A Method to Improve the Effectiveness of Corrective Actions — The "Double Five Rules" for Zero Quality Issues

Quality issue zeroing refers to the closed-loop management activity that uses appropriate technical and managerial methods to analyze the causes and mechanisms of quality issues occurring in design, production, testing, and service, and takes corrective and preventive measures to resolve the existing quality problems, while also conducting lessons learned to prevent recurrence. The process of quality issue zeroing is the transformation of quality management from post-event problem management to pre-event preventive management.

The "Double Five Rules" method of quality issue zeroing addresses problems from both technical and managerial perspectives, implementing rectifications item by item according to five requirements. It is based on the principles of systems engineering and closed-loop management, summarizing the successful experiences and lessons learned from aerospace systems over many years, absorbing foreign experiences, and systematically refining and improving a quality management method with aerospace characteristics.

The scientific validity and effectiveness of the "Double Five Rules" for quality issue zeroing have been proven by the successful practice of aerospace engineering, becoming a key tool to ensure aerospace product quality and promoted in the defense science and technology industry. It is China's FRACAS (Failure Reporting, Analysis, and Corrective Action System), also known as "zeroing management," and represents a more scientific, systematic, and extended PDCA cycle. The content of the "Double Five Rules" for quality issue zeroing is shown in Figure 1.

Quality Issue Management Zeroing

"Quality issue management zeroing" is the activity of zeroing quality issues from a management perspective. It can be summarized into five requirements: "clear process, clear responsibility, implementation of measures, serious handling, and improved regulations."

1. Clear Process

"Clear process" means identifying the entire process of the occurrence and development of quality issues, analyzing the causes, and finding weak points or loopholes in management. It requires clarity on the time, place, working conditions, operating procedures, problem phenomena, and results of the issue, as well as the management links, positions, and reasons involved, and the loopholes or weak points in management procedures or systems.

2. Clear Responsibility

"Clear responsibility" means distinguishing the responsible units and persons for the quality issues, clarifying the primary and secondary responsibilities and their extent. It is the premise for implementing improvement measures. Only by clearly identifying which departments and positions are responsible for improvement can management improvements be targeted. Based on the process of the problem occurrence, clarify the related responsible units, personnel, direct and indirect responsibilities, main and secondary responsibilities, leadership and execution responsibilities, etc. When multiple departments, positions, or personnel are involved, each should be clearly identified.

3. Implementation of Measures

"Implementation of measures" targets weak points or loopholes in management by formulating and implementing effective corrective and preventive measures. The implementation must yield results, reflected in improved regulations, education and training, and reasonable handling. The key is to enhance awareness and management capability. Measures should be specific, operable, and verifiable. Implementation should be planned and supported, with clear responsible persons, objective evidence of implementation, and records of supervision and inspection.

4. Serious Handling

"Serious handling" means treating quality issues caused by management reasons seriously, learning lessons to educate personnel and improve management. Quality issues caused by non-compliance, rule violations, or negligence should be strictly punished. Serious handling focuses on taking issues seriously, expanding education through zeroing work, learning lessons to raise awareness and improve management. The ultimate goal is to educate and improve work. For repetitive quality issues and those caused by human responsibility, responsible units and persons should receive administrative and economic penalties, aimed at deepening education and preventing recurrence.

5. Improved Regulations

"Improved regulations" means addressing weak points or loopholes in management by improving and perfecting rules and regulations to prevent quality issues institutionally. It involves identifying imperfections in existing rules combined with quality issue management zeroing measures, and embedding zeroing measures into related rules, operational guidance documents, standards, or norms. Improving regulations is the foundation of quality management system improvement, an effective resource for unit quality improvement, the source of organizational management capability enhancement, and the destination for achieving closed-loop management zeroing.

Interrelationship Among the Five Requirements of Management Zeroing

Clear process is the foundation; only by fully understanding the entire process of problem occurrence and development can the weak points and management loopholes causing quality issues be accurately identified. Clear responsibility is the premise; only by clearly stating where the problem occurred and identifying responsible units (departments) and positions can management improvements be targeted. Implementation of measures is the core; measures must be implemented not only in management documents but also in work responsibilities. Serious handling is the means; by strengthening the promotion of quality management systems and lessons learned from quality issues, employees are educated to raise quality awareness and managers to increase responsibility. At the same time, serious violators must receive appropriate administrative or economic penalties to deepen education. Improved regulations are the result; experiences and lessons are institutionalized and promoted through rules and systems to achieve preventive effects.

Essential Characteristics of Quality Issue Zeroing

After nearly 20 years of development, quality issue zeroing has formed a quality management method with complete elements, rigorous logical relationships, scientific process design, and closed-loop management implementation. Its essential characteristics are reflected in three aspects: using problems as opportunities for improvement; tracing root causes to seek fundamental solutions; and expanding from points to areas, moving from correction to prevention.

1. Using Problems as Opportunities for Improvement

The aerospace quality culture concept is "Never let go of any quality issue." Due to the special nature of aerospace engineering systems and products, any potential quality issue may lead to major quality accidents. Therefore, a very important concept in aerospace quality culture is "Never let go of any quality issue," which is also reflected in the double zeroing method for quality issues. Quality issues are discovered immediately, the double zeroing mechanism is activated promptly, and through accurate positioning and mechanism analysis, each problem is ensured to be resolved quickly and thoroughly, preventing recurrence and eliminating the possibility of quality issues happening again.

2. Tracing Root Causes to Seek Fundamental Solutions

Aerospace products are usually complex systems characterized by exploratory, advanced, and high-risk technical features. Therefore, accurately analyzing the causes and mechanisms behind each quality issue is very challenging. However, if the root causes of quality problems are not fundamentally uncovered, fatal hidden dangers may remain. Based on this, the "Zero Defect" approach to quality issues emphasizes the use of strict procedures and management, leveraging professional technical teams and methods, to accurately locate quality problems through root cause tracing, identify the fundamental causes and evolution process of the issues, and take corrective actions to fundamentally eliminate the causes of quality problems. Therefore, although the "Zero Defect" method is a management approach initiated only when quality problems arise, its purpose is not a passive corrective "band-aid" but a thorough solution that fundamentally eliminates the causes of quality problems through strict procedures, management, and professional technical means, resolving issues once and for all.

3. From Point to Surface, From Correction to Prevention

For high-tech aerospace products, mastering the technology is key to solving many quality problems, but behind technical issues there are often management system problems as well. Therefore, based on the goal of thoroughly eliminating root causes, preventing similar problems, and ensuring flawless outcomes, the "Zero Defect" approach analyzes and solves problems from both technical and management perspectives, complementing each other. Once a quality problem is resolved, not only is the technical mechanism behind the issue clarified and thoroughly improved, but corresponding management systems, processes, frameworks, and methods are also improved accordingly. Thus, the application of the "Zero Defect" method helps enterprises achieve continuous improvement in both technology and management. As two pillars of enterprise development, the dual enhancement of technology and management improves the overall quality of the enterprise and establishes a solid foundation and virtuous cycle for growth and development. Only by deeply analyzing and identifying the systemic causes behind each quality problem can effective preventive measures be taken. Problems that arise are opportunities for improvement—not just "firefighting" but also "fire prevention."

Example of Zero Defect Management for Military Industry Enterprise Certification Issues

1. Clear Process

(1) Description of the Problem Phenomenon

Some certified enterprises have overly broad and vague certification scope descriptions that do not match the actual product range produced by the enterprise. For example, a certain military unit's certification scope is described as: design, development, production, testing, and technical services of conventional and high-tech weapons.

(2) Analysis of Problem Causes

When applying for certification, contract review personnel determined the application scope to meet the enterprise's requirement that the certification scope must be consistent with the weapons and equipment scientific research production license catalog. The audit team leader and professional auditors did not further refine and confirm the actual product range during the on-site audit.

(3) Identification of Management Loopholes or Weak Links

Contract review personnel lack sufficient knowledge of the weapons systems in the scientific research production license catalog; the management procedures do not provide detailed regulations on how to accurately define the certification scope.

2. Clear Responsibility

(1) Responsible Departments: Marketing Department, Audit Department

(2) Responsible Persons: Wang XX, Li XX

3. Implementation of Measures

(1) Corrective Measures

The Audit Department arranges for auditors to conduct a special audit of the enterprise and reconfirm the certification scope, issuing a new certification.

(2) Preventive Measures

① Provide training for personnel in market development, contract review, project management, and auditors. Training content includes the Regulations on the Scientific Research Production License for Weapons and Equipment, Implementation Measures for the License, and On-site Audit Rules, focusing on understanding the license audit requirements for quality management systems and the description requirements for the license catalog scope;

② Revise the company's "Management System Certification Management Procedures" to add specific requirements for describing the certification scope.

4. Serious Handling

The audit team leader and professional auditors are given a formal criticism; contract review personnel receive a warning.

5. Improve the System

Develop the "Management System Certification Management Procedures," adding specific requirements for determining the certification scope. It stipulates that the audit scope definition cannot exceed the scope of the enterprise's business license and related industry qualification permits; it cannot be vaguely described by product and service categories but should be detailed to the specific products produced and services provided by the enterprise; the audit scope should specify the audit boundaries, such as the locations, organizational units, activities, and processes to be audited. When the initial or recertification process includes more than one audit (e.g., audits covering different locations), the scope of a single audit may not cover the entire certification scope, but the total audit coverage should be consistent with the scope in the certification documents.