Automotive · 200 employees
Tier-1 automotive supplier unifies PPAP and quality
A Tier-1 automotive supplier serving OEM customers directly in high-volume production replaced four disconnected quality tools with one system. All 18 PPAP elements now assemble from live, linked records; continuous SPC caught drift early instead of after shipment; and a supplier risk score flagged two suppliers before a rejection reached the line.
The challenge
PPAP documentation was scattered across four separate systems, so compiling a submission package took weeks of reconciling exports and chasing missing signatures. SPC reviews ran only weekly on offline spreadsheets, which let parts ship before drift was ever detected. Supplier quality lived in spreadsheets with delayed rejection visibility, and CAPA resolution averaged 47 days - long enough for the same escape to recur before the fix landed.
The challenge
Four systems, one submission, and no early warning.
As a direct OEM supplier in high-volume production, this Tier-1 manufacturer was judged on its quality system every day. But that system was really five disconnected tools wearing one name. The cost showed up at every stage of the program.
PPAP across four systems
The 18 PPAP elements lived in four separate tools, so every submission package was a reconciliation project - exporting, re-keying, and chasing signatures for weeks before the warrant could go out.
SPC reviewed weekly
Statistical process control ran on offline spreadsheets reviewed once a week, so a process trending out of control could build and ship defective parts for days before anyone saw the drift.
Supplier quality in spreadsheets
Incoming-supplier performance was tracked by hand, with rejection visibility lagging the actual problem - a degrading supplier surfaced only after the bad lot was already on the floor.
CAPA at 47 days
Corrective and preventive actions averaged 47 days to close, with root cause investigated from scratch each time because the related defect, NCR, and customer-complaint history sat in different places.
The approach
Consolidate to one quality system, then make it watch the floor.
The implementation moved PPAP, SPC, supplier quality, and CAPA onto a single connected data model in four to eight weeks, then turned on the always-on engines that monitor it. PPAP sits at the center; APQP, FMEA, SPC, and MSA orbit it, with data flowing in real time so the submission package is a byproduct of doing the work, not a separate assembly job.
All 18 PPAP elements in one place
Design records, FMEAs, MSA studies, dimensional results, and Cpk data link to the lots and studies they came from, so the full AIAG 4th-edition package - all 18 elements, PE-01 through PE-18 - assembles with one-click submission and the PSW generated as the cover sheet.
Continuous SPC replaces the weekly review
The SPC engine watches every control chart continuously, flagging 1-sigma drift as an early warning and raising a 3-sigma out-of-control alert in real time - so an operator can react before nonconforming parts ship to the OEM.
Predictive supplier risk scoring
A composite supplier risk score blends quality degradation, open SCARs, NCR rate, audit status, and delivery gap into one number that auto-escalates past threshold, turning supplier quality from a quarterly scorecard into a live signal.
Closed-loop CAPA tied to the source
CAPA runs identify, root cause, correct and prevent, then verify - wired to the originating defect, NCR, and customer feedback, so the same escape isn't re-investigated from zero.
The outcome
One system, caught early, before it reached the customer.
Consolidating four systems into one changed where problems got caught. Instead of reconstructing evidence at submission and audit time and finding drift after the fact, the supplier saw issues while they could still be acted on.
18 PPAP elements unified
The complete PPAP package now lives in one system, assembled from live linked records at any of the five submission levels - collapsing weeks of reconciliation into one-click assembly.
3 drift events caught early
In the first quarter on continuous SPC, three processes were flagged at 1-sigma drift and corrected before they reached a 3-sigma out-of-control condition - drift the old weekly spreadsheet review would have missed until after the lot shipped.
2 suppliers flagged early
The supplier risk engine escalated two suppliers ahead of a line-impacting rejection, giving quality engineering time to open SCARs and intervene before the defect reached production.
4 systems consolidated to 1
Four disconnected quality tools became one connected quality system on a single data model, so PPAP, SPC, supplier quality, and CAPA share evidence instead of duplicating it.
FAQ
Questions, answered.
Is this a real, named customer?
No. This is an anonymized, representative case study for a Tier-1 automotive supplier of roughly 200 employees serving OEM customers in high-volume production. The result metrics - 18 PPAP elements unified, 3 drift events caught early, 2 suppliers flagged early, and four systems consolidated to one - reflect the kind of outcomes Cortrova is built to deliver, with the client kept non-identifying.
How did consolidating PPAP into one system cut weeks off submissions?
Because all 18 PPAP elements share one data model with the FMEAs, MSA studies, dimensional results, and Cpk data they depend on, the package is assembled from live linked records rather than reconciled across four tools. Design records through the Part Submission Warrant are generated in-system at the chosen submission level, so building a package is a one-click step instead of a multi-week export-and-re-key effort.
What does 'caught early' mean for the three drift events?
The SPC engine monitors every control chart continuously instead of at weekly close-out. It flags 1-sigma drift as an early warning before the process reaches a 3-sigma out-of-control condition, with the dashboard refreshed every minute. In the first quarter, three processes were corrected at the early-warning stage - before drift turned into nonconforming parts shipping to the customer.
How were the two at-risk suppliers identified before a rejection hit the line?
The supplier risk engine computes a composite score across five weighted factors - quality degradation, open SCARs, NCR rate, audit status, and delivery gap - and auto-escalates a supplier that crosses threshold. That live signal flagged two suppliers early, so quality engineering could act on a trending problem rather than reacting to a rejected lot already on the floor.
Does Cortrova charge extra for automotive quality tooling?
No. PPAP, APQP, FMEA, SPC, MSA, control plans, supplier-PPAP gating, and closed-loop CAPA are part of the standard platform - the same feature set and embedded Trunnion AI agents every sector gets, tuned for IATF 16949. There is no automotive upcharge, and pricing is the flat annual rate with unlimited users.
Get started
See what Cortrova does for operations like yours.
We'll tailor a demo to your environment and constraints.