IAQG

1
IAQG Montreal General Assembly Survey (October
7th, 2005)
2
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey

• General Assembly key figures
• General Assembly Registration
• 244 people
• ( 131 persons attending only the
  General Assembly )
• by subtracting 113 people
  attending also the Council
• ( 25 Council meeting attendees not
  participating at the GA
• 4 Council members on 26 not
  attending the GA )
• Number of attendees participating to the survey
  
• 47 people
• ( 36 of 131 people attending only
  the GA )

3
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
General Assembly Evaluation Form used
4
IAQG MontrealGA Survey results
Survey Results
Based on 47 feedback
5
IAQG MontrealGA Survey results
(Rating above 3,5 / 5)

• Overall satisfaction with the IAQG
  meeting 3,96
• Strategic outlook consistent with needs 3,70
• Meeting pace appropriate 4,15
• Appropriate agenda length 4,11
• Expectations in terms of topics discussed 3,89
• Sufficient time for questions 3,88
• Open and cordial discussion 4,24

6
IAQG MontrealGA Survey results
(Rating above 3,5 / 5)

• Hotel meeting expectations 4,56
• IAQG location convenient 4,36
• IAQG registration process effective 4,40
• IAQG website with information needed 3,95

(Rating between 2,5 and 3,5 / 5)

• Clear action items identified 3,03

7
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments
Comments
Based on 27 attendees providing comments

• General
• IAQG presence or purpose not well understood or
  promoted
• within OEMs own companies (1)
• Opportunity for Quality representatives at all
  levels to attend
• meetings very constructive for whole
  community (1)
• Questions asked by attendees not answered
  effectively (1)
• GA, our chance to address Voice of the
  Customer didnt
• come close to take advantage of it (1)
• Need interim milestones real plans for IAQG
  projects
• not just report on progress in 6 months (1)
• Chance to meet people exceptional (1)

8
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• General (Contd)
• Need to develop a general survey that all
  participants can fill
• out to determine how various companies are
  doing in reaching
• maturity in meeting 9100s requirements
• Survey of 20 well-focused questions to be
  submitted at each
• IAQG meeting to measure our general progress
  (1)
• Summary list (with status completion dates)
  of IAQG initiatives
• would be very beneficial (1)
• Publish a list of attendees (1)
• Efforts laudable, effectiveness along with
  relevance and popularity
• would increase if follow up is done on
  common themes brought up
• by suppliers from previous meetings (1)

9
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• Presentations
• Available (4) and prior the meeting (2)
• More Down to earth results and presentations,
  too much detail (2)
• More Powerpoint presentations (1)
• Over use of acronyms (1)
• Presentations with duplication IAQG overview
  IAQG Strategy (1)
• Too many presenters reading slides (1)
• Projector screen too low (1)
• Some presentations too fast (1)
• Supplier presentations outstanding and 9103
  excellent (1)

10
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• Workshops
• Split workshops in smaller room Too noisy
  Difficult to hear
• Too close together (7)
• Very efficient way of collecting data (1)
• Workshops scheduled to allow attendance to more
  than 1
• workshop (1)
• Need more time during workshops (1)
• No very good introduction to working groups (1)
• Assign a facilitator for each workshop (1)

11
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• Selling
• No selling - Selling fine as long as doesnt
  distract from business
• - Selling to be limited and kept outside the
  area (4)
• OK for selling things at meetings (1)

• General Assembly Timing Schedule
• Allow more time for questions and give detailed
  answers (1)
• Addition of a pre-scheduled 15 minutes
  one-on-one member-
• supplier meetings (1)
• Meeting extension to 2 days (1)
• Fridays agenda on Thursday, then have the
  reception (1)

12
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• Agenda
• More input from suppliers (being 50-70 of
  primes product)
• should be solicited Consider a small
  business rep being the
• voice of small business as no small company
  is IAQG member (2)
• Need a better forum to share best practices
  more on best
• practices behind the spec. (2)
• More lessons learned on 9102 Need to include
  how 9102 will
• handle 3D models (1)
• Make more specific details of standards
  changes (1)
• Show more implementation experience (1)
• Answers or solutions to specific problems
  encountered at
• supplies (1)

13
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• Requirements / Standardization
• Extra requirements of different major companies
  to be merged
• in a new 9100 version to avoid multiple
  Quality system review (1)
• Harmonization standardization work by IAQG so
  far with
• minimal value to suppliers, no elimination
  of redundant audits,
• specs and Quality system requirements (1)
• Parity / crossover equivalence for suppliers to
  be looked at (1)
• Registered to other Industry standards find a
  way to accept
• certified automotive suppliers with some
  delta requirements (1)

14
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• Requirements / Standardization (Contd)
• Need to revisit 9102 to be focused on
  production process approval
• and not on 1st article inspection focused on
  part approval (1)
• Future of electronic documentation? Will it be
  standardized? (1)
• Tendency of NADCAP auditors to become standards
  developers
• causes increase of costs without opportunity
  to provide definition
• of those costs to customers (1)

15
IAQG MontrealGA Survey comments

• Positive comments
• Keep on the great work! We have been waiting a
  long time
• for this! (1)
• Having reps from companies present their own
  personal
• experiences really great! (1)
• 2nd meeting attendance, this meeting much
  superior to Cincinnati
• meeting Good job! (1)

16
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
Back up - Detailed comments
17
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
Survey comments
More PowerPoint presentations available prior to meeting.Selling things at meetings - OK.
Could you merge extra requirements of different major companies (Goodrich, Bombardier, PWC, Boeing, Textron, etc.) to include that in a new revision of AS 9100 to avoid multiplication of review of our Quality system? Show more implementation experience. Give more specific details of what will come on changing of STANDARD. Make workshops in smaller room to facilitate discussion.
The concern raised regarding the tendency of Nadcap auditors to become standards developers causes the increase in costs without the opportunity to provide definition of those costs to the customers.PowerPoint presentations are very helpful if they will all be available
The workshop sessions were cumbersome - il would have been more informative if a short overview followed by questions each session run several times with groups rotating through - unless you were at the table it was difficult to hear. More "Lessons Learned" on AS9102
Workshops too crowded, difficult to gather around hear all comments, questions, answers, etc.Great location!
Allow more time for questions try to give detailed answers (afterwards if necessary)No to the idea of selling products here.
18
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
Survey comments (Contd)
Pre-scheduled 15-minutes one-on-one member-supplier meetings could be added to the agenda. Member participation could be voluntary.Harmonization Standardization work by IAQG so far has minimal value to suppliers. No eliminating redundant audit, spec's, and quality systems requirements.Workshops were too close together - too noisy.
I'd like to see standards/req'ts group look at parity/crossover equivalence for suppliers (ex. specialty suppliers).Registered to other industry standards - can we find a way to accept automotive suppliers that are certified to TS-STD - Perhaps with some delta reqts??? Please consider. Soon.
Realizing that it would be difficult to accomplish, having presentation available before the conference would lead to better questions and discussions.Selling commercial product is fine as long as it doesn't distract from business.I don't think IAQG's presence or purpose is well understood or promoted within the OEMs own Companies
Supplier presentations were outstanding.9103 presentation was excellent.
Publish a list of attendees.Selling should be limited and kept outside the area. It should not become a pain.
Workshops are a very efficient way of collecting data. The opportunity for quality representatives at all levels to attend your meetings is very constructive for the whole community.Keep on the good work! We have been waiting a long time for this!
19
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
Survey comments (Contd)
I recommend that the meeting be extended to two days. The workshops should be scheduled so that one may attend more than one workshop.Q- What 's the future of electronic documentation in this industry? Will it be standardized?
More "down to earth" results and presentations instead of detailed high level strategic information.
If process control is at the top of the IAQG's agenda, then we need to revisit AS9102 specification to be focused on production process approval and not on first article inspection which is focused on part approval. We need to also included how AS9102 will handle 3D models.P.S. I was a part of the working group responsible for the rewrite of AS9102 in 2002/03.
If suppliers of "solutions" are to be included it should be in a show case type setting - allow more demonstrations, etc. More input from suppliers should be solicited as we are 50-70 of the prime's product.
The PowerPoint presentations were helpful along with a supplemental book. Hopefully the presentations will be available on your website.
Most questions, concerns and or complaints came from small businesses who truly produce the parts for the OEM's final product, but none of these small companies are members of IAQG. Consider a small business "Rep" that could be the voice of small Business. Ombudsman
Need more time during the workshops.Need a better forum for sharing best practices.Workshop location could be improved - separate rooms, etc.
20
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
Survey comments (Contd)
More on best practices behind the specI have tried to advertise the event attraction of SME depend on the content of the agenda to tease the potential audience.Chance to meet people like Bill Black was exceptional (fantastic access). It suggest to have the prime stating for their company where they sit, what is in progress quality wise.
Answers or solutions to specific problems encountered at supplies. This interaction may encourage more members to become more involved in discussion.
Too much detail provided in presentations. Over use of acronyms e.g. ICOP, OPMT, OASISFirst two presentations (B.Black/G.Dion) included duplication.
I would like to see Friday's agenda on Thursday. Then have the reception, this would encourage participation networking
Your efforts are laudable. Your effectiveness would be increased, along with your relevance, and popularity would increase if you followed up on some common themes from previous meetings brought up by suppliers.
Too many presenters reading the slides.Questions asked by attendees (especially Friday) were not answered effectively.Friday was our chance to address "Voice of the Customer" and we didn't come close to taking advantage of it.Need interim milestones real plans for IAQG projects not just "report on progress in six months"
21
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
Survey comments (Contd)
Projector screen too low. People's head's cut off bottom 1/4 of screen.Did not give a very good introduction to working groups. Need to provide better purpose, guidance, etc. Need to prepare some specific questions to ask in each working group to generate discussion as well as accept general requests/comments.Need to have separate rooms for working groups - too noisyAlso need to assign a facilitator for each workshop plus note/comment recorder. Many important comments/questions are being missed because facilitator trying to do both!!!Having reps from companies present their own personal experiences really Great!!Need to develop a general survey that all participants can fill out to determine how various companies are doing in reaching maturity in meeting 9100, 9120,9130, etc. req'ts i.e. How mature is the company in collecting analyzing process capability data? How mature is company in translating high level customer req'ts into detail part critical dimensions, features, etc. How capable is a company in etc., etc., etc.Could have a survey of 20 well-focused questions that we could submit at each IAQG meeting to measure our general progress in achieving our overall objectives.
22
IAQG MontrealGeneral Assembly Survey
Survey comments (Contd)
This is my 2nd meeting attended, this meeting much superior to Cincinnati meeting - Good Job!Would like copies of presenter's materials (slides) at the time of the presentation rather than 1 week afterwards - Not all the best slides are in the meeting hand-out!!Some presentations were too hurried, too fast.A summary list (with status completion dates) of IAQG initiatives, current tasks, etc would be very beneficialIt would be preferential to have workshops isolated more from one another or acoustic panels/adjoining rooms for each workshop. Unless one was sitting a one of the tables (small tables) the discussion and interchange could not be heard. This was a disappointment