IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Engineering Technical/Peer Review - Best In Class Process ?
Topic Summary: Requesting members inputs to create a "Best in Class Review" Process
Created On: 30 January 2011 01:46 PM
Status: Post and Reply
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 30 January 2011 01:46 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Wyvern

Posts: 14
Joined: 08 June 2004

Hi All,

I am looking for some input from members with experience in participating in or creating Engineering Technical/Peer Review processes that are willing to share their experience.

I am reviewing our current process as I believe that we could be getting more effective review from the investment in time and energy that we are putting into reviewing our work.

Current Process Steps:

    Design Complete
    Review Team Selected (4 Mandatory 2 x QA 2 x ENG, + Optional Functions)
    Design Deliverable Material Distributed (5 Days Prior to Review)
    Review Held (Initial Physical Review Meeting for On-Site, Teleconference Offsite, Follow up with Non-attendees via email)
    Action Item closure
    Review Closure


In particular, I am interested in how others conduct Technical/Peer Reviews as part of their Engineering Change management processes?

Key Questions:

    Who are the mandatory/optional participants, are roles assigned?
    Does line-management attend the reviews?
    How do you run the review, physical meeting, teleconference, pass-around, desk review...etc.
    How is the review material distributed, hard copy, email, sharepoint?
    How do you handle approvals, action items, re-reviews, go-no-go?
    Do you measure the effectiveness of your reviews and if so how?


Do you have a best-in-class system in place?

If so I would appreciate it if you could share with me some of your experiences in relation to conducting effective and timely reviews of engineering changes and projects.

(P.M. very welcome from those with expertise or process examples to share)

I will post a copy of the final process to all that contribute positively to it's creation.

Regards & Thanks;

Derek
 30 January 2011 04:38 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for gkenyon.
gkenyon

Posts: 4481
Joined: 06 May 2002

Not sure why "2 QA" would necessarily be needed (unless yor QA wrap up a number of functions that I'm used to calling "Project Assurance" or "Systems / Software Assurance" - i.e. looking not simply at process, but bringing other technical / safety / etc. standards, to ensure overall risks are better managed)?

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
 30 January 2011 09:10 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Wyvern

Posts: 14
Joined: 08 June 2004

The 2 QA engineers represent different functions:

    One represents design - Focus on Product
    One represents manufacturing - Focus on Process
 31 January 2011 09:41 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



StewartTaylor

Posts: 100
Joined: 18 January 2003

Can you give us a bit more indication what you are designing/what line of engineering you're involved with? Is it product design (the kind of thing that someone can pick up and carry away), system design (what sort) or even whole industrial plant?

-------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
 31 January 2011 10:28 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Wyvern

Posts: 14
Joined: 08 June 2004

A summary of the type of reviews that I am addressing:

Industry Sector: Medical Device Manufacture

Product Type: Life Support

Key Review Areas:

    Electronic Design
    Mechanical Design,
    Pneumatic Design,
    Manufacturing Process
    Review of Engineering Investigations/Research
    NPI
    Change Control Review

.
 31 January 2011 11:07 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



StewartTaylor

Posts: 100
Joined: 18 January 2003

Thanks. I can see now why you are concerned. Unfortunately, I don't think I have anything to contribute in your field.

-------------------------
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
 31 January 2011 12:08 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for gkenyon.
gkenyon

Posts: 4481
Joined: 06 May 2002

Originally posted by: Wyvern

The 2 QA engineers represent different functions:



    One represents design - Focus on Product

    One represents manufacturing - Focus on Process
I'm seeing a move away from "QA Engineering" as it was towards overall "Compliance Engineering" - which your QA guys may cover?

I see the need for manufacturing QA / QC input, but with "design QA", need to be sure who is covering things like:
- compliance with requirements
- compliance with standards (internal, external, technical, non-technical)
- legal compliance
- product safety
- EMC (if applicable)
- functional safety (if applicable)

etc.

I suppose some of thee can be covered by "Engineer", but your processes and procedures should ideally spell these things out so you can check competence of staff to carry out the requisite elements of the review.

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
 08 February 2011 12:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Wyvern

Posts: 14
Joined: 08 June 2004

I see the need for manufacturing QA / QC input, but with "design QA", need to be sure who is covering things like:

- compliance with requirements

- compliance with standards (internal, external, technical, non-technical)

- legal compliance

- product safety

- EMC (if applicable)

- functional safety (if applicable)




etc.



I suppose some of thee can be covered by "Engineer", but your processes and procedures should ideally spell these things out so you can check competence of staff to carry out the requisite elements of the review.


Thank you for the input, it seems that we are on the same page...

Initial assessment of the impact on the categories mentioned above would be carried out by the assigned project team during approval of the project plan, to be released through the formal change management process. During the approval process the plan would be approved by the appropriate specialists per a released matrix of SMEs, by product or specialty.

I am particularly interested in the format/procedure of the actual review meetings. When reviewing material, do folks believe that this is done best off-line withe the comments/corrections/additions being the topic of discussion at the review meeting, or should the review material be walked through or inspected at the review meeting itself?

Do you separate peer reviews, Technical Reviews, Project Reviews, Management Reviews into separate meetings?

 02 March 2011 01:20 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Wyvern

Posts: 14
Joined: 08 June 2004

I came across the following standard recently. IEEE Std 1028-1997,IEEE Standard for Software Reviews,IEEE Computer Society Does anyone know if there is a similar standard dealing with non-software reviews? Best Regards; Derek
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.