Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst

Huf Group

Corporate Supplier Manual

Guideline: 8D Method

… the intelligent
touch to cars
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

Contents:

1. Objective
2. Area of Applicability
3. Definitions and Explanations
4. Proceedings and Procedures
4.1 The 8D Steps
5. Appendix
Appendix A: Explanations
Appendix B: Checklist
Appendix C: Template 8 D Report
Appendix D: Template 8 D Worksheets

1. Objective

The objective of this attachment is to define and require an 8 D problem solving and
reporting method for suppliers of the Huf Group.

2. Area of Applicability

All suppliers of the Huf Group.

3. Definitions and Explanations

8 D: Eight Disciplines (D1 – D8)

FTA: Fault Tree Analysis

Nok: not okay

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 2 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

4. Proceedings and Procedures

The 8D Method within this Attachment 1 is defined as:

• a standard method
• a problem solving process
• a reporting format

Every Huf complaint has to be processed by using this method. As a first step Huf
requires a fast interim 4D report (D0-D4) up to the information about containment
actions. For complaint closure the fulfillment of complete 8D method has to be
shown. Both interim 4D and final 8D report have to be submitted timely at the
request of Huf.

An 8D template is shown in appendix C. The supplier is allowed to use own

templates if the 8D structure (D0-D8 with relevant tools) is met and the 8D
proceeding according this guideline is ensured.

8D Worksheets (see Appendix D) support the 8 D proceeding at the supplier. If

required from Huf, the supplier has to enclose the completed worksheets to the 8 D
report. This could be the case if the complaint is escalated (e.g. because of
occurrence at Huf customer) and/or the occurred failure is critical.

4.1 The 8D Steps

The 8D method is based on 8 steps plus a preliminary step for preparing.

In the table below the 8D steps are listed including a link to all supporting documents
(e.g.: checklists, flow charts, templates). Additionally all supporting documents are
printed in the attachments.

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 3 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

8D- Table

Step Explanation Checklist Template Tools &

Standard Escalated Methods

D0 – General Common 8D internal overview

D8 Task
0 Preliminary Step 0 Checklist D0 8D Worksheet
D0-D3
step

1 Establish a Step 1 Checklist D1 8D Worksheet

D0-D3
Team

2 Problem Step 2 Checklist D2 8D Worksheet Customer,

D0-D3
description Photo

3 Containment Step 3 Checklist D3 8D Worksheet

D0-D3
actions

4 Root Step 4 Checklist D4 8D Worksheet Ishikawa

D4/D5
cause(s) FTA,
5 Why’s
Root Cause
Analyze
5 Choose Step 5 Checklist D5 8D Worksheet Reliability
D4/ D5
permanent Study
corrective Tests
actions

6 Implement Step 6 Checklist D6

permanent
corrective
actions

7 Prevent Step 7 Checklist D7 FMEA,

reoccurrence Control
Plan,
Procedure
8 Problem Step 8 Checklist D8
solved

Report to Customer 8D Report sheet

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 4 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

5. Appendix

Appendix A: Explanations

Appendix B: Checklist

Appendix C: Template 8 D Report

Appendix D: Templates Worksheets

Appendixes C and D are available as Excel templates (Partner Portal).

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 5 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

Appendix A: Explanations

D0: Preliminary Step

Preparing for the 8D, ensure that all relevant information needed for the 8D are
available. If needed emergency actions must be implemented to separate the NOK
parts ant to protect the customer.

D1: Establish a Team

Establish a small team consisting of people who can contribute to solving the
problem and implementing a solution. A champion and team leader has to be
designated

D2: Problem Description

Describe the internal/external customer problem by identifying "what is wrong with

what". Get a profile of the problem (what, where, when, how many…).

D3: Containment Actions

Define, verify, and implement the interim containment action to isolate effects of the
problem until a permanent corrective action can be found. Validate the effectiveness.

D4: Root Cause(s)

Isolate and verify the root cause by testing each possible cause against the problem
description and test data. Also isolate and verify the place in the process where the
effect of the root cause should have been detected and contained.

D5: Choose Permanent Corrective Actions

List possible actions that could resolve the root cause(s) of the problem. Select the
'best' permanent corrective action(s). Verify the chosen action(s) will solve the
problem without causing undesirable effects.

D6: Implement Permanent Corrective Actions

Plan and implement selected permanent corrective actions. Define how the
effectiveness of the permanent corrective action(s) can be monitored continuously.

D7: Prevent Recurrence

Modify the necessary systems including policies, practices, and procedures to

prevent recurrence of this problem and similar ones.

D8: Problem solved

Complete the team work. Evaluate the achieved experience and decide who should
be informed about it.

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 6 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

Appendix B: Checklist
Common Tasks for every step
1. Do we have the right team composition to proceed the (next) step and make
decisions?
2. Has the factual information in the 8D report been reviewed and updated?
3. Have we informed all involved departments within our company/plants about 8D
status, its content with results, decisions and planned activities?
4. Have all changes been documented (FMEA, control plan, process flow, etc.)?

D0 – Preliminary step
1. Did Huf require emergency response actions or are those actions necessary
from our point of view?
2. How was the emergency response action verified and validated?
3. Is the symptom complexity known? Have the symptoms been quantified and
confirmed with measurements?
4. Does already an 8D report exist for this problem? Is it a repeated problem?

D1 – Establish a Team
1. Has the Team Leader/Champion of the team been identified?
2. How is Huf represented in the 8D team?
3. Are the departments/plants affected by the problem represented in the team?
Does the team structure ensure all necessary input and required experience? Is
the team small enough to act effectively?
4. Are the roles and responsibilities of the team members clear?
5. Does the team have sufficient decision-making authority and/or is the decision
process clear?

D2 – Problem Description
1. Do we have a clear description of the specific problem?
2. Is/Are the symptom(s) clear? Are the conditions clear when symptoms occur? If
more than one symptom exists, is it possible to separate them clearly?
3. Have 'Repeated Whys' been used? What's wrong with what? Has Is/Is-Not
Analysis been performed (what, where, when, how big)?
4. Has this problem appeared before? If yes, where in the process?
5. Is it a 'something changed' or a 'never been there' situation?
6. Does this process flow reflect the last approved status?
7. Are samples with these symptoms available?
8. Have all required data been collected and analyzed?
9. Do we have enough information to investigate and evaluate potential root
cause(s)? If not, which information and analysis are missing?
10. Which influence has the emergency response actions to the deviation?
11. Could the problem affect other/similar components or assemblies?
12. Has the Problem Description been confirmed by team and Huf?

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 7 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

D3 – Containment Actions
1. Are Containment Actions necessary and/or required by Huf? Have criteria been
established for selection of Containment Actions?
2. Have the appropriate departments/plants been involved in this containment
action decision?
3. Have appropriate Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) tools (e.g., FMEA,
control plans, instructions) been considered? Have we considered the
experience from the emergency response actions?
4. Is it ensured that the Containment Actions protect Huf totally from the effect?
How have all containment actions been successfully verified?
5. Do the Containment Actions show an adequate balance of benefits and risks?
Are implementation resources adequate?
6. Do we have a clear plan to implement the Containment Actions (who has to do
what and when)?
7. Did we inform Huf via 8D report? Is Huf approval required and given?
8. How is the effectiveness of the containment action? Which improvements are
necessary?

D4 – Root Cause(s)
1. What sources of information have been used to develop the potential root-cause
list? Do we have all needed information and analysis results?
2. Which quality tools are in use to find the root cause(s)? Has a Cause & Effect
Diagram been completed? Have 'Repeated Whys' been used?
3. Can we clearly identify factor(s) changed which contributes to this problem?
What data make us sure that these changed factors are responsible for the
problem?
4. If we indicated more than one potential root cause, does the sum account for 100
percent the problem? Do all known data confirm this?
5. Do(es) the root cause(s) match to the problem according the Problem
Description?
6. Is the desired performance level (specification) achievable?
7. If the desired performance level is not achievable, which other changes (e.g.
design) can solve the problem?
8. Is it useful to split the 8D investigations with regard to the single potential root
causes (sub-8D e.g. with supplier)?
9. Has the root-cause analysis gone deep enough? How did we verify the root
cause(s)?
10. Is a control system for relevant parameters available and verified to detect the
problem? Is there a need to improve the control system?

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 8 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

D5 – Choose Permanent Corrective Actions

1. Have criteria been established for selection of corrective actions and escape
point? Did the team leader/champion and Huf (if required) confirm these criteria?
2. What departments/plants are needed to be involved in the planning of the
corrective actions? Are they part of the team?
3. What options have been considered by choosing the permanent corrective
actions? Did we choose the most effective corrective action? If not (e.g. because
of financial considerations), did we analyse the benefit of the most effective
corrective action in relation to the costs? Did we keep in mind the short and long
term point of view?
4. How did we verify the chosen corrective actions (checked variables, consider
tolerances and process variations) and what evidence do we have that these
corrective actions will resolve the problem at the root cause level?
5. Did we identify and verify the risk to create other problems with chosen
corrective actions? How should these be managed? Did we involve Huf?
6. Does the Champion concur with the chosen corrective actions (if required)? Did
Huf release the corrective actions?
7. Do we have a clear implementation plan for the corrective actions (who has to do
what and when)?
8. What resources will be required for implementation of the corrective actions and
are they adequate? Are these resources available?
9. What is the plan to carry on the containment actions until corrective actions are
implemented and validated?

D6 – Implement Permanent Corrective Actions

1. What departments/plants are needed to be involved in the implementation of the
corrective actions? Are representatives of those departments on our team to plan
and implement their tasks and responsibilities?
2. What Huf and/or supplier involvement is needed? Who will coordinate the
activities at Huf and/or at the supplier?
3. How are we monitoring completion of the implementation plan? What points in
this plan could go wrong and what can be done to prevent this?
4. What is the exit point for the containment actions?
5. What measures are used to validate the chosen corrective actions (as well for
short and long term)?
6. How will we continue to monitor long-term results? Can we be sure that the
measurement system is capable to prove the root cause is eliminated?
7. Does the validation confirm that all root causes have been completely
eliminated?
8. Have all process related documents been reviewed and updated?

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 9 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

D7 – Prevent Recurrence
1. Where in our process did this problem enter and how could this happen?
2. What procedures or conditions allowed this problem to occur without detection?
3. Have all affected processes, production lines and/or products been identified?
4. What will be done differently to prevent recurrence of the root cause?
5. Who needs to be informed about the identified opportunities for improvement? Is
a plan available to coordinate preventive actions and standardize the practices
(who has to do what and when)?
6. How can we verify and validate the preventive actions?
7. Does the champion confirm these preventive actions?
8. Did we publish and transfer all knowledge from present 8D to the knowledge
data base? If applicable is also information included about not implemented – but
as most effective identified - corrective actions? How is ensured that results and
experiences will be saved?

D8 – Problem solved
1. Has the 8D published to the Huf and internal addressees?
2. Are there opportunities to provide recognition from Leader to Team, Team
Member to Team Member, Team to Leader, Team to Champion? Significant
contributions by individual team members?
3. Review of 8D objectives. What was done well in this problem solving process
and what gives opportunity for improvement?
4. Is the 8D report officially closed / signed off?
5. Is the 8D report completed?

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 10 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

Appendix C: Template 8D Report

Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst

Huf Group

8D-Nr./8D No.: Lieferant / Supplier:

Teilebezeichnung/
Huf Werk/Plant:
Component description:
Lieferanten Teile-Nr./
Huf Teile-Nr./Part No.:
Supplier Part No.:
Beanstandung/ Anzahl gelieferter Teile/ Anzahl fehlerhafter Teile/
Complaint reason: Nbr. of delivered parts Nbr. of defective parts:
intern/ extern/
Huf Berichts-Nr./Ref.-No.: Eröffnet am / Start date:
internal external

0. Vorbereitung, Notfallmaßnahmen/Preliminary step, emercency actions

Abteilung/ Telefon/ Firma/

1. Team (Teamleiter unterstrichen/Team Leader underlined): e-mail:
Department: Telephone: Company:

2. Problem-, Fehlerbeschreibung/Problem, Failure Description:

Datum Erstauftreten des Fehlers/Date of first detection:

Einführungsdatum/ Wirksamkeit/
3. Sofortmaßnahmen/Containment Actions: Wer/Who
Implementation date Efficiency

% Beteiligung/
4. Fehlerursache(n)/Root cause(s): Wer/Who Wann/When
Contribution

Wirksamkeit/
5. Geplante Abstellmaßnahmen/Select Permanent Corrective Actions: Wer/Who Wann/When
Efficiency

Wirksamkeit/
6. Eingeführte Abstellmaßnahme/Choose Permanent Corrective Action: Wer/Who Wann/When
Efficiency

Änderungsdatum/ Verantwortlich/ Einführungstermin/

7. Verhinderung des Wiederauftretens/Actions to prevent recurrence:
Revision date: Responsible: Implemented date:

Design-FMEA/Design FMEA
Prozess-FMEA/Process FMEA
Kontrollplan/Control Plan
Inspektionsplan, Produktprüfung/Inspect.Plan, Prod.Inspect.
Prozessbeschreibung/Procedure

Abschlussdatum/
8. Problem gelöst/Problem solved
Close date:
Unterschrift Teamleiter/Sign off Team Leader:

Unterschrift betroffene Abteilungen/Sign off concerned departments:

Verteiler/Distribution:
Anhänge/Attachments:

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 11 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

Appendix D: Template 8D Worksheets

8D Internal Overview

Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst

Huf Group

Interne Übersicht/Internal Overview

8D-Nr./8D No.: Lieferant / Supplier:
Teilebezeichnung/
Huf Werk/Plant:
Component description:
Lieferanten Teile-Nr./
Huf Teile-Nr./Part No.:
Supplier Part No.:
Beanstandung/ Anzahl gelieferter Teile/ Anzahl fehlerhafter Teile/
Complaint reason: Nbr. of delivered parts: Nbr. of defective parts:
intern/ extern/
Huf Berichts-Nr./Ref.-No.: Eröffnet am / Start Date:
internal external
Teamleiter/
Teamleader:
Problembeschreibung/Problem Description:
Art der Rückweisung/ Gewährleistung/ intern/ extern/ Serienproduktion/ Projekt/
0 km
Kind of reject: Warranty internal external Series Production Project

Problem-, Fehlerquelle/ intern/ Produktion/ Produktentwicklung/ Logistik/

Problem, Failure Origin: internal: Production Product Development Logistic

extern/ Lieferant/ Kunde/ Spediteur/

external: Supplier Customer Carrier

Ursache(n)/Root cause(s):

Korrekturmaßnahmen zur Fehlervermeidung/ Wer/ Einführungstermin/ Effektivität/

Corrective actions against occurrence of failure: Who Impl. Date Efficiency

Korrekturmaßnahmen zur Fehlerentdeckung/ Wer/ Wann/ Anteil/

Corrective actions to detect the failure: Who When Contribution

Fehlerbild/Picture of failure:

Maßnahmen zur Vermeidung des Wiederauftretens/ Änderungsdatum/ Verantwortlich/ Einführungstermin/

Actions to prevent recurrence: Revision date: Responsible: Implemented Date:
Design-FMEA/Design FMEA
Prozess-FMEA/Process FMEA
Kontrollplan/Control Plan
Inspektionsplan, Produktprüfung/Inspect.Plan, Prod.Inspect.
Prozessbeschreibung/Procedure

Abgeschlossen durch/ Abschlussdatum/

Closed by:
Name: Unterschrift/Signature:
Close Date:

Interner Verteiler/Internal distribution:

Anhänge/Attachments:

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 12 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

8D Worksheet D0 – D3

Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst

Huf Group

Lieferant/Supplier:

8D-Report ff. 8D-Nr./8D No:

0. Notfallmaßnahmen/Emercency Actions Wer/Who Wann/When Wirksamkeit/ 25% 50% 75% 100%
Efficiency

1. Team: Name Abteilung/Department: Telefon/Telephone: E-Mail: Firma/Company:

Teamleiter/Teamleader:

2. Problembeschreibung/Problem Description:
Art der Rückweisung/ Gewährleistung/ intern/ extern/ Serienproduktion/ Projekt/
0 km
Kind of reject: Warranty internal external Serial Production Project

Menge der von Huf zurück gewiesenen Teile/ Menge der fehlerhaften Teile/ bei/at Huf:
Qty. of rejected parts by Huf: Qty. of defect parts: innerbetrieblich/in house
Chargen-Nr. der fehlerhaften Teile/ Produktiondatum/
Lot No. of defect parts: Production date:

Wiederholungsfehler/ Repeated Kann während normaler Produktion erkannt werden/

problem? Ja/Yes Nein/No Can be detect in the normal production? Ja/Yes Nein/No

Beschreibung des Problems, Fehlers/

Description of the problem, failure:

Zusätzliche einzusetzende Methoden: '5 Why´s; Ist-/Ist-nicht-Methode

Additional methods to use: ‘5 Why´s’; ‘Is/Is not Not analyse’

Anhänge: (Foto, Bericht, Skizze)/

Attachments: (photo, report, sketch):

3. Sofortmaßnahmen: sortieren, nacharbeiten, verschrotten/ Wirksamkeit/

Einführungsdatum/
Containment Actions: sort, rework, scrap Wer/Who: Efficiency:
Impl. Date:
25% 50% 75% 100%
Maßnahmen bei Huf/Actions at Huf:

Maßnahmen innerbetrieblich/Actions in house:

Maßnahmen beim Lieferanten/Actions at supplier:

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 13 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

8D Worksheet D4 – D5

Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst

Huf Group

Lieferant/Supplier:

8D-Report ff. 8D-Nr./8D No:

4. Ursache(n)/Root cause(s):
Bei mehreren Ursachen muss hier die Gesamtheit 100% der Problemursachen darlegen. Wer/Who Wann/When Anteil/
If more than one root cause are existent, the total must be 100% contribution of the problem. Contribution
1. Ursache/1st root cause

2. Ursache/2nd root cause

3. Ursache/3rd root cause

4. Ursache/4th root cause

Anhänge/Attachments: ∑ 100 %

Zur Ermittlung der Ursache sollten Methoden wie FTA, Ishikawa, 5 Why´s angewendet und angehängt werden./
For root cause identification the methods like FTA, Ishikawa, 5 Why´s should be used and attached.
waru m/why
Problem

warum/wh y

Problem
w arum/why

warum/wh y

w arum/wh y

5. Geplante Abstellmaßnahme(n)/Select Permanent Corrective Action(s): Einführungsdatum/ Wirksamkeit/

Wer/Who: Efficiency:
Impl. Date:
25% 50% 75% 100%
1. Abstellmaßnahme/1st corrective action

2. Abstellmaßnahme/2nd corrective action

3. Abstellmaßnahme/3rd corrective action

4. Abstellmaßnahme/4th corrective action

Anhänge/Attachments:

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 14 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC
Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst
Huf Group

Root Cause Analysis

Huf Hülsbeck & Fürst

Huf Group

8D-Report ff. 8D-Nr./8D No:

Klassische 5 M/ 5 Why's: warum/why
Mann/Man Maschine/Machine
Classic 5 M:
warum/why

Problem warum/why
Methode/Method
warum/why
Measurement to Method
Management to Man Material Mitwelt/Mother nature
warum/why
(environmental)

derzeitige
5M Kategorie/ Faktor/ Warum Frage/ Warum Antwort/ Fehlerermittlung/ Ursache/
5M category Factor Why question Why answer current failure detection root cause
(FMEA, Control Plan)
Mann/
Man

Maschine/
Machine

Methode/
Method

Material

Mitwelt/
Mother Nature

Corporate Supplier Manual / 8D Method Rev.01 – Page 15 of 15

Guideline 01.09.2008, QC