 STA
Signed Phase 3 PPAP Warrant and Capacity Analysis Report
3 STA
• And agreement on need for ongoing monitoring & analysis as required

APQP Assessments & Programme Viability
 APQP Assessments are used as the inputs to JLR Programme Reports
 Programme Reports allow JLR to make decisions about Programme Viability

 What do the APQP Assessments tell us ?
 How much of the activity has been completed (C) as a percentage of the total required?
 What is the list of Work In Progress Red’s we have – CCAR’s : not Programme Critical yet
 From the deliverables is there a specific area we need to deep dive, e.g. DFMEA?
 What are the key escalation issues we need to take to the program team for escalation?
 Enforce the use of the Action Plan Summary Section for Key Escalation Issues
 Those that will affect programme viability if not fixed now or in the near future, i.e.
within the next reporting cycle.
 ACCURACY & CLARITY are fundamental .
 Board Members are in the audience at Programme Reviews.
 Board Members will take decisions based on this information

Programme Reports – Programme Viability
90
80
70
60
1st Qtr
Metrics – to show
2nd Qtr
%age Complete as
50 East
40 West 3rd Qtr
30 North
20
10
0
1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr
well as list of Reds
Program escalated
Red List
APQP
Key Issues List support plan and
Assessment
actions
Deliverable list
for escalation
Assessments
review
CCAR
Enforce the use of the Action Plan Summary Section for Key Escalation Issues and
Actions that will affect programme viability if not fixed now or in the near future
 The key escalation issues and actions are those that must be escalated to be fixed because
they are critical to the programme now, or will be by the next reporting cycle (next month).
 If there are NO key escalation issues and actions state this in order to avoid doubt– make sure
we put in the +ve statement
Summary
• APQP integrates JLR’s activities & the Supplier’s activities, and is a Team-based
process
• Priority Suppliers require enhanced engagement. The terms Priority Supplier & High
Impact supplier are interchangeable
• Engagement starts early to focus on Failure Mode Avoidance & Manufacturing
Feasibility
• The APQP Assessment is a key form of communication between JLR and the supplier
in the PMST
• JLR uses the information to assess risks, solve problems, make decisions – up to and
including Board level
• Phase 0: Run-at-Rate with the right Quality of Event is a key point
• PPAP is based upon the Supplier warranting that they can meet JLR’s requirements
Additional Information
The following manuals can be found on the Jaguar Land

Rover Supplier Portal on Covisint:
• APQP Assessment User Guide
• APQP Priority Supplier Process Manual

APQP Process Overview and Supplier Engagement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

APQP Process Overview and Supplier Engagement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

APQP (Advanced Product Quality

Supplier Technical Assistance

• It is intended to be an overview of the APQP process.

• Reporting Process Overview

PMST Compatibility verification with

• Suppliers are required to use Advanced Product Quality Planning &

• STA Role: Confirming programme viability at each

Enter Plan Dates into APQP.

Share Assessment Document with

Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation

Monthly Update of APQP Assessment

liers Enter Plan Dates into Assessment Document.

Share Assessment Document with

For Priority Suppliers

Enter Plan Dates into APQP.

Share Assessment Document with

Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation

Monthly Update of APQP Assessment

Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation

Monthly Update of APQP Assessment

Enter Plan Dates into APQP.

Share Assessment Document with

Evaluation Evaluation Evaluation

Monthly Update of APQP Assessment

1. Supplier launch success is a cross-functional, shared

4. JLR cross functional teams (PMST) will review Priority

• A programme’s suppliers are defined as “Priority” or “Non-

Reporting will focus on measurable “Deliverables” that highlight APQP

APQP Element Lead Due* Deliverables

1. Sourcing decision Buyer <PTCC> 1. Required Sourcing Agreement Signed

3. Craftsmanship/ PD <TT> 6. AAR Approved

4. DFMEA PD <PA> 8. DFMEA Completed

<PA> 9. Special Characteristics Cascaded to Suppliers

6. DVP&R material, PD <TT> 11. DV Testing Complete

<TT> 13. Sub-supplier PPAP Phase 1 (or equivalent) Completed

APQP Element Lead Due* Deliverables

<TT> 16. Facilities/Tools/Gauges are at the Final Production Location

<PTC> 17. Supplier’s OEE plan is Confirmed by Surrogate Data

<PA> 18. Gauge Plan (Including Released Gauge Drawings) Completed

<TT> 19. Supplier’s Demonstrated OEE (Phase 0) supports capacity

<FDJ> 22. Prototype Parts Ordered

<FDJ> 23. Prototype Parts Achieve 100% of Required Print Specs.

11. Drawings & Specifications PD <PSC> 24. Design Styling Confirmation

<FDJ> 25. Design Release (WERS) Completed

*UP Timing Shown

APQP Element Lead Due* Deliverables

*UP Timing Shown

APQP Element Lead Due* Deliverables

26. PV Testing PD <TT> 40. PV Testing Complete

27. PSW STA/PD <TT> 41. PPAP Phase 1 Completed

<PEC> 42. Demonstrate Compliance with RSMS

<PP> 43. PPAP Phase 2 Completed

<MP1> 44. PPAP Phase 3 completed

<MP1> 45. Suppliers Demonstrated OEE Support Capacity Req.

30. Master Sample STA <TT> 48. Master Sample Approved

*UP Timing Shown

Supplier The APQP process begins once the suppliers are

Update of APQP Assessment

Program Code: L405 LEAD PD ENGINEER: CSMIYJ

Program Milestones PTCC PTC PA VP LR LS J1

Planned Completion Counter

2. Customer Input Requirements