Document Name: Quality Assessment Tool Workbook - Manufacturing Revision No: 1.

0
Document Code: GQU-FRM-0023 Effective date: 01-Jan-2018

Document Information

Title: Quality Assessment Tool Workbook - Manufacturing

Document Code: GQU-FRM-0023
Revision No: 1.0
Effective date: 01 January 2018

Author Cleber Da Rodda Senior Quality Compliance Manager, AMR

Reviewer Murray McKay Quality Management System Manager

Reviewer George Paraschiv Senior Quality Compliance Manager, WEUR

Reviewer Lee Hwa Wong Quality Performance Manager, ASPAC

Reviewer Dmitry Lomovtsev Senior Quality Innovations Manager, EEMEA

Approver Gilberto Gouvea Global Quality Compliance and Performance Manager

Approver Daniel Tomazella Geographic Quality Manager, Americas

Approver Paul Mburu Geographic Quality Manager, AsPac

Approver Anna Mnoukhina Geographic Quality Manager, EEMEA

Approver Ewa Zochowska Geographic Quality Manager, WEur

Approver Daniel Tabrah Global Quality Innovation Manager

Approver Esau Freire Group Head of Quality

Document Owner Global Quality Compliance and Performance Manager

Revision History
Revision Author Effective date Reason for revision

1 Cleber Da Rodda Jan-18 First released version

Version Control 1 of 12
Document Name: Quality Assessment Tool Workbook - Manufacturing Revision No: 1.0
Document Code: GQU-FRM-0023 Effective date: 01-Jan-2018

Quality Assessment Tool - How to complete

The Roadmap is divided in 5 sections, which are the Quality Pillars: CAPABILITY, IMPROVEMENT,
Organization INNOVATIONS, COMPLIANCE, PERFORMANCE
Each Quality Pilar is subdivided in Processes which are also subdivided in Activities

The assessment scores to each roadmap point have to be based on the following classification:
1 - Not Compliant
Classification 2 - Baseline
3 - Proficiency
4 - Mastery

Minimum The minimum requirement is to reach and maintain level 3 in each section/question of the roadmap.
requirements
Each Activity is represented by a set of question which answer should be classified according to the pre-
determined in the roadmap (1 to 4)

The source of information of each "Activity" are Global Quality documents which are listed in the column
"Source of Information / Evidences"

The source of evidences to choose the appropriate answer for each question in the roadmap can be found
in the column "Source of Information / Evidences".
PS: The evidences are not limited to the ones listed in this column "I" so that the assessment is not based on
only those evidences.

The defined roadmap answer should be assigned in the column "Assessed Score" (K). Besides 1 to 4
options, there is a "N/A" option in case this activity is not applicable to the Operating Company assessed.

Using Guide
In case the answer be 1 or 2, automatically "Yes" will be assigned in the column "Action Required" (L). It
seems that a counteraction to ensure score 3 have to be assigned in the "ACTION PLAN" spreadsheet.

Any extra comment or explanation regarding the "Activity" or assessed questions can be register in the
column "Justification" (M).
PS: This is the only field that extra information can be add in the sections.

Scores ≥3 will appear in green, scores <3 will appear in red and "N/A" will appear in grey.

For "N/A" scores, a justification has to be written to explain why the question is not applicable to the
Operating Company.

The Assessment results are summarized in the "Consolidation" spreadsheet.

A counteraction with RCA and CAPA should be assigned in the "ACTION PLAN" spreadsheet for all cases
Action Plan where appear "Yes" in the column "Action Required" (L).
This action plan should to be tracked on a regular basis.

PSC - Product Stewardship Council

PLM - Product Lifecycle Management
SL - Shelf Life
PI&T - Product Integrity and Treaceability
P&HM - Pest & Hygiene Management
Acronyms WH - Warehouse
SAT - Supplier Accepance Test
FAT - Factory Accepance Test

Instructions 2 of 12
Document Name: Quality Assessment Tool Workbook - Manufacturing Revision No: 1.0
Document Code: GQU-FRM-0023 Effective date: 01-Jan-2018

Instructions 3 of 12
Document Name: Quality Assessment Tool Workbook - Manufacturing Revision No: 1.0
Document Code: GQU-FRM-0023 Effective date: 01-Jan-2018

Quality Assessment Tool

Factory: Oran Assessment Team: QA

Country: Algeria Date:

Final Score 2.8

Assessment Summary
Number of Actions Required 10

Pillar Process Activities Assessed Score Action Required Justification

1. CAPABILITY

2.3 3

Education & Training Set-up and deliver quality and product knowledge training to raise
awareness and capabilities 2.3 3

2.7 2

Create & Maintain BOM according to approved specs 3.0 0

Master Data management 2.3 1

2. IMPROVEMENT

Spec Management
Ensure that all Product materials and additives are PSC approved 3.0 0

Ensure that all Factory materials with potential contact with 3.0 0
Product are PSC approved

Guarantee Product Specs at Factory level 3.0 0

Product Maintenance
Spec changes through Product Quality improvement opportunities 2.0 1

3.1 0
3. INNOVATION

Qualification Process for new Products, Technologies, Materials & 3.1 0

Equipment - Quality Acceptance Standards
New Products &
Processes Validation
New Materials & Suppliers qualification 3.0 0

3.1 0

Audits and external certifying bodies management 3.0 0

Compliance with Global Quality Standards 3.0 0

4. COMPLIANCE

Quality Risk Assessment 3.0 0

Management System
Metrology & Maintenance 3.5 0

Shop floor Quality standards 3.0 0

Q2 Quality Reporting System methodology 3.0 0

2.8 5

Reporting & Dashboards 3.0 0

Performance & Continuous Improvement 3.0 0

Quality Assurance &
Labs Management
Lab testing & product release 3.0 0

Manufacturing Processes optimization 1.5 3

5. PERFORMANCE

CoCo and CuCo management 3.0 0

Retail Quality Assessment 3.2 0

Supply Chain Quality Transport & Warehousing Quality Management. 3.0 1 sdf

Materials improvement & Supplier Quality Performance 3.0 0

Management

Quality Improvement Forum 2.0 1

IWS IWS Quality Pillar management 3.0 0

CONSOLIDATION 4 of 12
 Road Map Assessed Action
Pillar Process Activities Source of Information / Evidences Justification
1 2 3 4 Score Required

2.7 2

Create & Maintain BOM according to approved specs and recipes 3.3 Product Maintenance 0
3.0

Yes,
Does the factory regularly check the receipt of Yes, Yes, All process route are checked on a SAP ERP vs PLM (Factory vs Product)
Process Route notifications for new recipes from No. Only within project's activities For NPIs and agreed maintenance monthly basis in the TaO system Local evidences 3 No
the Product Centre? (NPI) or ad hoc cases. changes. and confirm back with Product Emails
Centre.

Does the factory team perform BOM validations No. Yes
to check materials/availability? Not for all NPIs FG and SFG
Yes
For all NPIs FG/ SFG and agreed
Product Maintenance changes
Yes,
For all NPIs FG/SFG and Product
changes agreed on Maintenance SAP ERP vs PLM (Factory vs Product)
forum (Product Monitoring Local evidences 3 No
Meeting minutes
Meetings), in a formal meeting Emails
between factory and NPI,
happening on a monthly basis

Yes,
Does the factory have an ECN (Engineering For ECN's which consider Yes, SAP PLM (Product)
Change Number) tracking and gives visibility to No. Yes, but for NPIs only NPIs and agreed maintenance For all changes including those Local evidences 3 No
the Product Centre? changes, only for the ones that that not have production impact. Emails
have production impacts.

Production orders
Is there a governance to ensure the correct Yes, Yes, Local evidences
utilization of "non-valuated materials" in No Yes, For all cases, following BAT For all cases, following BAT Emails N/A -
production BOMs (shorts and other that are not Not for all cases guidelines without full visibility to guidelines with full visibility to Product Guidelines in Interact
in recipes)? Product Centre Product Centre Feedback from the Product Developer responsible for the
EM

Do you request the creation of production Yes Yes Yes. For all SKUs even without SAP ERP (Factory)
No 3 No
version, routing and specification sheet? Not in all cases For all SKUs with demand. demand (e.g. Materials for trials) Production orders
Local evidences

Are you executing Data Obsolescence activities Yes. Yes. Yes.

(ERP X PLM) according to the Global Process?
When trigered by Global Master When trigered by Global Master SAP ERP vs PLM (Factory vs Product)
No data Team, When trigered by Global Master data Team, delivering all Local evidences 3 No
Delivering the reqested activities data Team, delivering all requested activities in full and in a Emails
requested activities OTIF.
not on time or not in full shorter time than requested/SLA.

Yes, Yes, SAP ERP vs PLM (Factory vs Product)

No.
Spec Management

For Special cases: materials Only in case of business MES Legacy

Does the factory creates manual BOM regularly? Yes. BOMs always created from a 3 No
testing, factory trials, etc... Which contingency, formally approved recipe version issued by Product Production orders
Product Centre and Factory by Product Centre and Factory Centre. Local evidences
Leadership team are notified. Leadership team (email). Emails

Master Data management 3.3 Product Maintenance 1

2.3
Does the factory review manufacturing losses
No. Yes, Yes, Yes, SAP ERP vs PLM (Factory vs Product) 1 Yes Process to be implemented with the support of Production team.
against recipe and specification inputs/outputs On a 6 month cycle. On a 3 month cycle. On a monthly basis. Local evidences
(perfect consumption)?

Does the factory inputs SKUs weight and Yes, For all new and modified
Yes, Yes, Material Master (SAP ERP)
dimensions for warehouse management prior to No. Only for NPIs. For all new and modified SKUs. SKUs, performing a Quarterly Weight and Dimensions Report
3 No
release the first production order? review.
2. IMPROVEMENT

Yes,
Yes, when requested by NPI Material Master (SAP ERP)
Is the factory executing UoM (Unit of Measure) No. Yes, Team/Master Data Team. 3 No
conversion for production materials? Ad hoc or not for all materials when requested by NPI All current materials were already Local evidences
Team/Master Data Team reviewed along with Product Emails
Centre.

Ensure that all Product materials and additives are PSC approved 3.0 0

SAP PLM (Product)

Yes, Yes, Yes, Meeting Minutes
Does the factory checks PSC Approval before No All materials are checked against All materials are checked against 3 No
manufacture NPIs ? All materials are checked against the NPI validated list and Product the NPI validated list, SAP PLM, Staris System
the NPI validated list. Centre. Staris system and Product Centre. Local evidences
Emails

Yes, SAP PLM (Product)

Does the factory regularly check current SKUs for No. Yes, Yes, on an yearly basis with the Meeting Minutes
Not on a regular basis or not for On an yearly basis with the Product Centre. Staris System 3 No
PSC Approval?
all SKUs. Product Centre. There is a written protocol to be Local evidences
followed. Emails

Ensure that all Factory materials with potential contact with Product are PSC approved 3.0 0

Yes.
Local procedures to ensure PSC approval for Factory
Is there a formal process implemented to ensure Yes. Fully followed for all Factory materials
that all Factory materials with potential contact No Yes. Fully followed for all Factory areas. Meeting/ assessment minutes 3 No
It is not fully followed. Internal assessments are done in
with Product are PSC approved? areas. order to check shop floor Local evidences
equipment and materials.

Yes
Are all Factory materials with potential contact Yes. Local Engineering and Local procedures
No Not all products or the approval Yes Meeting minutes and emails 3 No
with Product previously approved before being request is made after the Procurement work proactively Local evidences
utilized? utilization. with the suppliers to avoid buying Shop floor materials assessment
PSC non approved materials.

Guarantee Product Specs at Factory level 3.3 Product Maintenance 3.0 0

Yes,
Product Monitoring Process on a
Yes, monthly basis and following-up
Yes, Product Monitoring Process on a through agreed changes with Product Monitoring minutes
Does the factory execute the Product Monitoring No. Product Monitoring Process not monthly basis and following-up Product Centre. Meeting Minutes 3 No
Process on a regular basis? on a monthly basis. through agreed changes with QIM previously analyse trend of Other local evidences
Product Centre. last 3 months and bring
recommendations to the Product
Monitoring Process.
Product Maintenance

Yes,
Yes, All systems are update SAP ERP vs PLM (Factory vs Product)
Does the factory update production systems Yes, For all SKUs with changes on all automatically for each SKU MES, LIMS and other legacies
(MES) according to approved specifications (new No. For NPI and agreed maintenance N/A -
and changes)? changes, only in SAP systems (SAP, MES, LIMS, other change and communicated to the Local evidences
legacies) Manufacturing team prior to Emails
production.

Product Quality improvement opportunities 4.3 Specification Maintenance 2.0 1

Yes,
Does the Quality Improvement Team drives Continuously monitor
Product/Process improvements based on No performance to ensure that
specifications and quality performance? product specifications deliver
desired outcomes.
Yes,
Investigate process optimization
opportunities, develop and
submit relevant
recommendations to Product
Department and factory
Production Management.
Yes,
Investigate process optimization
opportunities, develop and
submit relevant Q2 results
recommendations to Product Meeting Minutes Smoke trend analysis in place and solid communication with product
2 Yes
Department and factory Improvement Plans team.
Production Management Process capability analysis
Assure periodic processes
capability reviews and
improvement implementation
 Road Map Assessed Action
Pillar Process Activities Source of Information / Evidences Justification
1 2 3 4 Score Required

2.3 3

Set-up and deliver quality and product knowledge training to raise awareness and capabilities 2.3 3

QA team not achieving the minimum Equata score refer to Equata for all
Yes Yes Yes, visual inspections. A weekly review for all scores is performed but not all
Are the Quality Inspectors regularly trained in No Not with the specified frequency With the specified frequency, Plus, there´s a log of the Visual Quality Inspectors monthly scores achieved 2 Yes are achieving.
EQuaTA and performing the monthly test? or not achieving the required Cross-Checks agreements, Regional cross-check log
score. achieving the required score. updated and in place. Step up cards All team members not achieving are to be reviewed on more strict
frequency.

Yes Yes,
Yes Shop Floor Training Plan
Are the Manufacturing team regularly trained in No Not with the specified frequency With the specified frequency, Plus, there´s a log of the Visual Yearly scores achieved 2 Yes Euqata training plan already initiated with SF team.
EQuaTA and performing the annual test? or not achieving the required achieving the required score. Cross-Checks agreements, Regional cross-check agreements cascade
score. updated and in place.
Step up cards
1. CAPABILITY

Education & Training Plan

Is there an Education & Training Plan, considering Executions evidences
Education & Training

Yes, Yes, Yes,

all the main Quality Policies, SOPs, Guidelines, No not covering all the Policies & covering all the Policies & SOPs, Plus, after each Training there´s Training effectiveness measurement 2 Yes All necessary document already communicated. A refresher is to be
etc. (such as Shelf Life, PI&T, P&HM, Q2, RQA, SOPs repeated on a frequent basis. an Effectiveness check. Evidences of employees awarenes of their impact in conducted for all team including management.
NCM & NCP, etc.)? Product Quality
Step up cards

Are the IWS Quality DMSs & Tools part of the Yes, Education & Training Plan
Education & Training Plan? all the Quality DMSs & Tools,
(e.g.: QIE, CoCoE, Work Point Analysis, Machine No Yes, Yes, frequently refreshed at least once Executions evidences N/A -
Quality Matrix, Q-Behaviour Observation System, not all the Quality DMSs & Tools all the Quality DMSs & Tools a year and after each Training Effectiveness measurement
Step up cards
Product Defect Matrix, UPS, Ishikawa, etc.) there´s an Effectiveness check.

Yes Yes, Yes, Quality Skill Matrix

Are the staff (Production and Quality) skill matrix No With evidence of assessment With assessment & development With assessment & development Executions evidences N/A -
reviewed on a regular basis? conducted plan provided plan provided Step up cards
Tracking of development plan

Yes, List of new Equipment / Testing Methods

Yes,
Are the Quality & Manufacturing teams trained in No only Quality team or not for all
the new Equipment & Testing Methods?
Equipment & Testing Methods.
Yes, Plus, there´s well defined process Training Plan
both Quality & Manufacturing to improve Equipment & Testing Executions evidences 3 No
teams, for all Equipment & Testing Methods and the findings are Process description & evidences of escalated
Methods. escalated to the Technical Forums improvements
(Regional/Global). Step up cards

1
2
3
4
N/A
 Road Map Assessed Action
Pillar Process Activities Source of Information / Evidences Justification
1 2 3 4 Score Required

3.1 0

3.1 New Quality Acceptance Standards

GQU-SOP-0002: Quality Acceptance Standards
GQU-FRM-0001; NPI defect form
GQU-SOP-0007: NPI Process - Design FMEA
GQU-FRM-0002: FMEA Spreadsheet
GQU-FRM-0004: NPI Product and Quality RACI
3.2 New Product & Process Validation
GQU-SOP-0011: Packaging Qualification (PQ) and Material
Qualification Stage 2
Qualification Process for new Products, Technologies, Materials & Equipment GQU-SOP-0012: Material Qualification Stage 3 (MQS3) 3.1 0
GQU-SOP-0013: Quality Control Plan
GQU-FRM-0005: Quality Control Plan
GQU-SOP-0015: Shelf Life Study for New Products
GQU-SOP-0010: Finished Goods Validation
GQU-FRM-0011: Goods For Sale Certificate
GQU-SOP-0007: NPI Process - Design FMEA
GQU-FRM-0002: FMEA Spreadsheet
GQU-CAT-0001; Global Filter Defect Catalogue

DEVELOPMENT STAGE: Yes, there is a QCPlan, shared

with the Local Team, which
Are the Consumer Research Productions and yes, without sent by Yes, there is a QCPlan sent by engages Regional/Global Quality E-mail where Regional/Global Quality are sharing the
FAT/SAT (Machinery Accepance Test) being No Regional/Global Quality or not to Regional/Global Quality to all 3 No
to receive this document 2 weeks QCPlan
running in the Factory with a document which all CAP2/CAP3 projects CAP2/CAP3 projects QCPlan
contains the critical parameters to be assessed? in advance of the MQS Trial for
CAP2/CAP3 projects

yes, in full according the QCPlan,

DEVELOPMENT STAGE: yes, not in full or not to all yes, in full according the QCPlan in a template established and Quality Template with the results
Are the quality results reported to the Project No 3 No
projects and in a template established with a technical recommendation E-mail where Local Quality is sharing the results of the
Governance? projects.
from Local Quality

DEVELOPMENT STAGE:
For Consumer Research productions / MQS Trials, No Yes, Yes, for all projects and pre e-mail from Local Quality or NPI Manager sharing the
are the results being shared 3 days before the TA The results are not shared 3 days Yes, for all projects alignment is done between Local results to the Technical Team 3 No
prior to the meeting. and Regional/Global team Meeting minutes
meeting?

Yes, there is a QCPlan (with an

DEPLOY STAGE: NPI-Q embed, when applicable),
Are the MQS Trials running in the Factory with Yes, there is a QCPlan (with an shared with the Local Team, E-mail where Regional/Global Quality are sharing the
No yes, without Quality Control Plan NPI-Q embed, when applicable) 3 No
the Quality Control Plan which contains the or not to all projects sent by Regional/Global Quality to which engages Regional/Global QCPlan
critical parameters (visual and physical) to be all projects Quality to receive this document QCPlan
assessed? 2 weeks in advance of the MQS
Trial

DEPLOY STAGE:
Are all visual defects from NPI-Q, that are not in Not a consistent process which Yes, for all visual defects Meeting minutes
EQuaTA and identified in regular productions, No cover all the visual defects Yes, for all visual defects identified identified, with the participation E-mails N/A -
of the Local Quality Manager in
being proposed to be included in the next identified the EQuaTA Technical Forum Local evidences
revisions of the system?
New Products & Processes validation
3. INNOVATION

Yes,
DEPLOY STAGE: To all Projects. There is a
Are the documents of the Product & Process Projects documentations
Validation Plan (Quality Control Plans, FMEA, No Yes, Yes, structured way where the List of projects 3 No
waivers, etc.) kept by the Quality Innovation Not for all projects To all Projects documentation is updated when Meeting minutes
Project/Process changes are
Team? required.

MQS Results
Yes, for MQS trials or only IMI Yes, for all MQS trials and IMI IMI Results
Ate the Global Filter Defect Catalogue being used No Yes, for all MQS trials and IMI during an NPI and extended to 4 No
as a visual standard ? during an NPI or not to all during an NPI. regular production as the List of NPI
projects. reference BAU filter visual assessment results.

Does the Factory performs Risk Assessments for No Yes, not a consistent process or Yes, for all new process Yes, for all new process through a Process implemented vs Risk Assessment document 3 No
every new process implementation not cover all implementations PFMEA

Are the new raw materials being used only after Yes, according Quality Control Yes, according Quality Control Quality Control Plan
No Yes, following local criteria or not Plan with IMI requirements and Incoming Material Inspection Results 3 No
the Factory receive the list of analysis for for all new materials Plan with IMI requirements for all the results are shared with List of new materials + Certificate of analysis
Incoming Material Inspection? new materials Project Team prior to run the trial E-mails with the results shared

Yes, aiming to understand the

method and planning the Yes, understanding, planning Evidence of training sessions
Are the new methods being reviewed before trial No Yes, not through a formal process availability of all required activities and training the staff, New methods implemented N/A -
running? of training or not to all methods anticipating questions and Review of method improvement proposed to
resources, registering the team's proposing improvements Regional/Global Quality
training

When identified the need to perform a Shelf Life Involved only to manufacture, Involved in the design of the Shelf Plan of Shelf Life Study for NPI and Final Report
Study for NPI, how the factory is involved in the No involved Involved only to manufacture and send the product, perform the Life Study, sending the product, Emails N/A -
send the product for the SL Study assessments and report the performing the assessments and
process? results. reporting the results. Meeting minutes

Yes,
Are the Good for Sales certificate shared with Yes, Yes, According the Finish Goods Good for Sales certificate
Region/Global representatives (Quality, Product, No Not OTIF or not to all new According the Finish Goods Validation SOP and engaged with E-mail where Local Quality is sharing the certificate. 3 No
Packaging and MKT)? CAP2/CAP3 products Validation SOP. the technical team when results List of NPI launched
can be improved.

Involved in the design of the

When identified the need to perform a Logistic Involved only to send the product, Logistic Trial plan, sending the Logistic Trial plan for NPI and Final Report
No involved Involved only to send the product N/A -
Trial for NPI, how the factory is involved in the according to Logistic Trial plan. perform the visual assessment product, performing the visual Emails
process? and report the results. assessment and reporting the Meeting minutes
results.

2.1 New Supplier Qualification

GQU-SOP-0016: Global Direct Suppliers Selection,
Qualification and Approval
New Materials/Suppliers Qualification GQU-SOP-0024 - Management of Suppliers Audit 3.0 0
Programme
GQU-SOP-0027 - Supplier Technical Assessment

Yes, Quality Control Plan

Yes,
Are the new raw materials or new Suppliers being Yes, According to Quality Control Plan According to Quality Control Plan, Incoming Material Inspection Results
tested only after the Factory receives the quality No Following local criteria or not for and IMI requirements for all new IMI requirements and the results List of new materials + Certificate of analysis 3 No
critical parameters? all new materials / Suppliers are shared with Project Team List of new suppliers
materials prior to run the trial E-mails with the results shared

Yes,
Yes, In full accordance to the QCPlan, Quality Control Plan
Are the results of any supplier/material Yes, not in full of not in advance In full accordance to the QCPlan, in a template established (if there Trial Results in a template established (if there is one)
qualification trial reported to the appropriate No to the Governance meeting or not in a template established (if there is one), prior to the Governance 3 No
Governance? to all trials. is one) and prior to the meeting and with a technical E-mail where Local Quality is sharing the results with the
Governance meeting recommendation from Local Governance
Quality
 Road Map Assessed Action
Pillar Process Activities Source of Information / Evidences Justification
1 2 3 4 Score Required

3.1 0
Audits and external certifying bodies management 1.5 Quality Audits 3.0 0

Yes.
Are Local Quality supporting and reviewing ISO Yes. Internal audits are performed pat
Yes.
Standards related to quality (ISO 9001, ISO No On demand based on external Internal audits are performed at least once a year and prior to external Audit reports N/A -
17025, etc..) audits. least once a year and prior to audits.
external audits. All Quality certification activities are
managed by a dedicated system.

Are the observations pointed out in external or Yes, Yes. Yes.

Last audit report
internal audits of ISO Standards, related to No Not generate action plan for all Action plans are being tracked Action plans are being tracked once a Action tracker N/A -
quality, generating action plans and the progress observations or they are not once a Quarter and actions are month and actions are completed Meeting minutes
being regularly tracked? regularly tracked. completed prior to the next audit. prior to the next audit.

Does Local Quality perform a self assessment, Yes, Yes. Yes.

using the Quality Assessment Tool, at least once Not every year or not having Self assessment being performed Self assessment being performed at Last self assessment workbook
No at least once a year and action least once a year and action plan for Action tracker 3 No
an year generating an action plan for the items action plan for all items <3 or not plan for all items <3 are being all items <3 are being tracked on a Meeting minutes
with score <3 and progress is regularly tracked? regularly tracked. tracked at least once a Quarter monthly basis

Yes, Yes. Yes.

Are the issues pointed out in Regional Quality Last Regional Quality Assessment Report
Assessments generating action plans which No Not generate action plan for all Action plans are being tracked Action plans are being tracked once a Action tracker 3 No
progress is regularly tracked? observations or they are not once a Quarter and actions are month and actions are completed Meeting minutes
regularly tracked. completed prior to the next audit. prior to the next audit.

GQU-POL-0001: Global Cigarette SL Policy

GQU-GDL-0002: Global Filter Rod SL Guidelines
GQU-POL-0010: Product Integrity and Traceability Policy
GQU-SOP-0018: Performing a PI&T assessment
GQU-MAN-0003; TICS Manual for PI&T Activities
GQU-FRM-0007: PI&T workbook
1.9 Pest & Hygiene Mgmt.
Global Standard: Pest Management & Hygiene Standard
GQU-POL-0014 - P&HM Policy - Future doc
Compliance with Global Quality Standards GQU-SOP-0030 - Implementing Pest & Hygiene 3.0 0
Management - Future doc
Pest Management Guidelines
GQU-FRM-0008: P&HM Assessment workbook
GQU-SOP-0033 - Requesting a waiver to a Global Quality
Standard or Process - Future doc
GQU-FRM-0019 Waiver Request to Global Quality Standard
and Process Form - Future doc
GQU-SOP-0036 - Management of Materials Quality in the
Factory Shop Floor and WH - Future doc

Yes,
Yes,
Do the End Markets supported by Local Quality Yes, All of the EMs . All of the EMs for all product
teams, have a written Local SL policy based on a No Not all of the EMs or not for all For all product categories sold. categories sold. EMs Local SL policy 3 No
regionally approved SL study according to the product categories sold in the Local SL policy is reviewed in an yearly Local evidences
Global Policy/SOP? Ems. (* unless there is a SL study in basis to update any changes in
progress) Product portfolio / Supply Chain.

Yes,
Yearly performed, Yes,
Is PI&T self assessment yearly performed in each Not for all EMs/Factories; OR For all EMs/Factories For all EMs/Factories
EM/Factory with scores quarterly reviewed and No Not quarterly reported OTIF; OR Quarterly reported OTIF Quarterly reported OTIF TICS System reports 3 No
reported in TICS System and the identified scores Action plans in place for all points Action plans regionally reported.
<3 have an action plan in place? Action plans missing. <3 and follow up on the CAPA No items with score <3 were
closure identified in the current quarter.

Yearly performed, Yes, Yes,

Is P&HM self assessment yearly performed in Not for all EMs/Factories; OR For all EMs/Factories For all EMs/Factories
each EM/Factory with scores quarterly reviewed No Not quarterly reported OTIF; OR Quarterly reported OTIF Quarterly reported OTIF TICS System reports 3 No
and reported in TICS System and the identified Action plans regionally reported.
scores <3 have an action plan in place? Action plans missing. Action plans in place for all points No items with score <3 were
<3 identified.

Is the pest count, weekly monitored in each Yes,

factory area, uploaded in the TICS system by the No Yes, Yes, OTIF consistently in the last 2 TICS System reports 3 No
Not on time or not in full OTIF Regional/Global cascade.
5th working day of the following month? quarters.

There is an approved waiver for any Global Yes, Yes, Evidences to follow all Global Quality Standards /
Quality Standard that is not fully followed by the No Not for all Global Quality For all Global Quality Standards All Global Quality Standards are fully Processes 3 No
4. COMPLIANCE

Standards or the action plans are implemented and followed. Waivers request and approval
EM/Factory? not OTIF and the action plans are OTIF Local information
Management System

Yes, Yes,
Is there a Product materials (WMS, C&F, Tow,...) No Not robust or not to all Product Yes, Robust control to all materials. Local Evidences 3 No
shelf life management in place? materials. Robust control to all materials. FIFO well managed

1.3 Standards Deployment

GQU-POL-0006: Management of Global Quality
Quality Risk Assessment Documentation 3.0 0
GQU-SOP-0033 - Requesting a waiver to a Global Quality
Standard or Process

Yes List of analysis

Is there a risk assessment (e.g. FMEA) of the Yes Yes There is a risk assessment performed Reported data
manufacturing processes in the plant to
determine the type and frequency of additional No There is a risk assessment There is a risk assessment with FMEA and all mitigation actions Sampling/frequency N/A -
Quality Assurance Checks to ensure good Quality Not all mitigation actions performed with FMEA and all implemented based on Manufacturing Methods used
implemented. mitigation actions implemented. Quality Assurance Best Practice Risk assessment.
Control Guidelines Meeting minutes and other local evident

Is there an approved waiver for any Global Yes, Yes, Evidences to follow all Global Quality Standards /
Quality Standard that is not fully followed by the No Not for all Global Quality For all Global Quality Standards All Global Quality Standards are fully Processes 3 No
Standards or the action plans are implemented and followed. Waivers request and approval
EM/Factory? not OTIF and the action plans are OTIF Local information

Metrology & Maintenance 3.5 0

Yes, Yes, Equipment list

Is there a calibration and maintenance plan in No Yes For all equipment. For all equipment. Equipment calibration/maintenance plan/results 3 No
place for all quality equipment? Only to the critical equipment. Certified standards are used for Certified standards are used for all
critical equipment. equipment. Standards certification.

Is there a cross-check of the quality equipment in Yes Yes, Yes,

Locally performed for all equipment. Equipment list
order to guarantee robustness/alignment of the No Locally performed only with the Locally performed for all Regional cross-check at least one a Cross-checks evidences
4 No
assessed results? critical equipment. equipment at least once a year year.

GQU-STD-0001 - Standard on Manufacturing Quality

Control Checks - Future doc
GQU-GDL-0004 - Manufacturing Quality Assurance Best
Practice Guidelines - Future doc
Shop floor Quality standards GQU-SOP-0026: Tobacco Recovery from Cigarettes with 3.0 0
Capsule Filters using VSS
GQU-FRM-0012: Capsule Shorts Inclusion Calculator
GQU-CAT-0001; Global Filter Defect Catalogue
GQU-SOP-0020: Quality Testing of Capsule Filter Rods SOP

Yes, List of analysis

Are the mandatory Standard on Manufacturing Yes Yes, In full to all products/production Reported data
Quality Assurance Checks performed in shop No Not all analysis or not to all In full to all products/production modules. Sampling/frequency 3 No
Scope of analysis or frequency Methods used
floor? products/production modules modules increased based on specific quality Meeting minutes and other local evidences.
performance opportunity.

In case the factory has the VSS system for tobacco Yes,
recovery from cigarettes with capsule filters, are Not in full or not to all capsule
products specifications which
the procedures in the GQU-SOP-0026 followed in No tobacco is recovered, or the VSS
order to ensure equipment efficiency and avoid efficiency tests is not checked on
cut rag contamination?
a monthly basis
Yes, Yes,
In full and to all capsule products In full and to all capsule products
Qualification reports and check reports.
specifications specifications. Factory Calibration plan
N/A -
Efficiency checked at least once a Efficiency check is part of factory
month equipment calibration plan

Q2 Manual & System

GQU-MAN-0001; Q2 and FPI Calculator Manual
Q2 Quality Reporting System Methodology GQU-MAN-0002; Q2 Implementation Manual 3.0 0
Q2 frequently asked questions
Q2 and FPI Calculator

Is all the mandatory requirements of the Q2
Manual being followed?
Are Q2 data compiled and managed properly?
Q2 Manual
Yes, Reported data
Yes Yes, In full. All methods, calculations and Sampling/frequency
No Not in full. Deviation identified in procedures are reviewed and audited Methods used 3 No
any aspect of Q2 Manual In full at least twice a year by the Quality Data exclusion
Team. Meeting minutes and other local evidences.
Data removal procedures (outliers management)
There is a system (or the last There is a system (or the last version
There is a system (or the last version of the Q2 excel Calculator) of the Q2 excel Calculator) that
compile all the data and calculate
version of the Q2 excel Calculator) that compile all the data and scores (it can be different system).
that compile all the data and calculate scores (it can be Data removal is according to Q2 Q2 data reporting system
No calculate scores (it can be different system). Data exclusion evidences 3 No
different system) Data removal is according to Q2 Manual and there is a robust RCA/CAPA
Data removal is according to Q2 Manual and there is a robust procedure defined for request and
document the exclusions.
Manual. procedure defined for request There is RCA/CAPA for frequent
and document the exclusions. occurrences.
 Road Map Assessed Action
Pillar Process Activities Source of Information / Evidences Justification
1 2 3 4 Score Required

2.8 5
1.8 Quality Performance & Compliance Reporting
Reporting & Dashboards GQU-POL-0015: Reporting of Quality Incidents 3.0 0
GQU-FRM-0009: Quality Incident Report

Last reports
Does the Factory, Labs and End Markets submit Yes. Yes, OTIF report
complete Compliance&Performance data OTIF up No Yes, OTIF and consistently in the last 6 OTIF and consistently in the last 6 Q2 data reporting system 3 No
Not consistently months with RCA and CAPA for
to 6th working day of each month? months the main issues Emails and local evidences
Geographical Qual. Performance Mgr. feedback

Is the local Quality dashboard reflecting the same No Yes, Yes. Yes. Local Quality Dashboard of Performance, Innovations and 3 No
KPIs monitored Regionally and Globally? Not for all KPIs In full In full using the same template. Compliance.

If any Quality Incident has been reported for the Yes. Yes.
Factory or End Market in the last 12 months, is Report according to the Policy Report according to the Policy No Quality incidents in the past Last reports
No (OTIF) Global Action tracker N/A -
the report according to the Policy and all CAPA on Action plans not running (OTIF). Action plans running 12 months RD9:I10egional Quality feedback
track? according to plan. according to plan.

Performance & Continuous Improvement 1.6 Continual Improvement 3.0 0

Yes,
Yes, Continuously monitor
Does the Quality Performance team runs a Loss Continuously monitor performance through Loss
Analysis to identify the critical opportunities to be Yes, performance through Loss Analysis to identify critical Loss Analysis
addressed? No Ad hoc Loss Analysis and N/A -
improvement plans. Analysis to identify critical opportunities, define a RCA RCA / CAPA
(Quality KPIs: CoCo, CuCo, RQA, Q2, etc...) opportunities and defining a RCA through an UPS (or similar
process and CAPA. process) and ensuring CAPA
aligned with IWS DMSs.

Yes. Yes. Local Evidences

Are all RCA and CAPA correctly defined and RCA and CAPA not consistent or Yes. Robust RCA and CAPA . Action Regional Quality feedback
implemented according to plan for the quality No Robust RCA and CAPA . Action plan running according to plan. 3.0 No
opportunities? not implemented according to the plan running according to plan CAPA effectiveness been Actions Tracker
plan. evaluated. CAPA Effectiveness report

4.1 Product and Materials Test & Release

Lab testing & Product release 4.2 Product Chemical Lab Testing & Review 0
GQU-SOP-0006: Non-conforming Product Management
3.0

Yes.
Does the product materials passing through There is a list of critical materials Yes.
Quality Assurance & Labs Management

Yes, and what tests to perform. All materials are inspected and Local Evidences
incoming material inspection (IMI) process No Not for all materials They are inspected and the IMI the IMI results triggers the usage Procedures 3 No
according to specification and prior to results triggers the usage (or not) (or not) of the materials in the List of materials and parameters to be tested.
production)?
of the materials in the production.
production.

Yes. The laboratory have good

Yes. The laboratory have good
Does the Chemical Labs have the standard
conditions to properly perform the analysis in No facilities, environmental
accordance to the certification bodies? conditions and procedures.
Not certified.
Yes. The laboratory have good
facilities, environmental
conditions and procedures.
Lab has ISO 17025 certification.
facilities, environmental
conditions and procedures. Certifications
Lab has ISO 17025 certification. Audit reports N/A -
Equipment regional cross-check Cross-check reports.
lead by Product Centre at least
once a year.

Yes,
Are the Non-Conforming Products (NCP) and Fully following the SOP for all Local operating procedures to manage and report
Yes, Yes,
Non-Conforming Materials (NCM) managed in No Not followed in all cases or not Fully following the SOP for all NCM and NCP. NCP/NCM. 3 No
accordance to the Non-Conforming Product applied for all NCM and NCP NCM and NCP Local Quality supports List of NCM/NCP identified and actions taken
Management SOP? manufacturing in RCA and CAPA Emails and local evidences
analysis.

Yes. Yes.
Does the factory has a process to treat materials Yes For all critical materials identified For all materials identified Loss Analysis
issues with the Supplier, following RCA / CAPA No Only for some materials and through a proper Loss Analysis. through a proper Loss Analysis. RCA/CAPA 3 No
definition? suppliers. RCA/CAPA in place and regularly RCA/CAPA in place and regularly Other local Evidences
followed-up with the supplier. followed-up with the supplier.

Manufacturing Processes optimization 1.5 3

Yes
For all applicable
Are the solutions implemented to address quality Yes Yes machines/processes
opportunities being replicated/cascaded to the No Not for all applicable For all applicable There is a standardized process to Local evidences 1 Yes Prcess will be defined and implemented.
other machines/processes? machines/processes machines/processes replicate/cascade good practices, Best practices needs to be shared
as well as to ensure that IWS
DMSs are being applied.

Yes.
Are the proven solutions developed in the factory Yes There is a process in place to There is a process in place to
to address quality opportunities been shared with No Not all solutions or only when document the findings/learnings document the findings/learnings Local evidences 1 Yes Prcess will be defined and implemented.
and it is shared with the Quality Reg. Quality Feedback Best practices needs to be shared
Quality Community? requested and it is shared with the Quality Community in a proactive way.
Community when requested.

Yes
Yes On track and the effectiveness is Reg. Quality Feedback
Is there an implementation plan for the best No Yes 1 Yes In case relevance of any best practice, quality community will be informed.
practices defined as " must implement" ? Not on track. On track and the effectiveness is been measured and tracked. Implementation plan
been measured and tracked. New findings retrofitting the Implementation results.
original solution.

Yes, Local evidences

Yes,
Are the proven technologies / quality devices, Yes There is an implementation plan There is an implementation plan Reg. Quality Feedback
approved by BAT, considered in factory master No Not in a structured way or only for critical devices considered in Factory Master Plan 3 No
for critical devices considered in
plan (capex)? when requested. the next Capex CoPlan. Capex CoPlan.
the factory Master Plan

6.1 Customer Complaints

7.1 Consumer Complaints Management
CoCo and CuCo management GQU-SOP-0028: Receipt, Registration and Reporting of 3.0 0
Consumer Complaints
GQU-TEM-0008: CoCo Validation template

Yes Standard list of defects

Does the standard defect list of complaints No Yes Yes 3 No
aligned in the EM ? Not fully aligned Fully aligned Fully aligned and Call Centre Reports
trained twice a year. Training Records

Are the improvement opportunities managed Yes Yes Yes CoCoE health Check
CoCoE embedded in the factory
through IWS Quality CoCoE (Consumer Complaint No CoCoE not embedded in the CoCoE embedded in the factory Direction Setting cycle. For both 90 days Plan N/A -
Elimination DMS)? factory Direction Setting cycle. Direction Setting cycle. CoCo and CuCo. Factory Direction Setting cycle.

Yes
Yes For all relevant CoCo's, every Local Evidences
Does the factory provides to the EM a feedback of Yes. For all relevant CoCo's, every month in the PDT meetings, in a CoCo reports
CAPA implementation regarding the more No 3 No
In a not systematic way. month in the PDT meetings and in systematic way and previously CuCo reports
relevant CuCo's and CoCo's? a systematic way. discussed in the Quality Regional Quality Performance - Geography
Improvement Forum.

6.2 Retail Quality Assessment

Retail Quality Assessment Retail Quality Assessment (RQA) protocol 3.2 0
5. PERFORMANCE

Yes.
Current monitored products are Yes. Yes, All current monitored RQA Enablement Tool
Are the monitored BAT and Competitor Brands No products were approved by PDT 4 No
(SKUs) submitted and approved by PDT? not 100% approved (some brands All current monitored products and product portfolio is annually Last month RQA report
were changed, without PDT were approved by PDT. reviewed Minutes of PDT
approval)

Have the geographies been selected taking Yes. Yes. Yes.

account all relevance variations (e.g.: promotion Not all relevant variances were All relevant variances were All relevant variances were Local Shelf life Policy
No considered to define geography, Forum minutes or emails (PDT and TM&D ) 3 No
spend and sales, climate, supply chain considered to define geography or considered to define geography all the selected channels are Comparison between geographies and sales volume
type/length, etc. ) and channels selected in terms not all the selected channels are and all the selected channels are representative and both are
of spend and sales in the End Market? representative. representative.
reviewed at least twice a year.

Yes.
Are the RQA samples analysis being done Procedures fully aligned.
according to the available GAT No Yes. Yes. There is an internal audit plan GAT Methods 3 No
methods/equipment, following the RQA Protocol Not fully aligned. Procedures fully aligned. regularly performed (at leas once Retail Quality Assessment (RQA) protocol
and the EQuaTA catalogue (visual Inspections).? a year) to check compliance with Local evidences
methods and procedures.

Yes.
Are the samples bought and shipped to the No With delays, not complete or Yes. Yes. Last 3 months results 3 No
factory according to protocol and to the plan? damaged. RCA and CAPA to OTIF in the last 6 months OTIF in the last 12 months Local RQA protocol/Policy
address the delays.
pply Chain Quality
 Yes.
Are the samples analysed and input in RQA No With delays, not complete or Yes. Yes. Last 3 months results 3 No
enablement tool according to the plan? damaged. RCA and CAPA to OTIF in the last 6 months OTIF in the last 12 months Local RQA protocol/Policy
address the delays.
Supply Chain Quality

Yes. Yes.
Are the RQA Improvement Plans reviewed and Not in full or not every month or Yes. OTIF with RQA tracker (when Forum minutes
submitted/approved by QIF/PDT forums in a No OTIF with RQA tracker (when required) 3 No
monthly basis? without RQA tracker (when required) The best practices are shared with OTIF consistently green
required) the Region.

5.1 Transport Quality

5.2 Warehouse Quality
Finished Goods Transportation, Handling and Storage
Transport & Warehousing Quality Management. Guideline 3.0 1
Pest & Hygiene Management – Guides
GQU-POL-0001: Global Cigarette Shelf Life Policy
GQU-FRM-0007: PI&T workbook

Are the inbound transportation of Raw Materials Yes.

Yes.
& SFGs (if applicable: e.g. Capsules, Charcoal No Yes. All loads are monitored through All loads are monitored through Data Loggers report 3 No
Filters, etc.) being monitored in terms of Not all loads are monitored. Data Loggers. Data Loggers and issues are Actions tracker
Temperature & Humidity? actioned & tracked.

Yes.
Are the Factory warehouses (Raw Materials, Yes. Yes. All Factory´s WHs are monitored Data Loggers report
Finished Goods, SFG) monitored in terms of No Not all WHs are monitored - only All Factory´s WHs are monitored Monthly readings 4 No
through monthly readings and
Temperature and Humidity? FG/SFG. through monthly readings. Actions tracker
issues are actioned & tracked.

Yes.
Are the outbound transportation of SFG & FG Yes. Yes. All loads are monitored through Data Loggers report
being monitored in terms of Temperature & No All loads are monitored through 3 No
Not all loads are monitored. Data Loggers and issues are Actions tracker
Humidity? Data Loggers.
actioned & tracked.

Yes,
Is there a monitoring of the level of damaged Yes, Yes, Local evidences
Yes,
products (e.g.: losses, degradation, returns, etc.) No Occasionally / on demand. On monthly basis, with defined On monthly basis, with defined Return report (to Regional Quality) 2 Yes Monitoring to be implemented with support of SC team
in transport and warehouse? KPIs in a dashboard. KPIs in a dashboard, with RCA and Non criminal losses report (financial)
CAPA for the main losses.

Materials improvement & Supplier Quality Performance Management 2.2 Supplier Quality Performance 3.0 0

Yes,
Yes. Yes, all Materials, OTIF and KPIs are Local evidences
Is MatQuIS being uploaded on a monthly basis? No part of Local Quality Dashboard to Emails 3 No
Not for all materials. all Materials and OTIF. show progress in regards of the MatQuIS reports
main opportunities.

Yes,
Are the Non-Conforming Materials through a Loss Analysis Yes, Local evidences
(rejected/blocked) or Materials with poor No Yes. performed on Quarterly basis Plus, the main issues are in Meeting minutes 3 No
performance being addressed with Suppliers? Not for all materials or issues. where critical opportunities agreement with Supplier, Emails
triggers a RCA & CAPA process Procurement and Manufacturing. MatQuIS reports
with Suppliers.

Quality Improvement Forum QIF ToR 2.0 1

Yes,
Is the Quality Improvement Forum in place? No Not being performed with the
frequency, scope or participants
required.
Yes,
In full accordance to the QIF ToR, Meeting minutes
Yes, with significant Quality Best practices presentations shared. 2 Yes
In full accordance to the QIF ToR. Improvement in the past 6
months, and best practices shared Emails.
across the Quality Community.

DMSs
IWS Quality Pillar management Health Checks 3.0 0
Pillar has a Leader who is able to Pillar is still in its infancy & require
Does Quality has a Local Pillar Leader? No Pillar is mature and gives support Skill Development Matrix with Gap identified and Action 3 No
teach and coach about the Pillar support from region & Global to other sites to evolve. Plan defined.
basics pillar owner.

Local training for Q Local training for Q Pillar

Is there an official DMSs Training & Qualification No Official Training & Qualification pillar conducted based on the conducted based on Global Training record N/A -
process in place? conducted for the Quality Pillar.
available materials. Standard Work Packs.

There´s a Quality Pillar Board in

Is the Quality Pillar Board in place and with the
right content?
place, with key elements
displayed (Team OD with clear Q Pillar meeting happening on Gap Analysis based on Health
No R&R, Contribution to CBN, Pillar monthly basis following the PDCA Check includes Capabilities Pillar Board N/A -
Master Plan, 90 Days Plan, In/Out approach. Development plan (Training).
put measures, Gap Analysis and
Action Plan).

Clear evidence 90 Day Plan of Q

Clear evidence 90 Day Plan of Q
pillar has been part of production
Are the '90 days plan' available to address the key No team's plan.
losses in Quality?
Link with Loss Analysis and
addressing key losses on site.
IWS
Clear evidence 90 Day Plan of Q
pillar has been part of production
team's plan to address the
identified top 3 quality losses in
regards CoCo / Q2.
Demonstrated evidence in the
pillar has been part of production
team's plan to address the
identified top 3 quality losses in 90 Days Plan N/A -
regards CoCo / Q2 / E2E KPIs
(RQA, Suppliers, etc.).
Demonstrated evidence in the

reduction of NCP & CoCo.

reduction of NCP & CoCo.

Evidence of Q DMSs Activated. Evidence of Q DMSs Activated.

Basics is QIE (Quality Incident
Are the Quality DMSs correctly activated ? No Elimination) and CoCoE
(Consumer Complaints
Elimination)
Second level DMSs in place
(Quality Capability SWP -
Behaviour Observation / and
Machine Quality Matrix)
Evidence of Q DMSs Activated.
Third level DMSs in place Health Check of the DMSs N/A -
(Materials Quality) and robust
WPA (Work Point Analysis).

Evidence of UPS usage with Evidence of UPS usage with

Is there enough evidence of usage of Problem No Evidence of UPS usage with some robust Success Cases. robust Success Cases. UPS N/A -
Solving tool (UPS) and of the results achieved? Success Cases Ability to teach & coach other Ability to teach & coach other Issues solved proven by results
local pillar on UPS. sites on UPS.

Information flow from Quality to

Does the Quality Pillar DMSs embedded in
Factory DDS cycle?
Presence of the Quality
No representative on Factory DDS,
ensuring integration of
information (driving focus).
Information flow from Quality to
Factory (and vice versa) present &
evident. Works well to address
any issue.
Factory (and vice versa) present &
evident. Works well to address Factory DDS dealing with Quality issues and solving them. N/A -
any issue. Clear evidences of
countermeasures agreed to
address daily issues reported.

Is it perceived the presence of Quality Mindset & No Evidence of continued build of Q Team able to identify key gaps Q Team able to identify key gaps Q BOS used to address Cultural opportunities at site level.
the quality mindset & behaviour on site behaviour and define on End Market behaviour and Health Checks N/A -
Culture in the organization?
throughout the organization. countermeasures. define countermeasures. Machine DDS Board
 QATool Action Plan

Assessment
No Factory Pillar Process Activity Issue RCA CAPA By whom Start date Finish date Status
Date

QA team not achieving the minimum Equata score refer QA team not achieving consistantly required Equata Bi weekly monitoring and coaching to achieve the Amine Rizk Hamedi 07/15/2018 08/16/2018 Not Started
to Equata for all visual inspections. A weekly review for score, due to lack of understanding and language target
all scores is performed but not all are achieving. barrier
All team members not achieving are to be reviewed on
Are the Quality Inspectors regularly trained in EQuaTA more strict frequency.
01 Oran 8/7/2018 Capability Education & Training and performing the monthly test?

Euqata training plan already initiated with SF team. Operator trained on visual assessment but not 1. Equata install on Shift Managers computers. Shift Managers 07/15/2018 10/16/2018 Not Started
performing Equata training. No access to the 2. Shift Managers visual refresher. Production Manager
Are the Manufacturing team regularly trained in EQuaTA database. 3. Operator refresher, and regular assessment QA team
02 Oran 8/7/2018 Capability Education & Training and performing the annual test?

All necessary document already communicated. A Most of team memebers are aware about the Refresher training to be conducted to all team Amine Rizk Hamedi 5/8/2018 08/19/2018 Not Started
refresher is to be conducted for all team including importance of these documents, but require a deep members
Is there an Education & Training Plan, considering all the management. refresher on all processes.
03 Oran 8/7/2018 Capability Education & Training main Quality Policies, SOPs, Guidelines, etc. (such as
Shelf Life, PI&T, P&HM, Q2, RQA, NCM & NCP, etc.)?

Process to be implemented with the support of Production team not reviewing losses against Process of review to be implemented. Production Team 07/23/2018 07/30/2018 Not Started
Production team. recipe and specs. No process defined Amine Rizk Hamedi
Does the factory review manufacturing losses against
04 Oran 8/7/2018 Improvement Spec Management recipe and specification inputs/outputs (perfect
consumption)?

Smoke trend analysis in place and solid communication Trend for physicals missing Implement trend analysis for physical parameters. Amine Rizk Hamedi 07/30/2018 08/30/2018 Not Started
with product team.
Does the Quality Improvement Team drives
05 Oran 8/7/2018 Improvement Spec Management Product/Process improvements based on specifications
and quality performance?

Prcess will be defined and implemented. No process defined. Define process and implement. Amine Rizk Hamedi 1/8/2018 08/20/2018 Not Started
Best practices needs to be shared
Are the solutions implemented to address quality
06 Oran 8/7/2018 PERFORMANCE Quality Assurance & Labs Management opportunities being replicated/cascaded to the other
machines/processes?

Prcess will be defined and implemented. No process defined. Define process and implement. Amine Rizk Hamedi 1/8/2018 08/20/2018 Not Started
Best practices needs to be shared
Are the proven solutions developed in the factory to
07 Oran 8/7/2018 PERFORMANCE Quality Assurance & Labs Management address quality opportunities been shared with Quality
Community?

In case relevance of any best practice, quality No best practice developped/shared In case relevance of any best practice, quality Amine Rizk Hamedi 1/9/2018 09/30/2018 Not Started
community will be informed. community will be informed.
08 Oran 8/7/2018 PERFORMANCE Quality Assurance & Labs Management Is there an implementation plan for the best practices
defined as " must implement" ?

Monitoring to be implemented with support of SC team Lack of losses monitoring Monitoring to be implemented with support of SC team SC team 07/22/2018 08/19/2018 Not Started
Amine Rizk Hamedi
Is there a monitoring of the level of damaged products
09 Oran 8/7/2018 PERFORMANCE Quality Assurance & Labs Management (e.g.: losses, degradation, returns, etc.) in transport and
warehouse?

10